Skip to main content

tv   New Day  CNN  October 24, 2017 4:00am-5:00am PDT

4:00 am
why it took so long to get help. why the body was left. these are all questions that need to be answered. >> the assessment by our leaders was that contact with the enemy was unlikely. >> reporter: troops first requested air support a full hour after initial contact with approximately 50 isis affiliated fighters. >> americans should know what kind of operations we're engaged in. >> we owe you more information. more importantly, we owe the families of the fallen more information. >> we need to find out what happened. the families will tell you, they don't want a political football. anytime we touch this tax code, we need to simplify it, we need to make it more fair. >> what we want to do is provide tax relief focused on the plamie class. >> republicans have to get a tax plan passed. they're probably going to need john mccain's vote. >> announcer: this is "new day" with chris cuomo and allisisyn camero camerota. we have revealing new details about the ambush in niger that claimed the lives of four u.s. soldiers nearly four
4:01 am
weeks. a top general says the u.s. did not call for air support until an hour after the firefight began. >> many questions remain. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general joseph dunford, said the pentagon owes victims of the family answers. meanwhile, president trump can't seem to let go of this condolence controversy with a gold star widow. the president disputing the widow's account of his condolence call, which she says left her in tears. we have it all covered. let's begin with cnn's michelle kosinski, live in washington. michelle? >> this is remark to believe see the chairman of the joint chiefs feel as though he had to get out and answer these dozens of questions, repeatedly saying that the public is owed more information. but there is still in basic questions that he can't answer yet. things like where exactly were these troops when they came under attack? were they wearing body armor? how many u.s. troops searched for sergeant la david johnson?
4:02 am
and we are now three weeks after it happened. america's top general providing some answers, but not many. detailing a revised timeline of the ambush in niger that killed four american troops. >> we owe you more information. more importantly, we owe the families of the fallen more information. >> reporter: october 3rd, 12 members of a u.s. special operations task force leave the capital of niger with 30 nigerian troops. their goal, a reconnaissance mission in a village about 53 miles north. >> the assessment by our leaders on the ground at that time was that contact with the enemy was unlikely. >> reporter: but the next day, on their way back to the capital, mid-morning, they came under fire by around 50 local fighters with ties to isis, carrying small arms, machine guns, and rocket-propelled grenades. nbc reports u.s. officials are looking into whether the militants were tipped off by someone in the village. the special forces team engaged in a firefight for about an hour
4:03 am
before requesting help. within minutes, a u.s. drone was overhead. french jets were scrambled, but took another hour to arrive to the remote location. >> i don't know that they thought they needed support prior to that time. i don't know how this attack unfolded. i don't know what their initial assessment was, of what they were confronted with. >> reporter: the french did not drop bombs. u.s. officials said friday the pilots had the authority, but could not readily identify enemy forces and did not want to risk hitting u.s. or nigerian allies. it was evening by the time the french could evacuate the injure and bodies of the dead americans. but it remains unclear how sergeant la david johnson became separated from the group and why it took two days to locate his body about a mile away. >> did the mission of u.s. forces change during the operation? did our forces have adequate intelligence, equipment, and training? was there a pre-mission assessment of the threat in the area accurate? >> reporter: this as a white
4:04 am
house official confirms to cnn that the administration expedited condolence letters to families of fallen soldiers after president trump made this remark last week. >> i've written them personal letters. they've been sent or they're going out tonight, but they were written during the weekend. >> reporter: the following day, the president going a step further, making this false claim. >> i have called, i believe, everybody, but certainly, i'll use the word, virtually everybody, where during the last nine months something has happened to a soldier. i've called virtually everybody. >> reporter: an e-mail exchange between the wohite house and th pentagon, first reported by "roll call," shows that the president's aides knew these remarks were not true. the aides rushing to learn the identities and contact information from the defense department. among those who have been calling for more information and concerned about the lack of it is senator john mccain, chairman of the senate armed services committee. and now we know the pentagon will give his committee a classified briefing this
4:05 am
thursday. chris and alisyn? >> michelle, thank you very much. joining us now are cnn political analyst and white house correspondent for "the new york times," maggie haberman, and her alone. she has so many sources, we speak about her in the collective. you are a panel in and of yourself. that's what it said, that's what you are. >> i'll put my glasses on and i'll run to that side. >> an apple is an apple, you are a panel. >> wow. >> so let me ask you this question, this beguiling question that only you can answer. this is a situation where the president could have instant high ground and say, what just happened in niger, we're going to find out what happened and then you in congress, you better own your duty and start debating what's happening militarily. i'm not a big fan of getting involved all over the world. that's what i campaigned on. we've got people all over the place, advise and assist missions, where they could die like this. do your duty. instead, he won't let go of the feud with wilson. why? what is the calculation? >> i think we have asked that
