tv The Real Story With Gretchen Carlson FOX News September 8, 2014 11:00am-12:01pm PDT
>> and who else. you have three complicated question questions. >> the point is no american boots on the ground. >> it's complicated but not illegitimate. why them? their country. again, the president -- i think the president, again in the interview we're owl sighting prescribe it as a profound mistake to admit combat boots on the ground in syria. this is not a fight the united states can take on for them. the united states is willing to be supportive of the syrian opposition, as they try to put in place a government that reflects the will of the syrian people. we will continue to support them. >> their country three years ago, three years later 163,000 people are dead. millions of refugees all over the region. again, why not then? why didn't -- why wasn't it
effect auated back then? >> i would say the united states has been engaged in an effort to support them and have been for some time, more than a year at least. separatory -- separately the concern that was expressed at the time was a concern we didn't want to provide assistance to every individual who said that they were fighting bashar al assad. had we done that without thoroughly vetting them and building the kind of relationship necessary to understand who to provide weapons to we would have inadvertently provided weapons to those fight ing iraq. there was a question of who exactly was included in the syrian opposition and which of those elements were interested in putting in place a government
that actually reflected the will and diversity of the syrian people and which were members of the opposition actually extremists, who were hoping to use the power vacuum that's been created by this civil war in syria, to try to carry out their own vision of an islamic caliphate in this region. the reason the administration wa interested in carefully vetting the individuals who are part of the syrian opposition is because we wanted to make sure that our assistance was landing in the hands of the people who were trying to create a government that reflected the will of the people and not create an islamic caliphate that was creating acts of violence throughout the region. this challenge of vetting the opposition certainly contributed to the -- to the policy of this
administration to ramp up our assistance to that opposition over time after we had established some relationships and had the opportunity to vet these individuals and get a better sense what their intentions actually were. john. >> jeff asked you a series of very direct questions and i didn't hear a direct answer, so can you just tell me -- >> i'll try again. >> please help me with a yes or no. >> i'll try. >> does the president intend to ask congress for authorization to expand his campaign against isil? just a yes or no. >> the president was asked this direct question and he -- >> didn't give a direct answer either. i'm asking for a seriously yes or no. i don't know what buy-in -- i covered congress for years, i don't know what buy-in is. buy-in implies to me a vote of some kind, either vote on
appropriations or authorizing but some kind of vote. is that what you want from congress, a vote on this, yes or no. >> if you want to get insight into the president's skurcurren thinking about this i refer you to the interview he gave in the interview with chuck 48 hours ago. if the president decides to expand the operation, these are the kinds of questions best answered after the president has made fundamental decisions about what he wants to do there, that if there is an expansion in the operation that takes place, what consequences are there for a whole range of things, for diplomatic relationships, what kind of assistance we're going to seek from our partners and regional governments in terms of the role they play here and what role does congress have? it's hard to -- unless we're talking about a very specific order from the president, it's hard to talk -- and very specific terms what we want congress to do. as a general matter the
president is interested in their buy-in and congressional debate and is interested in consulting closely with the leaders in congress so that they feel bought into this process and feel like the partners they actually are as elected representatives of the american people. >> the president did make a decision on air strikes in syria under very different circumstances previously and his point then was he needed congressional authorization or wanted congressional authorization. if he were to go in that direction again and decide some extended air campaign against isil targets in syria were necessary, is it safe to assume he would have the same view he would need, want congressional authorization? >> the situation from last year is a little bit different than the situation this year. the situation last year was related specifically to this issue of chemical weapons being used by the assad regime against
the people. the situation right now is related directly to the protection of american citizens in the region. the president does believe he has all the authority necessary as commander in chief of the united states to order the kind of military action necessary to protect american citizens. >> including strikes in syria? >> again, if there is an expansion of the president's military orders or if there is a a -- an expansion of the scope of operations the president is willing to consider, at the point then president made that decision, we can start making decisions about what sort of congressional role or authorization is required, if any. >> give me a sense on the timeline for a decision on this, something the president's considering right now, something we should expects in the next day or two or is this something over -- >> when you say "this". >> the decision whether or not to expand military operations you just referred to. >> the president has been regularly consulting with his national security team for weeks
