tv The Intelligence Report With Trish Regan FOX Business May 8, 2017 2:00pm-3:01pm EDT
of oil. sally yates, no friend of this administration, she's going to outline why and how she warned them about michael flynn. that he would not be a good guy to put in that position, now to trish regan. trish: all right, we are on it. breaking right now the woman who was fired for refusing to uphold the president's temporary ban on immigration is getting ready to testify about what she believes is russian interference in our election. by the way, if the obama white house was that concerned about general flynn, then what the heck were they doing giving him clearance to begin with? sally yates, the personal responsible for classified information as donald trump is suggesting today? we have lots of questions and we are getting answers for you today right now.
i am trish regan, welcome, everyone, to the intelligence report. sean spicer wrapping up conference moment ago and made the point that the obama administration is the one who made general flynn security clearances to begin with. so does this suggest that this is nothing other than one giant political witch hunt that the democrats are salivating at. i want to go blake berman. blake: the press secretary sean spicer wrapped briefing and confirmed that, indeed, then president elect trump sat down with president obama here at the white house in the oval office, just a couple of days after the election that president obama did warn the incoming president, hey, you shouldn't go about hiring michael flynn and days after that president trump hired flynn. that shouldn't be any surprise because as we know, then
president obama who was not a fan of flynn. watch. >> president obama made it known that he wasn't exactly a fan of general flynn which shouldn't come to a surprise given that general flynn had worked for president obama with an outspoken critic of president obama'ortcomings specifically related to lack of strategy confronting isis and other threats around that were facing america. so the question that you have to ask yourself really is was president obama truly concerned why didn't he suspend the security clearance which they had approved months earlier. blake: during the briefing i asked spicer if there were specific reasons given by then president obama to then president-elect trump why not hire michael flynn and spicer told me that he could not answer that question. as you know, sally yates who is in the middle of all of this is set to testify in capitol hill in just a short while's time.
she's expect today testify that she gave heads up to the trump administration that there might be some checking into on michael flynn, of course, the big questions are what did she tell the trump administration and might she have been the source as you mention of some los angeles. president trump was tweeting about ms. yates earlier today, ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got in the newspapers soon after she explained it to white house council. trish, the cameras will be trained on yates on capitol hill. trish: very interesting. blake berman, thank you so much. joining me right now for all analysis, former cia officer buck sexton and gina and stewart holiday. good to have you here. buck, you're a former intelligence guy. i'm going to start with you here. she's plain training that she somehow gave the information this heads up, that she actually gave them information that was
relevant to general flynn whic shou have nt him running for the hills but at the same te if that information did exist, why the heck did he have hearing in the obama administration to begin with? >> well, we have to know what the information was that was passed along in terms of whether it was just we don't trust this guy, we don't like him or if there was greater specificity, that hasn't been made clear. anybody afacilityuated with the obama administration that doesn't like general flynn or have concerns about him would be entirely unsurprising given that he was a prominent critic of the administration. without knowing the information is, no one else can honestly really comment on whether it was a bad decision or not to bring flynn based id. i did say that some of the information we do know the speeches, some of the work that he did reportedly for turkey, these were lapses in judgment. why this is such a big story, though, i should note is the
russia-trump angle. it's really not so much general flynn so much keeping russia, trump and the specter of these ties in the news cycle because every administration is going to have people that don't work out. the obama administration did, flynn was not a good choice for this role at this time and he has already paid a price. trish: i'm coming back if you actually had some concerns about him, i just don't know why, stewart, wouldn't be obama administration if they were that concerned about any potential lapses in judgment, et cetera, why did they allow him to stay there to begin with? why do you have to go to trump after the fact, why wouldn't you just boot him? >> well, i think what they were looking at is evts that may have taken pce after he left dia where, of course, the administration gave him, you know, the clearance to run the defense intelligence agency and when he started his private sector practice and into the transition. there were obviously a number of activities in the range
including the conversations can embassador kislyak. trish: gina, how -- how much of this is really substantive, how much of this is really political? your view right now? >> it's political. you look at -- it's like looking at a game, trish, that was lost and saying what should have been don't differently, the trump administration fired flynn and this is over -- comey has even said, comey has even said there's zero evidence of any collusion. they are still chasing that paper tiger, if you will, when what they really should be talking to her about is the leaks that there's ample evidence of why is it that the media and the left in general want to continue to discuss a
nonissue that there's zero evidence in lieu of what there's ample evidence of and that is los angeles that took place that she may have good information that should be talking about instead. trish: this is exactly what donald trump brought up today. he basically said, look, somebody ought to be asking her about these leaks because you have to wonder, asking sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got in newspapers soon after she explained it to white house council. it could have gotten there a multitude of different ways but some people are suggesting that she was the source of this leak, buck, walk us through how the leaks can happen in the intelligence community? in other words, she wasn't the only one that had any intel on general flynn. >> she is somebody who is already been willing to grand stand publicly. we saw this on unwillingness to enforce the trump immigration ban, which is part of why she's getting additional attention of a possibility of a very politicized leak.