4:06 am
version of that question every three weeks or so for the last two years. and the answer is, this is who he is. he has consistently since taking office, we saw this during the campaign, there was an open question of, is this going to change when he becomes president? but it hasn't. he confuses himself with the institutions he serves repeatedly. you're seeing that now. he is taking the criticisms of how he handled this phone call with this military widow very -- i understand why he's taking it personally, because the criticism from the congresswoman was personal. however, most politicians, most presidents would say, this is not a fight i'm going to engage in. it is not just the president, however. and you talked about this earlier on the show. it is also his chief of staff, john kelly, who has engaged pretty wholeheartedly in this fight. so the president is not backing down, because he's getting some sense of support from his own staff. i think it's really important to remember, when you look at how this white house functions, you have a lot of people working
4:07 am
there who all feel under siege. they go to work every day not feeling entirely safe because they never know what version of the presidency they're going to be dealing with. and because of that, they tend to view attacks, however legitimate, however legitimate the criticism, as attacks on all of them. and i think that you have a white house that is a little split on this. there is more sympathy for the president internally than you might imagine. >> and so on the larger issue of niger, not just the back and forth with the congresswoman and sergeant johnson's widow, are they focused on this at the white house? do they think that what happened in niger is a big problem? >> i mean, there's no collective "they," again, as we know. it's a bunch of different fiefdoms. they do recognize this is a huge issue and something that they need to contend with. it's also a separate issue from the question of the president calling relatives of those who died in the line of fire. that is what this issue has morphed into publicly. there is a separate and really significant questions, equally significant, if not more, as to what exactly happened, how quickly answers can be gleaned, and we're seeing -- and is not
4:08 am
uncommon with an incident like this, not that quickly. >> well, it must be said that the president created this first issue about condolences. >> sure. >> that did not exist. >> that's right. >> the timing existed. and the president's -- i don't know if this is conscious, but his not mentioning isis as who did this -- >> that, i think, is conscious. >> it is conscious. why? >> because, look, for the same reason -- and this comes up repeatedly, where we wonder and many people have wondered why it is that the president doesn't do more to acknowledge those who have died in military service during the course of his tenure, because i think that he sees it as, a, an elevation of an enemy. and i think that there is -- you can have a longer argument about that or conversation about that. but i think that he also sees it as some acknowledgement of weakness or failure on his part. >> so you don't think he's saying, isis did this, not because they don't believe that, in fact, because everybody seems to agree that these are isis affiliates, but that there's a perception of weakness in the president's mind? >> i think that there is a danger in acknowledging this.
4:09 am
and again, i think that depending on who you talk to in that white house, you'll get different answer as the to why it is that he is not saying it, but i think that that is certainly a component. >> so that moment, where general john kelly, chief of staff, went to the podium and talked about his son, as well as talked about -- sort of ginned up, frankly, the continuing back and forth with congresswoman wilson, was he -- john avalon was on earlier, and he was saying how unfortunate it was that john kelly was pushed out. >> i heard you disagree with him. i don't think he was pushed out. and to be clear, what john kelly gave up in service of country is enormous. his pain is unfathomable. it is impossible for me as a parent to imagine losing a child. so i cannot imagine what he went through. and i think that all of us found or many of us found his description of what families go through to be very moving. but i think -- but that's separate from what he said about the congresswoman, which included some things that were not accurate. about something she had say in 2015, for instance. my understanding, from what
4:10 am
happened, is he was frustrated and surprised by the president for invoking his son. i think the president -- look, john kelly is the one who has prepped the president, right? so the president is, as we know, he used to be called on the campaign a parrot. he's not always a tremendously skillful parrot. so sometimes he will repeat half of something. >> that's what we found. the words that john kelly shared were the words that he told the president. >> right. and to be fair to the president, in a different context, i could hear other presidents saying, look, he knew what this job demands. essentially, that's what he was saying. it's just that it sort of spiraled out of control in this case. but i don't think that john kelly was acting against his will at all. >> i think we see ample proof of that. the intrigue about what he knew about whether his son was going to be used or not, there is almost no percentage or analysis of that, because it's just pain. and he has 100% right to deal with that any way he wants personally. >> correct.