now. when they are having these meetings, they're talking about our broader strategy posed by isil and broader strategy discussed in terms of our diplomacy with the iraqis trying to form a central government. they've made tremendous progress over that in the last couple of weeks and hoping this week they will make important progress in forming a cabinet. there's important work being done by the secretary of state traveling to the region this week to talk with regional governments. it was pretty powerful explaining the role these governments have and the stakes. the president highlighted so often these sunni dominated governme governments perceive shia led governments as the principal threat to their ability to lead their country and remain in power. it's the president's view and i think there is some
justification for this based on some facts we see on the ground there they actually face a greater threat from more extremist sunni elements that have demonstrated significant capacity to wreak havoc in their region. there's diplomatic effort to engage the international community here. there are a number of intelligence efforts the president ordered and we talked about ordering intelligence assets to get a better sense of what actually was happening on the ground and better assess the capability of both isil but also the iraqi security forces, but also, as you point out, there's the other element to the strategy is the use of military force. that is part of the strategy. the reason i'm running through this long list here is to illustrate to you that this broad strategy the president's put in place to deal with this is something regularly discussed among his team and they're
discussing every element during these meetings. >> in this speech wednesday is this a primetime address or daytime speech? >> we're still looking at the logistics and will have more details and let you know. >> is the purpose of the speech to announce a new phase in this military operation or to outline what he has already outlined in different venues, the interview over the weekend, press conferences on his last trip, what his strategy is, vis-a-vis isil? >> the speech isn't written yet. i downtown want n't want to get describing a speech that's not written. >> is there going to be something new or -- >> i wouldn't rule out something new in the speech but the goal to is to make sure the people understand what the clear stake is for the american people and our nation for this ongoing violence we're seeing in iraq and syria. he also wants to describe what sort of tools are at the
disposal of the american government as they try to protect our interests in the region. the president wants to try to lay that out pretty clearly. does that mean the president may have something new to sane the pea speech? he might. i'll wait until the speech is written before i start guessing where he will end up. major. >> you were asked has the president decided to expand the air war you said he will do whatever is necessary. that sounded like -- >> you can expect the president himself would announce a decision like that not just little old me. >> the statement he will do whatever is necessary. >> that this is authority he has as commander in chief to address these challenges and the president is determined to act where necessary to protect american citizens both in the
region and homeland and the president has demonstrated the ability to do that already. >> timing -- >> the principle continues to apply. >> it's not a matter of whether but the time. is that going to be addressed in wednesday's speech? >> no. wednesday is on military strategy and military strategy relies heavily on the president's forceful diplomatic might and range of other assets we have at our disposal and the president will use all of them to address this specific challenge. >> to say forsake of argument i was an american that watched the president's interview yesterday and press conference, will i say at the end of the speech it's like 70% brand new or like 90? [ laughter ] >> that is a particularly creative way to ask that question.
i think what i would say, i would encourage that american citizen you're describing to tune in to the speech and evaluate for themselves just how surprised they are. >> you can give us something better than that. >> at this point i can't, a little earlier. >> as you said to jonathan mostly what we heard before, there might be something new. is it to try to gather the american people's attention and say, in case you haven't heard, here's what i'm thinking about, here's the context but this isn't a declarative speech on how i'm going to ratchet up this conflict to a higher military level and i need congress to approve it and here's how much it will cost and here's the timeline i've put something to achieve goals xy and z? >> we're still a couple days away from the speech and i'm not in a position to say what the president will or will not say. we will have the opportunity to talk about this tomorrow and
maybe i will be more prepared. the president and his team are working on the speech as we spe speak. i will try to provide -- maybe i'm overcommitting myself -- i will try to provide greater insight for you and your viewers what the president intends to talk about wednesday. >> lets talk about immigration for a second. want to be clear. what the president decided saturday was he wouldn't take any executive action until after the november election, right? >> the president decided -- >> or he decided to revisit the entire question of taking executive action until after the election? in my mind many advocates pushing for this, they're very different things. >> i appreciate you giving me the opportunity to clarify this to the extent there is any ambiguity. >> the president decided he will take executive action within the confines of the law to fix those aspects of the broken immigration system he's able to fix before the end of the year.