how these things happened are rather straightforward. somebody who has high-level access, has security clearance, decides to take that information and share it with a party that's unlawful. calling somebody in a newspaper and saying, hey, this is what i've got, you should run with this, it's very straightforward. those leaks can be tracked down, depends on the method of communication may have been. it's not clear that yates is the person who leaked anything. trish: right. that was sort of my point. in other words, there are other people in the room that would have the information. donald trump is saying, hey, you know, ask her about these. whether or not it was her, they should be asking because you don't want all of this classified information leaking out into the snreses. >> they are going to be asking her under oath effectively did you break criminal law and at that point my guess whether she did or didn't she's going to say no, of course not. it doesn't matter all that much unless they can catch her in the first place and to be clear about this, i think that
somebody at her level to leak that kind of information that end up in the press assuming that it's accurate, assuming that it was leaked, the legal jeopardy there is tremendous. to be acting attorney general and -- trish: maybe somebody a little further on down. >> it could be. we don't know. trish: it can often come from someone else. >> there are leaks and leaks where there's a blessing for them, go talk to the reporters about this without it necessarily being something that everybody would be, you know, they're not holding a press conference about it but somebody -- trish: when you get asked under oath, did you actually leak this -- >> is that a leak or not. for somebody down the chain it becomes a more interesting question. trish: thank you so much. i may be seeing you a little later in the show. gina, buck, stewart, thank you. the texas bill just signed into
law that essentially bans any city or county in the state from becoming a sanctuary city. it's like a showdown between municipal, state and federal law, the laws also going to allow police to ask about the immigration status of anyone they detain even for just a traffic violation and is any city official or law enforcement member refuses to comply with the law, they can face prosecution. i know many of you do not appreciate this constant conflict right now between state, local and federal law specially when it comes to protecting all of us, all of us individuals that are here legally in the country. so what's going to happen next? will other states follow texas lead? are we going to see major challenges in texas ahead ned, where do you see this one
heading, major legal troubles or is texas going to be able to enforce the law, saying, look, if you're going to try and provide some kind of a escape to someone who is here illegally, then you're going to be the one in trouble. >> well, the thing that's important to remember about this texas law is people have been saying, well, the arizona law went up to the supreme court and struck down almost no entirety, but the one thing that was not struck down in the arizona law was that it permitted police to ask people that were detained what is their immigration status. so i think that as you look at this and what they did in texas allowing officers to ask what is your immigration status regardless for criminal activity or traffic violation, it's been upheld by the supreme court. it's already been addressed by the supreme court. it's already been dealt with and that's why i think texas kept it fairly narrow and focused just on that. i think the thing that's interesting, trish on this, first of all, i can't believe we are having a debate about we should uphold the law, we should
think about we are a nation of law, rule of law, just uphold the law, what a novel idea. the thing that's interesting to me, the people are saying the controversial part is there can be consequences for people who refuse to uphold the law, they might go to jail for a year and lose post. all they are trying to do is say let's follow the law, let's enforce the law and if we come into contact with people that might have criminal activity -- trish: nothing wrong with that. >> exactly. trish: but leslie, the left gearing up for a big fight. let's keep in mind, by the way, one of the weirdest things about all of this, i was looking through stacks of papers the other day and this is from ice and their reports and all the various people that they had arrested yet they couldn't do -- they couldn't follow through cause local sheriffs, county sheriffs, local police chiefs invoked the sanctuary city status. i thought, how crazy is this, these people have committed
crimes, they cannot be deported. they cannot -- they cannot really even be sent to jail the way they should be because of this ridiculous very political rule and i think it's political because let's in not forget police chiefs, leslie, they are elected. you have some texas communities and, look both parties have been guilty of this trying to play to certain populations, but i think a lot of people have played to these communities and said, hey, we will keep you safe, but what about everybody else? what about the people that are in the country legally, don't they need to be safe too? >> well, we do need to be safe from here that are here legally because those are the majority of criminals in the country, those that are not coming here illegally. one of the problems that we have here in texas or arizona -- trish: leslie. i have to stop you. can i ask you a question, if somebody commits a crime, shouldn't they be kicked out of the country?