4:11 am
i completely agree. >> what he doesn't get the same cover on is what he did in that press conference. >> that's right. >> which was create alternative facts about the nature of wilson's presence on the call, this was demonstrably false, we know it, because the widow says it, and she cannot be questioned about whether or not wilson was allowed to be on the call and the "empty barrel" stuff was factually inaccurate in terms of how it had happened and revealed an animus of his own towards wilson that doesn't need any pushing by the president. that was all kelly. >> number one, in terms of what he said about wilson listening in on the call, he was listening in on the call, too. if he wanted to criticize her about talking about the call, that's a different issue. the second that somebody who has been in the partisan fray does start talking about this, it does give it a different patina. >> by the way, that would have been a fair criticism. because she did talk about a private call. >> and that's a different criticism.
4:12 am
that's not what he said, number one. the second issue is in terms of him going after her. we heard sarah huckabee sanders say from the podium, i think from the next day, if you want to challenge a four-star general, that's up to you. that's not what this country is about. generals fight for the right of citizens in this country to question their military. and when john kelly went out, he was acting as a chief of staff. so what i would say to the second point is that there is a desire, i think on the part of critics of the president to act as if everybody who does -- who works for him or who does something in the service of this white house, is doing it essentially at gunpoint. john kelly is a lot more conservative than i think a lot of people realize. he was very supportive of the president's immigration policies when he was at dhs. i think there are aspects of this president that he supports. and i think that life is complicated. so i think everybody turns these things into a binary. they're really not. >> well, i appreciate that. and there was another bit of kn nuance i'm interested if you have any perspective on.
4:13 am
when he said, i used to believe that some things were held sacred. women in this country used to be sacred. look where we are now. and then he said, gold star families used to be sacred, but then look at what happened at the convention. was that a -- was he -- >> i do not -- >> a jab at the president or overlooking what the president has done on those two fronts? >> i think john kelly has a choice every day which is essentially, how do i figure out how to contain donald trump's tweets, for a lack of a better way of putting it. and he went out and said things that the president himself feels, because the president does not cast an internal eye at what he has done. i think that was entirely about the democrats. and look, there has been a fair amount of criticism for the way that democrats used khizr khan as essentially a surrogate going into the fall. we have heard that before. the bit about women, i wasn't really sure what they was referring to, but i don't think that was trying to jab the president. >> that's helpful.
4:14 am
maggie, thank you. >> the big concern coming out of it is what they were wrong about. especially if you're going to go at the brwidow of a service meb who just died in service, you better get your facts right. maggie, thank you so much. you are a great panel. >> thank you. president trump is heading to capitol hill today. he's trying to sell his tax plan. but more importantly, he's trying to get on the same page with gop senators and remind them, they're supposed to be on the same team. can he get it done? cnn's joe johns live at the white house with more. joe? >> reporter: good morning, chris. the president headed to capitol hill to participate in the traditional senate tuesday policy luncheons. he has a clear message for republicans in the senate, as well as the house, pass a tax bill or go down to likely defeat in next year's midterm elections. he's also indicated that he wants to fast track the bill and get it on his desk by thanksgiving, which would be an extremely heavy lift. in part because all of the ways
4:15 am
to pay for at least part of this bill seem to keep coming off of the table. the president has indicated he wants to protect 401(k) plans. he said that in a tweet just about 24 hours ago. here's the tweet. there will be no change to your 401(k). this has always been a great and popular middle class tax break that works and it stays. now, there had been talk around the hill of reducing the pre-tax amount of money workers can save in their 401(k)s as a way to pay for this bill, as required by senate rules. but it doesn't seem the case, at least according to the president. there's also heartburn on capitol hill about getting rid of other deductions, iluding the mortgage interest deduction, which is so popular around the country. alisyn, back to you. >> okay, joe, thank you very much. so members of congress say they want answers about what went wrong in niger, but what did they know about the mission? we'll ask two of them, next.
4:16 am
tal? what kind of sorcery is that? it's not the magic-wand kind. it's the rfid-collar-and- internet of things-kind we created with chitale dairy. so every cow can let farmers know how she feels and what she needs to be healthier- (phone vibrates) all with a simple text. tah-dah. magic can't make digital transformation happen. but we can. that's the power of vmware, part of dell technologies. going somewhere? whoooo. here's some advice. tripadvisor now searches more... ...than 200 booking sites - to find the hotel you want and save you up to 30%. trust this bird's words. tripadvisor. so, verizon and google have teamed up on the pixel 2. it's a match made in tech heaven. it's like verizon is the oil and google is the balsamic. no, actually they separate into a suspension. it's more like the google pixel 2 is the unlimited storage. and verizon is the best unlimited plan.
4:17 am
what if it's like h2 and o? yeah. that's right. i had a feeling that would score with you guys. good meeting. (avo) when you really, really want the best get the pixel 2 for up to $300 off on google's exclusive wireless partner, verizon.