that is a decision he has made and that is something that will occur. now, some of the static, that you might say, in the media over the weekend, was related to the preside president's earlier commitment to acting before the end of the summer. what the president has decided he will act now before the end of the year. the president has not in any way altered his commitment or interest in taking executive action again within the confines of the law, to solve, to act where congress hasn't and more specifically act where congressional republicans have blocked congressional action. the president agency commitment to acting on this before the end of the year has not changed. >> you said yesterday the reason for that he needs to explain to the american people. why does he need until the end of the year to explain something? isn't it true the dominant factor, if you want to call it static was static fm senate democrats saying this is maybe a good idea, maybe you think it's a good idea but it's terrible
politics for us and we wanted you to wait until after the electi election? the president clearly doesn't need nine weeks to explain this to the american people. if he wanted to explain it he could explain it just like he is going to try to explain the strategy on wednesday. it seems to me the only rational explanation for this is intervening november election and the democrats doesn't want him to take this on that might hurt the party. >> the reason the president announced delays on action he might take is specifically he is concerned mostly about insuring the decision he offers is sustainable and enduring. >> if it's executive action it is sustainable until the end of his presidency. he doesn't have to worry about congress. that's the whole pointed. >> the president wants to insure the work done over the past several years to build this powerful bipartisan coalition in support of immigration reform is
sustained. by injecting an executive action in the midst of this hyper partisan hyper political environment shortly before the mid-terms, that will have a negative impact on the broader public support and on the sustainability of immigration reform. so the president -- i guess the short answer to your question is the president's willing to take a little political heat from the pundits from some of the evacuates in th evacuates -- advocates in the hispanic community in particular to ensure the policy he puts forward is one that can be sustained. the fact is we haven't seen a similar willingness from congressional republicans to take a little heat to do what's in the best interests of the country in fact we've seen congressional republicans do exactly the opposite. they're in a situation they don't want to take any political heat even though they know acting on bipartisan immigration reformed would create jobs, expand economic growth, reduce
the deficit. that's why it's strongly supported by the faith community, law enforcement community, business community, labor community. these are all reasons why comprehensive immigration reform should move forward and passed with bipartisan approval in the senate and there are a certain number of republicans blocking this. >> not going to do what he said on the timeline he said he was going to do is an act of courage. >> what the president has done -- look, major, it isn't a surprise at the white house or not a surprise to me, i won't speak for my colleagues. some people over the weekend critical of the president's decision to announce these executive actions before te end of the year as opposed to the end of the summer. that criticism is not a surprise, that criticism was anticipated. but the president is willing to take on that criticism so that
we can ensure that the executive action the president takes is sustained. that it's enduring and we continue to have public support for it. for all the disagreement there may be around this one issue there should be no dissfputing e fact injecting this issue into the current political environment would be really bad for the issue. there's some disagreement whether or not maybe it would help some democrats, make hurt others, galvanize base democratic voters, energize latin nope supporters, maybe provoke republican candidates into doing outrageous things like shutting down the government in a way that would benefit democrats. there are a lot of people with a lot of views what impact this could have on political races. no arguing about the fact injecting this issue into this sharply political polarized environment would be bad for the issue and the president believes
ultimately that's the most important thing, making progress on this issue is the most important thing. no one in washington d.c. has invested more in trying to get this done than president barack obama. if that means the president has to take on heat for a few weeks until we announce our decision in order to make it more likely these solutions will be enduring and sustained and successful, the president is happy to take on that heat to get that condon. move around a little bit. justin. >> i want to follow on that and maybe argue the idea -- >> that's why we're here. >> injecting that into the current political environment is bad for this issue. we just went through the same thing again the republicans haven't moved on the issue and seems legislatively dead and the only executive action seems to be control of the senate. i want to know if you could
