tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX November 9, 2014 9:00am-10:01am EST
i'm chris wallace. two americans held in north korea returned to the u.s. with the dun ease top spy. are republicans head fold compromise with president obama or confrontation? we are heading to washington. and we are going to make them squeal! >> and 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 members of the wave of new republican senators. shelley moore capito of west virginia and cory gardner.
after that white house lunch, could the power shift end the partisan gridlock? >> we do have an obligation to work on issues where we can agree. i think we have a duty to do that. >> i would enjoy have been some kentucky bourbon with mitch mcconnell. >> we'll discuss the agenda for the lame duck session and next years with john barrasso, and javier becerra. plus the president authorizes sending 1500 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 role and said, guys, this is the sound of liberation, emancipation. all this on "fox news sunday." hello again from fox news in
washington. we'll get to the new balance of power in washington in a moment. two americans held by north korea are back home, and u.s. air strikes in iraq may have taken out the leader in isis. catherine herage has. >> they insist there was no quid pro quo, but now that they are home, there are new questions about the timing and motivation of north korea's secretive leaders, the release of kennest bea and matthew todd miller came from a last-minute trip by the senior intelligence office. miller way was accused of hostile acts. bae was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for unspecified crimes. >> i just want to thank you all
for forgetting me. >> the director of national intelligence james clammer did immediate with official, but significantly not with the north korean leader kim jong-un. officials say it was emphasized that pyongyang must deneurolackize for additional talks. it's been confirmed a new series of air strikes near mosul targeted the leadership of isis. with intelligence meeting a senior operative, possibly including al baghdadi, a convoy of armed trucks was destroyed. damage assessments are ongoing and a defense official had no further information on the status of the isis leader. >> catherine, thank you for that. a red wave swept the country this week, giving them the first
senate majority since 2006. we want to introduce you to some of the new members puff the senate. we'll talk with colorado's new senator cory gardner in a moment, but first congresswoman shelley moore capito, its first republican senator in more than half a century. congratulations. >> thank you. wonderful 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 that he's willing to compromise? >> he did say and he congratulated me, which was very welcome. the call was wonderful, of course, but he did say that 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. i appreciate that sentiment and want to find the common ground.
>> he didn't put much meat on the bones? >> no, it was late. i'll tale what i can get at this point. >> in his news conference, the president was unling to say he's going to change any policies or change the way he does business. he also seemed to almost dismiss the message from the vote others tuesday night. take a look. >> to everyone who voted, i want you had to know that i hear you. for the two thirds of voters that chose not to participate in the process yesterday, i heard you too. >> do you think the president gets how unhappy voters are with him and the democrats? >> not really. with the comments we saw after the election, when he says he hears two thirds of the people not voting, what kind of message could he possibly be getting? i think the dysfunction, the gridlock, the overreaching, certainly in my state the overreaching by certain reg la lori bodies i think is eating
away at the confidence in his ability to lead and get things done. i don't believe -- 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 bit more than he did in the first press conference. >> there's also a question for republicans, and that's whether they compromise with the president or whether they confront him. there seemed to be a split in the days after the election within the republican party, various comments made by the new presumptive majority leader mvp mcconned and tea party favorite ted cruz. >> i want to first look for areas that we can agree on, and there probably are some. >> the era of obama lawlessness is over. >> are you with mcconned, let's look for areas of agreement, or
cruz, who apparently wants to draw bright lines. >> he unified us. we have a larger majority in the house, many states, my state hasn't elected a republican senator since 1956. part of it was the dissatisfaction with the direction the president is going. i think what we would be smart to do in my opinion, the way i want to move forward is to score some small victories, bipartisan, with the president, showing and demonstrating to the disaffected majority of americans out there that we can begin to solve the problem. >> such as? >> such as keystone pipeline, tax reform, a transportation bill. >> do you think the president will back down? >> i think he would be smart to do it when he sees a margin in the senate of over 65 votes. if we're looking at jobs,
infrastructure, we have an energy growth in our country that we really need to capitalize on. >> let me talk about one of the big issues in your campaign, which was what you call the war on coal, which is obviously a billing deal in coal-rich west virginia. how aggressive will you be in the senate to try to roll back some of the epa regulations? >> extremely aggressive. we have several thousand other miners who are what are called a warn notice, which means potential losing their jobs. that doesn't count the transportation, the electricians, the tire distributors. coal is our base load fuel. the president's policies is disenfranchising 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.