4:18 am
>> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view, it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough,
4:19 am
ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. the chairman of the joint
4:20 am
chiefs of staff providing new details and an updated timeline on the ambush that killed four u.s. soldiers in niger. new revelations raise a lot of new questions and lawmakers want answers. so joining us now is congressman will herd of texas. he's a member of the intelligence and homeland security committees. thanks for being here. >> always a pleasure. >> because you were undercover in the cia for almost ten years, you bring a very unique perspective. did you know what was happening in niger? did you feel you knew what the mission was and you had enough information? >> i didn't know what happened beforehand, but i shouldn't have. i'm not an operational or a tactical planner. and tii think this focus, individual members of congress shouldn't know about individual, you know, activities. there's probably thousands of individual movements that the military is involved in every single day. and if congress thinks that we should be part of the
4:21 am
operational planning, i disagree with that. now, our role is in oversight function is to make sure everybody had the right training, tools, that were they getting the right intelligence before the activity. and i think general dunford, yesterday, outlined a number of the questions that the military still has and is looking into this case. and i think this is a perfect example of how thousands of our citizens, our men and women, are putting themselves in harm's way every single day to keep us safe. and the world is a dangerous place. >> and are you comfortable with that? some of what this niger episode has revealed is that americans are in places that most americans don't know they are and wouldn't be able to identify the mission. are you comfortable with what was happening in niger and the fact that we now know that 800 troops were there? >> i'm comfortable that our military planners on the ground have the troop strengths around the world that they need. i want to make sure that, you
4:22 am
know, this is one reason i supported a recent budget to increase the amount of money going to our men and women in the military, to make sure that they have all the tools in their tool kit that they have robust intelligence. and i think, you know, a review of this type of operation, you know, what we find out, were some things lacking? and i don't know if there was or not. and can we make sure that we get the support to our men and women in the military. the one thing i do know. there are a number of terrorist groups that have metastasized to all parts of africa. while most of the media and the attention has been on isis over the last couple of years, al qaeda is still a real threat. al shabaab is still a real threat. and so, we have to make sure that we're following these organizations as they metastasize around the world and that the military plays a key piece in that.
4:23 am
>> congressman, what about what we've been talking about on this show so much for the past few days. that is the aumf, the authorization for the use of military force. is it time for congress to really take responsibility for all of these different battles around the world, that we're now seeing our people fight? >> well, i would disagree with the premise of your statement. we have taken responsibility for this. congress has acted on a number of occasions and since i've been in congress for 2 1/2 years in funding the military at higher levels in previous years, i think we all recognize the threat and have given the right authority to the last administration, as well as this administration. >> but help us understand that. so are you equating funding with a reauthorization of the aumf? which hasn't been authorized, as you know, congress hasn't fully taken responsibility for since 9/11? >> well, an authorized use of military force is not, you know, is not the only way to take responsibility for activities
4:24 am
overseas. supporting our military with training and funding is one way to do that. making sure administrations, past and present, have the tools they need in order to do their job. and if changing a piece of paper that says terrorist groups in general all around the world, yes, can this debate happen? and these debates are ongoing. this is something that has been debated for the 2 1/2 years that i've been in congress. >> but what's the holdup? why not just authorize that? >> because, again, in my opinion, we're providing the support that the military needs and the administration needs in order to make sure that the threats -- that we cover the threats around the world. i was in the cia when 9/11 happened on september 12th. i was in the unit that prosecuted the war in afghanistan. and then, if you would have told me that there would not be another major attack on the
4:25 am
homeland for 16 years, i would have said you were crazy. but the reason we have seen that is because the men and women in our military, our intelligence services, our diplomatic core, and law enforcement, are still protecting our homeland. and they've gotten the support from congress in order to do their job. >> congressman, on a separate topic, i've been reading your twitter feed, and you seem to be very fired up about cybersecurity. let me read for everybody what last week you said. who is is the equivalent of the knave s.e.a.l.s when it comes to cyber protection? that's what i want to know. so, what are you worried about? >> well, i'm worried about a number of things when it comes to the cybersecurity. what is a digital act of war and what is our response to that. we know what an act of war is. you know, the u.n. even says, if you manipulate the utility grid, that's an act of war. but the russians did that to the ukrainians a number of years ago. what was the response? if that were to happen here in the united states, what would