maybe explain explicitly why executive action if it would come this week would be less enduring than one that happens five weeks from now if it's not what i think we're all dancing around that it helps senate democrats to retain control of the chamber? >> the reason that the immigration reform over the last five years has made such progress. >> has it made progress? >> it passed the senate with bipartisan support and every single democrat in the house -- in the senate voted for it. we also know -- we haven't tested the proposition, everybody in here let me know if you disagree, everybody willing to stipulate if this legislation were put on the floor of the house of representatives would also pass with bipartisan support and majority the president would certainly sign it. that's evidence of significant progress. it's not ancient history to see it 2006 you had democrats and republicans on both sides of the
issue reluctant to engage in a debate about it let alone reluctant to vote for it. we have made a lot of progress over the last five years. the reason for that i think is two-fold. the first is it's become clear at what the facts are. the facts are it would be good for job creation, good for economic growth and reduce the deficit. facts are clear why congress should take action on this. the second thing a lot of very difficult work was done between democrats and republicans to find common ground. >> you've been listening to white house spokesman josh ernest answer questions about immigration. it's a real busy day in d.c. josh ernest will continue to talk and if he says anything important about isis and other issues we will come back to that. he was grilled about immigration reform and delay until after the mid-term elections and the president's big speech on wednesday. he says the president is still
not committed to boots on the grounds for iraq or syria and committed to consultation with congress. he says it's important for congress to understand the plan, what they are calling a buy-in to somehow debate this issue. so, what is actually a buy-in? hi, everyone. i'm gretchen carlson. welcome to the real story today. meanwhile, lawmakers also back on the hill after weeks of vacation and picking up where they left off. we already know one thing for sure, there won't be any movement on immigration reform from them either? what's the real story? the president says the choice to play it safe has nothing to do with politics making this real reason behind the delay not quite so clear. >> you made a decision to delay any executive action until after the election. what do you tell the person that's going to get deported before the election this decision was essentially made in your hopes of saving a democratic senate. >> that's not the reason.
what i'm saying is i will act because it's the right thing for the country. >> what's the story behind this sudden change of plans. so much to chomp on here today, chris. first and foremost i know you were listening to josh ernest as i was. he was really going around the questions a lot about the president's speech wednesday. he really didn't sell this he basically said we're probably not going to learn that much new. >> what was amazing about it, his revelation the president is still deciding whether he's going to decide and he's deciding whether or not congress is going to have a role or how much of a role congress is going to have and by the way, this is going to take many years. the president makes it clear, this is a very long process. you get an idea how long a process they think it will be when josh essentially says, first "w" we have to reshov-- fo resolve a 16-year-old conflict
and the saudis and like saying i need to invented a hydrogen car first and then i can drive to the moon. come on. you get a sense of how off in the weeds they are on this thing even as they speak. >> everyone thought including many members of the media when the president said he had this big address on wednesday he would actually lay out a strategy dot dot dot finally but probably not. i want to move on to immigration something he is once again delaying. you heard josh earnernest go on extensively it's not politics. what's the real story? >> it is politics. the president himself said it is politics but not to help democrats build the senate. i tend to believe him because he doesn't much care about the democrats in the senate. this is about the politics of obama's legacy and everything that has to do with his second
term not being a wipeout. what he meant was he wants to do something that will stand up and last. if you did it now given what happens and continues to happen on the u.s. border and people's concerns there it might get rolled back. the president is saying it is politics and the politics are he's got to make it stick. if i was a senate democrat i don't think i would find that very comforting the president you want to be helping you out says, well, it might have helped some but might have hurt some. i made a decisions i will take care of me, first. >> chris. thank you. >> you bet. >> as president maps out a plan to fight isis, senator dianne feinstein calling on the president to make a strong stand and quickly saying quote this is the most vicious well funded militant terrorist organization we have ever seen. we either confront isis now or later when it will be a much stronger enemy. senator feinstein's republican
counterpart, senator orrin hatch joins me with reaction. great to have you on the set. you were probably hearing the briefing as well and i know you heard me say what senator feinstein said, i can't think of a more direct way for somebody in the president's own political party to tell him to get going! >> the president ought to pay attention to dianne feinstein. she's chairman of the intelligence committee and she knows as well as i he's known about isis a long time when they were less than a thousand people and now more than 10,000 people. they're not only in iraq, but they're also in libya. i have to say they're having a much greater impact all over the middle east than they ever would have had had we had a president who decisively acted. >> even former homeland secretary janet napolitano when she was secretary said everyone