finally how do you feel about the president getting a lot of things done in this lame duck session. just yesterday he nominated loretta lynch p as opposed to waiting for the new senate with members like you getting to vote to it. >> i see with the rapid change on both houses i think you'll see a lot of this push the first of the year. that will give us time to debate and deliberation that the senate hasn't had the last four years, whether it's a nominee for attorney general. >> do you think it would be a mistake to jam her through? >> yes, if we have a era of good faith here, we need a discussion about. >> thanks for coming in, and please come back. >> i would love to. thank you. good. another gop senator in the battleground state of colorado.
cory gardner ousted is it mark udall. congratulations to you, and welcome. >> thank you and thanks for having me on. >> do you think from what you've heard since the election, do you think the president gets what voters were saying on election night? >> time will tell. look, what i saw on colorado election night wasn't so much about republicans or democrats, but a rejection of the failed ways of washington. democrats happened to be in charge of the senate, and the president. if the president doesn't recogni recognize, he's going to have a challenge over the next couple years. >> what message, senator-elect do you think voters were sending? was it a mandate or kind of a sense they dislike you less than
the president and democrats. >> they don't like gridlock and they don't like the way -- if republicans don't prove we can govern with maturity and competent, we'll see the same results two years from now, except it will be a wave going back a different direction. >> in your campaign you reached out to his sparges who make up 14% of voters in your state of colorado. 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, he determine ailing he's going to sign the executive order. here is 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 the president continues to act on his own, he
is going to poison the well. when you play with matching, you take the risk of burning yourself. >> senator-elect, do you worry that republicans are going to once again be seen, when all this is 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. the right thing for the president to do is working with congress, so i think that's the challenge this new era of goodwill presents itself for us. we have to make sure the president is willing to do the right thing. that means the congress, house and senate, are willing to show an effort to work together. ultimately that's how we have immigration reform, and we have to continue our outreach efforts in every community and states like colorado to make sure they have the confidence we'll look out for them and be a strong
voice for them, regardless of where they're from. >> the president says he says will do it before the end of the year and signs this executive order. >> i hope the president will decide to do the right thing. >> if he doesn't. >> that means -- we have to encourage him to do the right thing. i don't want to speculate about a executive order that may or may not exist. we need immigration reform in the country, because the system isn't working right now with what we have. the president to encourage a way to go forward, if he does this, then i'm concerned he won't be doing the right thing. let's do the right thing, work together, find solutions. that's what the people in colorado are looking for. in large part that's why we were able to chief victory. that's what the president neither to do. >> let's talk about doing the right thing on immigration. the hispanic vote did not play a big role in the mid terms, but
you know they will play a very big role, because hispanics tend to vote in presidential elections. how do republicans getting on the right side of the immigration issue for what is the fastest growing bloc in the nation. >> when you look at the issues -- in pueblo county, colorado i essentially tied senator udahl, and we did it because we talked about issues that mattered to every community, whether it was education, growing jobs and opportunity, making sure that children aren't trapped in -- >> but sir, specifically on immigration. >> that's the message we want to make around the state. >> aren't republicans going to have to do something when it comes to legalization of the millions who are already here. >> let's start with border security, but border security in and of itself is not complete
unless you have a meaningful guest worker program to go along with it. we have to make sure we're fixing the exit/entry systems, verifying the systems. those are things we can do right now. that's something that the house, senate and president can work together. let's take those steps where i think is a broad agreement that we can get behind and make sure we are doing the right thing. finally, for all the talk about the republican senate, you're going to find out quickly, i know you already know it, but i suspect you're not up to fully how frustrating it would be. you'll need a lot of votes to hit that super majority to get anything done. anything thoughts on how to break the gridlock in the senate? >> i worked chloroly with gary piatter stone have michigan, worked with ron wyden from oregon.