4:26 am
our response be? the response doesn't always have to be a digital response. it could be a physical response. two summers ago, i was saying, when we were learning about russian activity in our elections, i was saying back then, let's at a minimum kick the russian ambassador out of our country. so we have some very basic questions on what our response is going to be. and also, does the federal government have the tools in order to -- and do they have the flexibility to integrate tools to defend our digital infrastructure and to protect american citizens' information? and that's why as a chairman of the i.t. subcommittee, we're focused on a number of these issues. >> see, because it feels like, when i read your tweets, it feels like you're trying to sort of take us and shake us into waking up, about this threat. and so are you saying that congress and the white house are not taking this seriously enough? >> people understand the problem. i think obm, the opm breach of i guess it was two years ago now, was something that everyone woke up. the fact that most americans
4:27 am
even though what opm is, is an indication of that problem. if you look at the most recent issue with the equifax breach, the millions of americans that were impacted by this, at no point did they ever opt in to give their information to equifax. so one of the problems that we have is when you create legislation, it takes some time and in an increasingly evolving and technical world, it's been hard to keep up with this. but i think this administration, the last administration, this congress, has been focused on this. and i do believe that cybersecurity is one of the last issues that is truly bipartisan here in washington, d.c. and this is something that my ranking member, that we work together very well on. >> okay. congressman will hurd, thank you very much for your perspective on all of this. >> thank you. >> chris? all right, so, here, a question here is whether the niger ambush that killed four
4:28 am
u.s. soldiers and injured others will push congress to reauthorize military operations overseas. and it wouldn't be reauthorizing, it would be initially authorizing. they haven't done anything about this since 9/11. you just heard a republican congressman say he doesn't think it's really necessary. that they're already supporting troops the way they need to. we'll ask another member, this time a member of the senate armed services committee, what they think. next. we're facing 20 billion security events every day. ddos campaigns, ransomware, malware attacks... actually, we just handled all the priority threats. you did that? we did that. really. we analyzed millions of articles and reports. we can identify threats 50% faster. you can do that? we can do that. then do that. can we do that? we can do that. can we do that? whoamike and jen doyle?than i thought. yeah. time for medicare, huh. i have no idea how we're going to get through this.
4:29 am
follow me. choosing a plan can be super-complicated. but it doesn't have to be. unitedhealthcare can guide you through the confusion, with helpful people, tools and plans. including the only plans with the aarp name. well that wasn't so bad at all. that's how we like it. aarp medicare plans, from unitedhealthcare. looking for a hotel that fits... whoooo. ...your budget? tripadvisor now searches over... ...200 sites to find you the... ...hotel you want at the lowest
4:30 am
price. grazi, gino! find a price that fits. tripadvisor.
4:31 am
4:32 am
chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general joe dunford, answering questions for nearly an hour about the ambush that killed four u.s. soldiers and injured others in niger nearly three weeks ago. the pentagon says it's going to brief members of the senate armed services committee on thursday in a classified briefing. let's discuss the specifics and what niger says about our larger military strategy with senator gary peters of michigan. he is a member of that committee. senator peters traveled to west africa just this past august as part of a congressional delegation. good to have you on the show, sir. >> great to be with you, chris, thanks. >> so specifically with the niger ambush, what are your
4:33 am
concerns at this point? >> well, i just think we need to have more facts of what happened, what went into that mission before the mission left the area and went into hostile territory. what sort of intelligence backed up that mission. it sounds as if it was a surprise that at least some of the indications that we've heard is that folks didn't think there would be any kind of aggression involved in that kind of mission. but i think we need to know, precisely, what went into the planning of the mission, what was the objective of the mission, and then, was there adequate support provided to those folks on the ground? we know the french did respond with aircraft, but it took quite a bit of time to respond. it's questions of when they called for that support, when it came. i think there are a lot of specific questions that members are going to want to ask. >> senator, are you a member of the "who knew" coalition? senators who say they weren't told, that they didn't know about what was happening in niger and troop levels. not as of august.