knew about isis. i want to bring you to congress's role in all of this. the president's spokesman said the president was hoping congress would have some sort of buy-in to his strategies and ideas. what does that mean? >> well, i think what he wants to do is have us buy into what is a disastrous foreign policy. syria is in trouble. all over the middle east are in trouble. isis or isil, whatever you want to call it, is building forces and we could have stopped all of that had we had a president who acted decisively. i think the president is a failure in this area and i feel sad about it and we will pay a heavy price in the end because he failed to act. you look at iraq, my gosh, they first tried to attack the kurds. this president hasn't given anything to the kurds i know of that will help them turn them back and defeat them. france and germany and england claim they have donedf9gñ some. our country has to get involved and support our friends.
kurds were with us through the second world war against hitler. they've been u.s. fans for years yet we're not helping them the way we should help them. the president has had intelligence on this matter for not only this past number of months but for the past year or so and has not been willing to act. >> senator, is he coming to congress just to be friendly or because he wants other people to be on his side so the blame can't all go on him or does he actually need to come to congress? >> look, i've always given the president, whoever the president may be, a lot of leeway in these type of issues. it doesn't hurt for him to come to congress because that would be helpful for him to know what congress feels about this. the fact is he won't act, he doesn't act and the rest of the world that has always depended on the united states to be the fighter for freedom throughout the world is aghast. they don't have the ability we have to be able to stop this type of stuff. we will have a lot more deaths.
you look at christians killed over there and the way they rolled over others unbelievable this president doesn't do anything about it. i'll be interested as much as anybody next wednesday when he hopefully comes up with some sort of a plan. it's long overdue. he's avoided it with everything he can. look, it's time for him to wake up and start realizing the united states is important to world peace. >> if his spokesperson is on the mark today it sounds like it's not going to be that big of a deal on wednesday. let's see what develops wednesday. senator hatch, thank you so much for your thoughts today, sir. >> thank you. >> the president taking heat for dismissing the terrorists who, well, he called them the jv team, remember that? those terrorists were isis. he now insists he wasn't actually talking about isis. one organization rating this statement by the president yesterday as false. we will debate that coming up.é4 breaking news in the domestic
story. time for some real talk now. the president getting slammed for fudging when asked about isis on a sunday talk show. remember "the new yorker" profile in january, the president was told the al qaeda flag was flying over the iraqi city of fallujah. he dismissed the terrorists who had taken that city as jv, junior varsity team. those terrorists were isis. and politifact rating this statement false. >> keep in mind i wasn't specifically referring to isil. i said region alley, there were a whole series of organizations focused primarily locally, weren't focused on homeland. a lot of us, when we think about terrorism, the model is osama bin laden and 9/11. >> meanwhile former homeland security secretary jan threat napolitano said isis was on the radar before she left the
administration a year ago. and political advisor to late senator frank lautenburg and fox contributor and david. what do you say, julie? >> seems like a false statement to me and i say that a democrat. i don't know who the people he's referring to and the people referred to as isil and isis and they're certainly not jv and not today. >> was it the mantra al qaeda is on the run and the campaign speech that arguably got him re-elected. >> he said it after the campaign and i don't think it had anything to do with the campaign. he said it because there's pressure to go into syria by mccain and others to fund the remember bems in syria and i expect he was basically saying one had nothing to do with the other. the problem with syria, there now are no moderates in syria
and i'm not sure who they were. we found out isis has some of the weapons the saudis gave to them which means in fact had we armed the syrian opposition as mccain wanted we would have been giving isis a lot of these same weapons. >> we found out isis was 1,000 people and now 10,000 people, david. >> they're concerned how the president will protect our country whether he said they're jv or not jv and more importantly when the president speaks wednesday and whether he provides action. he's a very good speech maker. this president continues to say there will be no boots on the ground yet the defense department says there will be an increase of 1200 in the military in iraq to -- >> it's part of the message the president wants to follow that he's not a war kind of president and finds himself in situations all about war.