let's start with putting those solution, like repeal of the medical device tax on the president's desk, and prove to the american people that washington learned its lesson and that will ultimately help republicans in 20106 when it comes to our nominee. >> senator gardner, thank you so much for talking with us. please come and visit us in washington. >> we'll do it. thank you. next week another new member, tom cotton on the next "fox news sunday." a show of pabipartisan ships the president wells comes members of congress to the white house for lunch. will the shift in power in washington only increase the gridlock? let me no and use the #fns. [♪]
to help build a stronger economy. with a solid fiscal foundation, we can create more jobs, invest more in innovation and infrastructure, and make america more competitive, giving our kids a better future. a bipartisan solution to our long-term debt means more growth today, more opportunity tomorrow. and the time to start is now. how can in china,sumption impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 70% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing.
>> and xavier becerra, welcome back to "fox news sunday." i want to ask you about the president's decision on friday to send 1500 more u.s. troops to iraq, almost doubling our deployment there. senator barrasso, you're on the foreign relations committee. one, are you going to vote for the 5.6 billion that the president wants, and how do you feel about the slow motion bitbybit escalation of our footprint. >> we're going to look specifically at how he wants the money spent, but it's right for the president to come to congress for the support. you do get concerned about a 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 destroying isis and securing iraq. there are still big problems,
and we discussed all of this with the general. >> and congressman becerra, any concerns that this escalation has the scent of vietnam about it? and do you think the president has a strategy, a strategy and plan to beat isis? >> the way it was outlined on friday, it seemed like a coheernt plan that was directed at the ultimate goal of dismantling isil, my sense is, as the senator said, we have an opportunity to look at all the details, i think most members will see this is a buildup of the original plan, which is try to help the iraqis stand up and take care of business. >> it was in the 200, now 2900, how many more troops? >> i think the president has always said the iraqis have to handle this, they've asked for help, 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 anything close to a vietnam. let's talk about the lunch which you both attended on friday. how heated was the discussion about the president taking executive action to defer deportations of millions of people illegally in this country. will that, as some republican leaders are suggesting, hurt cooperation on every issue. >> i believe it would hurt cooperation. what the president does over the next two months will 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 versus mob executive authority to take executive actions on amnesty or healthary or any of those other issues. the american people want us to work together to find solution. it's like the president pulling the pin out of the hand grenade as we're trying to work together.
i hope cooler heads can prevail on the president to say if you want a good constructive final two years, don't do this now, wait until the new congress is sworn in, let them come together and do the sort of things that senator-elect gardner was talking about in terms of working together to find solution 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 for republicans to come up with their own bill? and do you worry that it will be the grenade scenario and this will poison the well on a bunch of issues, not just immigration? >> first, i don't recall anybody being cut off. there was a good conversation back and forth. and on the issue of immigration, i think the president has been very patient. he made it clear for quite some time ago, he's been waiting six years for a bill from congress, waiting a year and a half for the republicans to act on the bill that the senate passed, and
he'll take action where he can to make the law work better, smarter than it is right now. i don't think there's anything strange going on, except for the fact that if house republicans continue to insist that the president must wait to help everyone -- 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 sr., president bush jr., president clint clinton, they have all used executive orders to make laws work better. >> senator barrasso, you say the president hasn't come to grips with this election. is he in denial? >> i don't know that, but i think he's not fully grasping the significant defeat for his party and his policies. as the you said said, his
policies were on the ballot each and every one of them. we have now elected i think we will end up with nine new republican senators, his policies have been rejected by the voters, and not just because they're unpopular, but 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 economic, affordable centering, health care. i was astonished during that whole lunch, the president didn't ask 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 to change the direction of the company 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 raised it, saying it will be tough to do anything together if you do executive action. to put the blame on the president for responding to the speaker i think is unfair.