4:34 am
i'm saying that, obviously, you better know. you were just there in the region being briefed, but do you understand the senators who are saying, yeah, i didn't know? >> well, i'll say, there has not been a lot of briefing of what's been happening in west africa. you know, we've been focused, and i sit on the armed services committee, but a great deal of the work that we do relates to what's happening in north korea, what's happening in iraq, what's happening in afghanistan, so there's no shortage of things that we have to deal with. in fact, when i came back from nigeria and the briefing that i received, i thought at that time, my colleagues aren't really aware of what's happening here in west africa, we need to have a briefing. i talked to the chair of the subcommittee that i sit on and hopefully we're in the process of actually having a more specific briefing of what's happening in the northwestern region of africa, but it impacts what happens in niger as well as chad. >> back in march, general wald hausser gave a briefing on what
4:35 am
was going on in niger and the mission. were you there for that? >> it was a broader briefing about a variety of topics. >> but they did give details in that briefing about what was happening there. so members of the committee should have been aware? >> i think members of the committee are aware, but -- >> but they say they're not aware. that they didn't know what was going on and that's why mccain is very exorcised about this. >> well, i think we need -- what we need to have is a much deeper briefing, i think, is the point that senator mccain is making and he's talking about a broader discussion of the aumf, which i believe we need to have. we need to have that kind of broad discussion of what's happening in west africa. that's why we need to have a deep dive in this. we have not had the kind of deep dive i've been comfortable with. when i heard the briefing there, it opened my eyes to the threat there. and it is a growing threat that we should be aware of, but members of congress need to know that. and i think that leads to the broader discussion, that we have to have discussions about when we are deploying united states service members overseas in
4:36 am
dangerous missions. we have to understand that. and understand, it is an obligation for all of us in congress to be thinking about this. and more importantly, debating it. >> now, congressman will hurd out of texas, republican, was just on the show. and he says, no, you guys do support the military, because you fund the operations. so it's there. but i think there's a larger kind of support that is absent, which is what you're talking about, which is the debate, which everybody says they want to have, but you never have. and that's why you have the same aumf that you've had since 2001, 2002, if you count the iraq war. i want to play for you what will hurd said about why he's not a big fan of needing an aumf debate. >> well, you know, an authorized use of military force is not, you know, is not the only way to take responsibility for activities overseas. supporting our military with training and funding is one way to do that. making sure administrations past and present, have the tools they need in order to do their job.
4:37 am
>> see, here's the problem. you're giving them the money, arguably. i know that many in the pentagon and the military would argue with that and say you're not giving them enough money, but that's a side point. you don't own the political reality of these decisions. because you don't debate it, you don't vote on it, and you're not on record about it. and it seems to me, that's why there is no debate, because, senator, with all due respect, you, every lawmaker we have on this show, says, yeah, yeah, we've got to get after this. except will hurd. he's really the only one i've heard that he doesn't think it's that important everybody else says, it's very important. but it never happens. why doesn't it happen? >> and i'll agree with you, it has to happen. it should happen. and i guess from the previous comments, it's true we support our military. we are the appropriators to make sure that they have the resources. but you just can't write a blank check. to me, that's not responsibility. that's not really functioning as the congress should, which is an oversight. and the congress has the constitutional authority about
4:38 am
putting the united states into war situations. >> right, and yet you punt. and that's what i don't understand. it seems to me what you call in politics a ham and egg situation. the money is teghe eggs. a chicken can give eggs. but when a pig has to give ham, that's a different situation. that's a sacrifice, not a contribution. and you don't want to have this debate, because, quid pro demonstrateo, you don't want to have the debate. do you think these lives are enough to stop giving away power to presidents? this isn't all on president trump, senator. he's new there. these troops were put there by president obama. you gave him the power that he wanted. you gave bush the power that you wanted. but it was your power and you could argue it wasn't yours to give away. do you think we'll see a real debate here this time? >> i certainly hope so. and you say we haven't taken a vote. we did. as you know, there was an amendment to repeal the aumf and start with a fresh discussion, that just occurred last month. i was one of those individuals that voted for that.
4:39 am
>> but it didn't happen. >> well, there were 30 of us. we have to get to over 51. >> why? why are they holding out? >> i can't speak for others, as to why they won't want to do it. but it may be for the reasons that you mentioned, that if you aren't voting for it, then you're not on the hook. and that's irresponsible. it's not what we should be doing here in congress. it's why i voted the way i did. i hope we get another 20-plus colleagues in the senate to vote with me and the others, who believe that we need to have this kind of discussions. and certainly, after this tragic incident. and our heart goes out to the families who had a very tragic loss in niger and the american people deserve to have answers. those folks who serve in the military every day, as well as the public, as to where our activities are. and it should be up to the pentagon to make this case to members of congress as to why we're there and then make sure that we buy in and have support, if that's something that we believe we should do. and you know, i want to say, these are very dangerous places. and being in nigeria, there is
4:40 am
some serious challenges that the nigerian government that thas t with. we don't want to have safe places where terrorists can operate. but it's the ultimate speedometer responsibility of places like nigeria and chad to be able to enforce the rule of law in their country. and we can be very helpful in providing resources, particularly intelligence resources, which is why we have the drone base there to try to provide more information realtime to folks on the ground. >> but we're seeing the reality now. as you saw when you were there, we call it advise -- well, we don't. you guys call it advise and assist. and it makes it seemingly be benign. and we keep being told, well, u.s. troops aren't the ones out in front. well, they're dead now. and they're dead because they were out in front. they were in an ambush and they were doing advise and assist and it was an intel mission. so it ain't safe. it should be debated and it should be laid out and you should be on the record. i hope, senator, you're one of the senators that owns this initiative. i know you'll get political
4:41 am
cover, because the media and the left and the right would much more talk about the feud between the trump and congressman wilson. but it's hard to say these families are respected when they're not respected enough to have this debate. senator, thanks for being on the show. we'll stay on it and i'll check with you on a regular basis. >> appreciate it. >> alisyn? all right, bill o'reilly is back in the news and he's fighting back calling reports about a $32 million sexual harassment settlement a smear campaign. we have all of the latest for you, next. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
4:42 am
4:43 am
4:44 am
this throughout history, the one meal when we come together, break bread, share our day and connect as a family. [ bloop, clicking ] and connect, as a family. just, uh one second voice guy. [ bloop ] huh? hey? i paused it. bam, family time. so how is everyone? find your awesome with xfinity xfi and change the way you wifi.