can we agree on that? >> we do agree on that, but here is the problem. local law enforcement whether in texas, arizona or in california, they simply don't have the people or the money to be immigration cops as well as criminal cops, first of all, second of all, they need the cooperation of a lot of undocumented workers in heavily populated areas specially like texas to help them to get those criminals that -- trish: you're going to show us your license and passport, et cetera, proof that you are here in the country legally. if you said that, it acts like a deterrent, leslie. >> here is part of the problem, the problem becomes if i am driving -- this is why the supreme struck down most of the arizona bill except for asking status and here is the problem, who do you ask status of? if i have brown skin and a yucky
pickup truck and a lawn mower in the back i'm assuming i'm an undocumented worker doing landscaping and asking me my immigration status, how do i prove it? i think this becomes a slippery slope as we have seen in the past in arizona and i think the fact that the governor pushed this through the way he did on facebook, if you will, trying to avoid more protests -- >> no, no, no. trish: final comment to ned. i have to run. >> this has been debated in the legislature. they passed it through four days ago. there's no surprises here. he just chose to sign it on facebook for whatever reason. we are not asking the police force to become another immigration force, we are asking them to ask very simple questions, do you have proof, are you here legally, very simple question. this is not rocket science. trish: i hear you. good to see both of you guys. ned and leslie, we are waiting, everyone, testimony from former acting attorney general sally yates about possible russian
interference in the election, we are going to bring you that testimony just as soon as it happens, now you have to imagine democrats are ready to pound because it keeps the whole narrative going about the russian interference in the election or what president trump likes to call fake news. another big story we are following right now. the fallout from the french elections, riots breaking after e e emmanuel macron won presidency. we are heading to france next
we asked people to write down the ings they love to do most on these balloons. travel with my daughter. roller derby. ♪ now give up half of 'em. do i have to? this is a tough financial choice we could face when we retire. but, if we start saving even just 1% more of our annual income... we could keep doing all the things we love. prudential. bring your challenges.
they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business. ways wins. especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business. trish: we are waiting on testimony from former acting attorney general sally yates. she got fired because she
wouldn't enforce donald trump's immigration, temporary immigration ban. it's testimony that she's expected to give about possible russian interference related to general michael flynn in the election. they're assembling right there on capitol hill, this is for the senate intelligence committee and it's been postponed a bit but, indeed, it will happening today momentarily and as soon as it starts, we are going there, you can imagine, the democrats are all over this and ready to pounce because they are putting the russian interference story right up there at the top of the news cycle or, you know, in a way what president trump likes to call fake news. that'll be something that dominates what you hear out of the questioning at least from democratic lawmakers, just exactly what did michael flynn know, what was the problem with him, she may also be asked by republicans how was that communicated to donald trump and the white house, any knowledge
that they had about general flynn, sean spicer saying a brief time ago, look, if the guy was that bad and they had the intelligence, why didn't they do something about him sooner and again donald trump also asking the question about who was responsible for all of these leaks in the first place. was it actually perhaps sally yates, you can anticipate that this question will be asked as well. another story that we are following fall-out on french elections after macron beats nationalist marine la pen. the latest with ashley webster who has been in the thick of those riots. ashley: hey, trish, last night, of course, we had the smiles and the cheering and waving of the flags and here we are less than 24 hours later and the
disillusion is apparent particularly on the far left and also the far right. many challenges facing mr. macron. this is a very deeply divided country. let's not forget he had zero representation in the french national assembly, he's going to start putting a government together. not an easy task. meanwhile as you say, we were in the middle of one of those protests today, several hours ago. it was those workers, trade unions, the young socialist party, those folks out there today, they do not like emmanuel macron because frankly he wants to reform the very tight french labor laws that make it difficult for french companies to hire and fire and reduce hours and reduce wages, all of the things that others will tell you, including macron that hurts this economy with the unemployment rate still running around 10% in france, among the youth of the country it's closer to 20%, so have is a
man elected as president of france and not many people seemed not be thrilled about it and many people taking anger across the streets and we saw record of blank votes filed in the election. we will have the legislative races here in france next month and that's when mr. macron will try to put together some sort of coalition government but i tell you what, it's not an easy job and as the guardian in its headline today, good luck, mr. macron, thank you, trish. trish: it's amaze to go me that you see so often administrations fail to grasp the concept that, you know, when you are actually trying to get people back to work, you cannot have these kind of labor laws that prevent companies from hiring and firing, in other words, that's the problem. they don't want to hire in the first place because they won't be able to fire them. we need flexibility. ashley: they want cake and eat it too. [laughter]
trish: ashley, good to see you. live from paris. all right, we want to go next to omaha, nebraska where our liz claman is with shareholder meeting, she has very big interviews with big folks, bill gates and warren buffet. the intel next to investing, looking from a fresh perspective can make all the difference. it can provide what we call an unlock: a realization that often reveals a better path forward. at wells fargo, it's our expertise in finding this kind of insight that has lead us to become one of the laest investme andealth management firms in the country. discover how we can help find your unlock.