the president said we have a lot to do together. >> was there not a discussion back and forth about both parties' ideas about jobs? >> the president posed that as one of the issues we should super conversation about. remember, we had only so much time to discuss a number of issues. we had a briefing by the military on the situation in syria and iraq, and so as the president said, he went through about four or five different issues, saying i hope we have an opportunity to work with. >> but senator, you think there wasn't enough talk about the economy and jobs, which according to the voters is the number one concern. >> but whose fahd is it? it was john bain are who started off right away, executive action, it will be tough to do anything. >> and the president then spent an inordinate amount of time talking about his goals for executive action and pretty much ignored the next two years. that's why i say what the president decides to do in the
next two months sets the tone not next two years. there are dozens of bills that have passed the house specifically related to jobs, the economy, trade, health care that we will start putting on the president's desk in january. >> none of that was discussed. >> none of those issues came um, in addition to the ebola and isis briefings, a lot of the focus was the president's goals and desires to take executive actions when the policies and party were repudiated in the elections on tuesday. >> congressman becerra, the president said the day after the election is one of the big changes is the republicans will no longer have to kowtow to the tea party wing in the house and the senate, but especially the house. here's what he said. >> it means that negotiations end up perhaps being a little more real, because, you know, they have larger majorities, for example, in the house, and they may be able to get some things through their caucuses that they
couldn't before. >> congressman, do democrats have to do anything differently? >> all of us have to do something differently. >> i'm asking about democrats. >> what do democrats have to do differently? >> i think democrats have to know now that the senate and house are both in the hands of republicans, we'll have to see how to work with those who drive of agenda and find common ground. it's no longer going to be a republican houseworking with a democratic senate. so it will be one of those areas where we have to see if they with join with republicans, as they propose legislation to send to the president. hopefully the republicans in both the house resolution and 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 you a question i asked senator-elect capito, how do you feel about getting the nomination of loretta lynch
confirmed in this lame-duck session as opposed to waiting for a new senate and how much will you resist it? >> the attorney general of the united states is a very consequential position. we have not an attorney general confirmation in a lame-duck since 1906. that was in the same party. the last time we did one with a change of party was whether james buchanan was leaving the white house and abraham lincoln was coming in. what the president does in two months is very consequential for the next two years. he's going to have to come to the hill and talk about 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 both. thank you for joining us today. >> thank you. let's show you a picture of the leaders of congress as they left the lunch.
you can see they were carrying white house swag bags from the lunch. we wondered what was in the swag bags. well, john barrasso has given me -- i think i may drink it in the second half of the show. white house honey ale. have you tried it? >> no, not yes. >> have you try it had? >> not yet. will, though. >> maybe we'll have a beer summit. up next, republicans win a big victory election night. what happens now? our sunday group joins the conversation.