4:45 am
braill o'reilly is fight ba. he says a "new york times" report about him paying a $32 million settlement to a fox news legal analyst to settle a sexual harassment claim is all politically motivated. but his former colleague, megyn kel kelly, is telling a different story. cnn's brian stelter is here with more. it just continues. as i said yesterday, the plot sickens, because it just continues every single day, there are new developments. the $32 million settlement is so jaw-dropping, of course it begs the question, what evidence could possibly be worth $32 million? >> right. we know that there were e-mails that she had with o'reilly, bafferback and forth, that she was citing, text messages. this raises the idea, was there video, audio, something else. gretchen carlson, when she received that $22 million settlement in the roger ailes case, she had audiotapes.
4:46 am
so she had compelling evidence. but in this case, it may always be a mystery why he was willing to pay $32 million. he says this was a hit job, people were out to get them. >> why would you pay $32 million if it were all false accusations? >> i can't figure out the answer for that. i think he wants to blame the messenger, attack the media instead of taking responsibility. >> people pay settlements to avoid scrutiny that they believe they can't escape. that they can't prove the nonexistence of a fact. sometimes there's a reason that's practical. $32 million speaks to one of two things. one, what you're talking about, is evidence or just having such an immensely deep pocket because of the money that he has and a little bit of relative, right? if you can don't have the money, you can't pay the 32. he was able to. but the larger thing is where is bill's head at on this. he's not saying it didn't happen. he's saying that people outing him is politically motivated. and if it is, good! because they should be part of our political dialogue that's been ignored too long.
4:47 am
megyn kelly was talking about it on her show. do we have sound of that. >> that's right. let's take a look at that. >> o'reilly's suggestion that no one ever complained about his behavior is false. i know because i complained. this must stop. the abuse of women, the shaming of them, the threatening, the retaliation, the silencing of them after the fact, it has to stop. >> your take? >> she is one of the highest profile examples of someone who was harassed by roger ailes of fox, who has been able to speak publicly about it, because, remember, some of the women who were harassed by ailes and who were allegedly harassed by o'reilly, they received these confidential settlements so they were not able to speak publicly. it's significant when someone like megyn kelly can do so. and the ailes conflict is 15 months old and still being talking about today.
4:48 am
there's this ongoing investigation of fox news. who knows what the department of justice will do. >> they're on tv over there hammering on harvey weinstein, who deserves to be called out, but they have their own situation to deal, and they're awfully quiet on it. whether it's alisyn, megyn, gretchen carlson, these are high-profile women. how about the ones that don't? how many of them haven't been able to say anything because they're afraid >> and we hope the conversation helps them, as well. the more we talk about it, the more it helps. thanks, brian. so our next guest worked in washington as president reagan's senior policy analyst. what does he think about president trump's tax plan? is it really about the middle class? we're beginning to ask him, next. rizon and google have teamed up on the pixel 2. it's a match made in tech heaven. it's like verizon is the oil and google is the balsamic. no, actually they separate into a suspension. it's more like the google pixel 2 is the unlimited storage. and verizon is the best unlimited plan. what if it's like h2 and o?
4:49 am
yeah. that's right. i had a feeling that would score with you guys. good meeting. (avo) when you really, really want the best get the pixel 2 for up to $300 off on google's exclusive wireless partner, verizon. it can transform a frogng. into a prince. but it can't transform your business. for that you need dell technologies. we are transforming jet engines into turbo powered safety inspectors. dairy cows into living, breathing, data centers. and though it seems like magic, it's not. it's people and technology working together. magic can't make digital transformation happen. but we can. he's brought us to the obstructed justice at the fbi.