trish: all right, the annual berkshire shareholder meeting is happening in omaha, nebraska, just about to wrap up there with board of directors meeting right now at company headquarters and that happens to be where we find our very own liz claman who is just about to exclusive interview none other than warren buffet, bill gates. quite a line-up, liz. tell us, what are you going to ask. liz: let me just say that it is the exclusive and only interview directly after they get out of the board of directors meeting, trish, so i will ask them right off the bat, succession.
he threw a little bit of a grenade over the weekend when he said that maybe, first time he ever said that maybe his successor will take over while he's still alive, while warren is still alive. he won't say who the successor is. that was a big deal from the meeting and, of course, you know the meeting, trish, thousands and thousands of people will get a finallaly but probably brushing against 40,000 people arrived and there's no other shareholder meeting on the planet like this. he works his way around the floor where he has all of the cis plays of companies that berkshire owns, dairy queen, froot of a loom, precision car parts, he spends the most time at the railroad, burr -- burlingto, no northern, that's why they see many shipments of coal, safety issues and all kinds of regulation. i system -- asked him.
he bought precision car parts. have, listen.y does he really liz: your cash pile, it was $89 billion, what is it going to be going into the meeting today? >> well, it looks like cash every place and treasury bills, it's well over 90. it's going to be as much as 94 or 95. liz: 94 or 95 billion. would you commit half of that to acquisition if it's the right one? >> yeah, sure, more than that that. liz: i started to hear from a lot offers because they are the guessing game and the palace intrigue. many came with an interesting theory on where he would spend
half of that pile. he's a large shareholder of coke, he owns millions and millions of coca-cola shares. the hot seller was the coke bottle that's selling very hot in china with his picture on it. they put his picture on it because they want to sell more coca-cola in china. it is not the top-selling soda. sprite is. the chinese like to drink clear liquid. trish: it's better for their teeth. you know what i would love for you to tax to him about tax policy. he's always making the point -- liz: yes, we are. trish: he pays more than his secretary in taxes. if he thinks that you make money on investment that it needs to be taxed at a much higher rate because that might equalize things with his secretary, so to speak in terms of what he's paying. but we look forward to it, liz, it'll be an interesting interview as yours always are.
liz: the richest minds. trish: 3:00 p.m. we will stay toon for that. in the meantime we are waiting right now on former acting attorney general sally yates who is going to testify any minute from now on contacts that she believed former national security adviser general flynn might have had with russia. this should be interested. you can the democrats topping at the bit of this one. they get the whole russian interference of the election back in the news cycle but president trump calling this whole thing fake news and demanding that sally yates be asked under oath if she knows how classified material was leaked to the media, in other words, how did that happen, what can she tell u you're not suppose today leak this classified stuff. it's not suppose today make its way to the newspapers but somehow in the obama administration it did. we are going to bring you that testify live, stay with me, i'm
back in two think your large cap equity fund has exposure to energy infrastructure mlps? think again. it's time to shake up your lineup. the alerian mlp etf can diversify your equity portfolio and add potential income. bring amlp into the game. before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. read the prospectus carefully at alpsfunds.com/amlp
trish: breaking right now, we are awaiting testimony from former acting attorney general sally yates who is set to appear before the senate subcommittee to answer questions about possible russian interference in the 2016 election. you are watching senator lindsey graham right now, he's beginning the opening statements and we we are waiting, ms. yates who will be answering a lot of interesting questions. adam shapiro with the latest. hey, adam.
adam: we got a hold of opening statement, subcommittee, trish, she's going to say as the subcommittee understands many topics of interest today concern classified information that i cannot address in this public setting either directly or indirectly. now, as this hearing gets under way, we do expect the warning president obama gave president trump about michael flynn to be among the topics, members of the committee will attempt to ask former attorney general sally yates. yates is speaking to the subcommittee investigating russian influence of 2016 presidential election and expected to maintain that she informed the white house's legal counsel in january that flynn lied to the administration about his phone calls and conversations with russian embassador sergey kislyak. this morning president trump
tweeted about yates, ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after he explained it to white house counsel. white house press secretary sean spicer was asked if yates is trust worthy, here is what he said? >> i would assume that when you raise your right hand that you'll do that, that's the whole