as president, i have a unique responsibility to try and make this town work. >> we'll see whether we can work with the president. i hope so. that's what he says, and we'll find out. president obama and presumptive senate majority leader mitch mcconnell talking about cooperation after tuesday's republican wave. will they find a way to do it? it's time for our sunday group. brit hume, peter baker, who covers the white house for "new york times," republican divorce carly fiorina, and charles lane from "the washington post." when democrats lost their last midterm badly, president obama came out the day afterwards and called it a shellacking. what struck a lot of people this time is he seemed unwilling to admit how badly republicans had lost or talk about any changes in his policy or his way of
doing business. i guess the question is, peter, behind the scenes at the white house, are they any more realistic about what happened on tuesday night? >> they know it was a bad night. they're not fooling themselves, but they look for all reasons why that happened. a bad electoral map. every two year in a presidency, it tends to go badly. he didn't want to look chastened. he didn't want to use a term like shellacking. he wants to come out and be aggressive. what we've heard is he's chomping at the bit to be more aggressive, but was held back -- >> to be more aggressive during the campaign. >> now he's liberated in effect. the election is over, and can be more aggressive if he wants to be. >> brit, you and i have been through a bunch of mid terms that have gone badly for
presidents, oftentimes the presidents decide to switch course as a result of the election results. bill clinton seems perhaps like the best example of that. do you think this president has it in him to really change course and to work more cooperatively with republicans? >> perhaps on a few issues, but here there's a karkt issue. he seems to of a path lock cal inability to accept responsibility. >> the last second term midterm wipeout we saw was in 2006. george w. bush came out and called the results, called it a thumping. he said i share a large part of the respond of this. it was in the aftermath that he adjusted course in iraq, which i think was the issue that dragged this 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 lost the congress in 1994, two years
into his presidency. i don't sense this president is prepared to do that. it's almost as if he thinks this election was somehow not legitimate because he wasn't -- there wasn't a presidential race. >> and two thirds of the people didn't vote, and among his wondrous qualities, he has the ability to hear from people who haven't said anything. >> apparently if there is -- to be a confrontation, the first will be over immigration, and as we've been discussing today, the president seems determined to enact executive action before the end of the year to defear deportations for millions of people who were in this country illegally. are republicans making a mistake here with all the this talk this week, boy, you do that, it's going to poison the well? should they separate it out? or you know, are they right to
say this is going to poison the well? >> well, i think first republicans should be reminding the american people that when barack obama was president when he held both of house and the senate, after promising in his 2008 election campaign 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. >> wait, wait, wait, there was a xre hence ichb bill with republican support in the senate and it was killed in the republican house. >> that's right, and generally legislation goes the other way, though not always, that is it starts in the house, moves to the senate and eventually gets to the president's desk, but i do not think this president wants comprehensive immigration reform. i think he wants a club to beat republicans over the head will. therefore i think he will take
executive action. i think republicans must be talking tough about the consequence it ises of that presidential action, because clear think republicans want the borders 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 is 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 to follow up on your question there is a risk in the republicans overdo it and say this will kill any hope of bipartisan -- i think the safer position would be so say something like, boy, this will cause problems, but we're going to soldier on and try to pass legislation anyway. the truth of the matter is in
the last congress, despite of the gridlock and so forth, a lot of work was done quietly in committees on unsexy issues, things like postal reform, cybersecurity, housing financing, fannie mae and freddie mac. there were bipartisan projects that got action traction, and they sort of died for all the reasons we are familiar with. and corporate tax reform being one of the big ones. it's not inconceivable even after all this that something could get legislated. real quickly, only about 30 seconds left in this segment. interesting to hear republicans talk about could stone. do you think the president would bend on that? >> i think so. i can imagine a package to -- in exchange for some, so the question is, can they come together. he would argue as a trade-off for whatever damage might be
created by the keystone we get this benefit, it may be worth it. we'll see if that's possible. >> all right. that was a little hopeful. we have to take a break. when we come back president obama is almost doubling the number of u.s. troops in iraq. does that signal a change in our mission there? plus what would you like the panel? we may use your question on the air. it's a fine-looking group of people there. how could a luminous protein in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 70% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. hard it can be...how ...to breathe with copd? it can feel like this.
copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva is a once-daily inhaled... ...copd maintenance treatment... ...that helps open my airways for a full 24 hours. you know, spiriva helps me breathe easier. spiriva handihaler tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells,... you can get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. sfx: blowing sound. does breathing with copd... ...weigh you down? don't wait ask your doctor about spiriva handihaler.