4:50 am
and in direct violation of the constitution, he's taken money from foreign governments and threatened to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer and, like you, i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet, today, people in congress and his own administration know this president is a clear and present danger who is mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons. and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it. >> tech: so you think this chip is nothing to worry about? well at safelite, we know sooner or later
4:51 am
every chip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace.
4:52 am
finding the best hotel price is whoooo. now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches... ...over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the... ...hotelock it in. tripadvisor. president trump heads to capitol hill today to meet with republican centers to push what he claims will be the biggest tax cut ever.
4:53 am
ivanka trump is pushing this saying the middle class will win. >> there are many elements of the tax plan that are squarely targeted at creating jobs in this country and growth in this country and offering relief to our middle income families. you have to support the american worker and create jobs, and we have to create growth, but we also have to support that american worker's family. >> is she right? joining us now is an expert on this. we have bruce bartlett. he worked as a senior policy analyst for the reagan administration. thanks for being here. >> thank you. >> you were one of the brains behind the reagan tax cuts, and you are saying the republicans have been relying on that model for all of these decades and you
4:54 am
now believe -- correct me if i am wrong, the idea that tax cuts will always suppur growth is a myth? >> yeah, it's economics. you have to see what is appropriate under these particular circumstances. >> why do you think it worked with reagan and not so well now? >> who says it worked so well? >> the growth was uneven. you had a bigger growth before the rich and the middle class, so where was the success? >> there were other things going on besides cutting taxes, and you had slashed interest rates, and the defense build up, which hardly anybody talks about, but that was a powerful spur to economic growth. the tax cut was just one of many elements, and yet in the decade
4:55 am
of the 1980s, overall growth was less than in the 1970s, or 1990s, after taxes were increased. >> bill clinton raised taxes and growth was the highest after that. >> when bruce talks about their being a complexity to the economic landscape, that's true, because he had thedot calm bubble. >> just recently during the george w. bush administration, we had tax cuts annually, and that was the west economic year for the eight years. >> well, they especially want to get rid of the estate tax. so republicans feel obliged to
4:56 am
give it the old college try. >> sounds good, too. you don't want a tax cut? >> not if it doesn't work. >> for you it will work. if you are a middle class family, if you are a worker making somewhere around $70,000, you hear you are going to get a tax cut, you are happy. you hear the guy that is making $700,000, you are still happy because you are still tkweting a tax cut. >> the middle class doesn't pay enough taxes to get a big enough tax cut to make that much difference. that's why the administration is trying to sell the idea that your wages will go up, because that's the only way that they can really show -- >> companies have rarely been holding as much cash as they are now, and wages are not going up
4:57 am
the way they expected. >> we had a tax reform in 1986 that all economists agree was good tax reform, far better than what we are likely to get now. wages fell for ten years after that legislation was enacted. >> i want to get to your book "the truth matters." we agree. we believe in facts first, and i hear so many people every day saying there's a deluge of information, and i don't know who to trust. what is your answer to that? >> there's not a simple answer. the average person knows hneedsw how sausage is made. as we know the communications
4:58 am
director didn't know, and we need to know more about how news is made, and how some things in the past they could have assumed, well, the journalist know this stuff and i don't need to know it. >> it's going to involve critical thinking. where can people find wroer book? >> it should be available as of today. >> i like the size. i am a big fan of little books. i am more likely to read it because i am not as intimidated. >> very digestible and valuable. >> thank you. >> thank you for speaking truth this morning. always welcome. we're following a lot of news this morning, so let's get right to it. what was the mission? why was there a lack of support? >> we do owe the american people transparency, and we plan to deliver just that. >> enemy contact was not likely.
4:59 am
>> the foreign services committee is not getting enough information. >> i want answers, most importantly for the families. >> the president and congress are laser-focussed on making sure the middle income wage earners benefit. >> sitting down with senators for tax reform. >> they are doomed to fail if they do not make it a bipartisan effort. good morning, and welcome to your "new day." it's tuesday, october 24th. now 8:00 in the east. we have new details about the ambush that killed four american soldiers in niger and injured others just three weeks ago. america's top general now says the u.s. special forces did not call for help until after an hour after the fire flight with the islamic terrorists began. did an intelligence failure lead
5:00 am
to the deadly attacked? >> and meanwhile, president trump has not let go of the condolence call controversy with the gold-star widow, and donald trump is disputing the call with the widow that she says left her in tears. here we have the chairman of the joint chiefs. obviously he's feeling the need to get out and answer questions, making a point to answer all of the questions and repeatedly saying the public is owed more information. but at the same time there was so many basic questions he could not answer, things like where exactly were these troops when they came under fire. were they wearing body armour? we are three weeks after the

37 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on