they have demonstrated the willingness and the skill to go after isil. so they have 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 kirby, and lindsey graham sharply disagrees over the decision to send more troops to help the iraqi army fight isis. peter, what are your sources tell you about this u.s. air strike against isis leaders in the mosul area of northern iraq, and what about the possibility that's being mention that had they actually hit the leader of isis? al baghdadi. >> they of course this intelligence the leaders would be gathering. i think we ought to be cautious in suggesting that anybody specific has been knocked off. we've seen again and again in the 13 years since 9/11, reports of demise of this or that leader proved to be unfounded. i remember we killed chemical
ali less five or six times. >> but it was encouraging they had this intelligence that some of the leaders were going to be meeting. >> that's right. it's not just dug to be they troops but will rely heavily with people on the ground to help spotters to figure out the targets to hit. we asked you for questions for the panel, and we got this on facebook from donna robb. she writes -- how is this different from when we trickled soldiering into indochina in the early 1960s. we remember well where that got us. brit, do you see any similarities to vietnam here? >> oh, sure, because you have this seemingly gradual contemplation here, the early forces send to vietnam were advisers. what strikes me about this is the rationale seems to be the iraqi forces now are doing so
well, we need to send twice as many advisers to help them as they had before. that seems to me to make any sense. it suggests to me that the truth is that they're not doing so well and that's why we need to sended forces, the opposite of what they're saying. i think that was always the case in vietnam. we kept escalating and kept not quite winning, and that's what's caused them to keep ramping up the troops. it's a slippery slope. let's look at however long the slope is, let's look back at the escalation. back in june the president sent the first 275 soldiers there to help support iraqi forces. now with this new deployment we'll have 2900 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 tenfold increase in 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 is a promising sign that there was good enough intelligence, which was always going to be the defect to hit what seems to have been a target-rich environment this morning, but the achilles' heel of this whole project, of course, is the iraqi army. we're talking about training it to effective. this is an army that collapsed after $20 billion and years of u.s. training collapsed the minute 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. there's a bit of a vietnam analogy, but also a world war ii analogy in all of this. we're proposing to team up with one evil, namely the shia-dominated iraqi militias and iranian backers against what we deem to be a worse evil in isis. if you think the practical
problems associated with that are tough, wait until we start seeing the moral problems. juan you are our side starts committing massacres, so on and so forth, which is another thing in common with vietnam, the corruption and brutality of our allies. some people thought it was more than coincidental that the pentagon and white house announced this just three days ago after the election. carly, what do you make of that? and also what do you make of the expansion of our deployment of u.s. forces? >> well, first, let's put this in the context that we 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 position has never put forward his plan for defeating -- degrading and defeating isis. secondly i think this is within the envelope of the total number of troops that he at one point suggested he would send.
the issue is timing. it's always with this president too little too late. i think senator graham had the, which is why now? why not two months ago? why didn't we arm the syrian rebels that we thought were moderate 2 1/2 years ago? we know this president disagrees with the strong and unanimous advice of his staff, including his military staff. we have seen that over and over and over again. so i think the election may have had something to do with this timing, but frankly i think what had more to do with this timing simply the president's reluctance to commit to a strategy that will win. we know doing something too late never works as well as doing something on time. this president is always too late. >> peter, what about this question of the timing and coming just after the election? >> this has happened before, of course, i remember president
clinton announced he would keep troops in bosnia. president bush sent more troops after his -- his own caucus is mad he didn't fire don rumsfeld before the election. and it will always create suspicion about motivations and timing. i think it's such a small amount of droops here in the end that it's hard to imagine this would have had an effect on the election one way or the other before last tuesday, but it's not surprising that people wonder. >> you know, i want to go back to what carly said, brit. that's the big question, which is the means and the ends. the president has a big end here, the destruction of isis, but has he got the means? has he got a strategy to accomplish that? >> remember, the eventual destruction of isis. everything we're seeing so far now is about containing isis from further advances in iraq.
the idea of going after the isis in a serious way in syria really is on the back burner. what i think this president tends to do over and over again is to decide what means he will use, and then tailor the mission to the chosen means. >> also decide what means he's not going to use. >> exactly. what you have, you impose these limitations on yourself as he repeatedly does, and conjures a mission that will fit or seems to. so far in this case, it seems to me the smaller mission of trying to hold isis back in iraq has not been met by the means he's chosen for that, and that i think is what 1500 more troops going over there to advise means, that this isn't working so far and he needs to do more, or else this piece of it will fail. >> 30 seconds? >> i think one of the things that's happened recently is huge massacres in anbar province of
the sunni tribes that were our allies the first time around when al qaeda was defeated in iraq. i have a feeling that somehow what some of these troops are going to anbar to shore that up. this is a bit of an effort to address that hemorrhaging that was going on in the short term. this is not the last conversation about this subject. thank you, panel. see you next sunday. up next or power player of the week, the plan on the front lines in the battle against child sex slavery.
hi spent 12 years as a special agent for the government, but then decided he would be more effective on his own s here's our power player of the week. >> to see the kind of abuse, and the worth -- the abuse you don't want to talk about, that's the shocking part. >> tim ballard is talking about child sex trafficking and his efforts to stop it. he's the founder of operation underground railroad. he and his colleagues call themselves abolitionists. the comparison to the civil war is intentional. >> people are being sold. the human beings are being sold. slavery is alive and well. >> they focus on the 2 million child sex slaves around the world. >> all right.
you're the man. >> traffickers convince parents in poor countries to turn their kids over, supposedly to become models. then the traffickers sell the children for the night or permanently. >> in haiti, for example, we had traffickers sell children for $15,000, they're yours, when we walked out with the kids, a 2-year-old and 3-year-old. >> wait, 2-year-old, 3-year-old sex slaves? >> they didn't care what we did with them. >> ballard spent 12 years working for the department of homeland security, as a special agent in the child crimes you aren't. last december he decided he could do more outside. last month he and a jump team of former special forces got a tip from the colombian government about sex trafficking on an island off cart henna. they sold as potential customers. >> an individual walks up says we have this, drugs, girls. we asked, what kind of girls? as young as 10. just like that. they didn't even skip a beat.
it was like they were selling us a car. >> they started negotiating for a sex party. >> in colombia, about $23300, fe environmentals, and they brought those kids. >> the traffickers brought 55 kids, and ballard paid more than $26,000. >> i look at these kids, as they're crying. it's a punch to the stomach. they think you're the monster. >> once they had the evidence, ballard called in a colombian s.w.a.t. team that arrested the traffickers. usually balan lly ballard and hp their cover, but this time the children found out they were the good guys. >> at one point this little girl went up to the screen of the window where we passed by, and i was able to reach out and touch her hand. we broke role and said, guy, this is the sound of
libberation, this is the sound of emancipation. >> just this year operation underground railroad has down a dozen stings, rescued 230 children and put traffickers in prison. he's not the public face. he won't go under cover again, but will still be part of every operation. >> the satisfaction of a child being liberated and know we can do it again and again. it's bittersweet how many more we know are still there. the minute you start to celebration, you stop yourself and you realize you've got to get back to work. operation underground railroad is a nonprofit totally funded by private donations. if you want to learn more, please go to our web web
discover the champion in you! . (applause) well, god bless you. it's always a joy to come into your homes. if you're ever in our area, please stop by and be a part of one of our services. i promise you we'll make you feel right at home. but thanks so much for tuning in. thank you again for coming out. i like to start with something funny. i heard about this scientist. he said to god, "we've decided we no longer need you. we can clone people, transplant hearts and do all kinds of things once considered miraculous." god said, "well, that's fine but to prove that you don't need me let's have a man making contest. the only requirement is you have to make man out of dirt." the scientist said,