unfortunately i have to wrap it there because we have breaking news with ray rice and baltimore ravens. that is a fox alert now. we'll see you again soon, david and julie. ravens are releasing that they're releasing ray rice from the team after the video came out he punched and knocked out his fiance in the elevator. trace, we all remember the nfl originally -- saying they didn't see this whole video but only gave him a two game suspension. now, this whole video came out in the last 24 hours and things have dramatically changed in this sorry. >> which is an example, gretchen, of the outrage in this case. a shorted while ago baltimore ravens said they will hold a news conference at 8:00 p.m. eastern time and minutes later on their twitter page they posted this saying ravens have terminated running back ray rice's contract this afternoon which means he's done, no longer a baltimore raven. this might mean the end of ray
rice's nfl career. you're looking at the video now and the question is why the nfl never saw this video. h this is ray rice and his fiance and he punches her out cold. >> the hotel says they never released it. the grand jury indicted ray rice and saw this video and tmz saw it and reportedly say they just saw it today. when we saw the video of him dragging his fiance out of the elevator. ray rice said he was defending himself. that is not the case. we have outrage across the building and terrance nighton said that man should be thrown out of the nfl and thrown into jail. shame on those deciding his punishment. brady quinn, the former quarterback current broadcaster
says quote am i the only one who believes it should be a lifetime ban for the first time a player commits domestic violence? they should be done period and sean shaun o'hara watched ray rice video. as a man i am disgusted. as a former nfl player i am ashamed by handling of this by the league. despicable. what could the league then do? go back and retroactively punish ray rice? roger goodell gave him a two game suspension and then after that said i blew it, made it a mistake and made any charge of violence against players at least six months suspension for the first offense and then lifetime ban. it seems it would be left up to the ravens and they have acted very quickly by releasing ray rice terminating his contract all together. >> you have to wonder, the nfl
commissioner was undoubtedly having talks with the ravens today, this all happening so swiftly. i do find it fascinating it's the ravens making the announcement and not the nfl coming out and making the announcement. your thoughts? >> maybe because nfl's hands might have been tied. roger goodell gave him that two-game suspension. could the nfl go back and retroactively punish ray rice for this part of the video coming out? the answer is maybe but the other side of the equation the nfl players association could come out and fight this and puts the nfl in a bind. while that fight is going on you have ray rice playing the whole year. really, this came down to ravens and coach harbaugh could have put him on the bench and suspended him game to game. this is probably the easiest scenario, ravens have had a lot of pressure and this is the way
a lot of people believe it should have worked. >> from the beginning quite possibly. interesting because it's the same coach john harbaugh i remember coming out and doing a press conference after the two-game suspension wags announced and said everyone makes mistakes. and he got a lot of flak for that because they said he wasn't taking this domestic violence very seriously. >> he said, quote, ray rice is a heck of a guy and at the ends a lot of critics say that wasn't handled very well. it's baltimore ravens had seen both sides of this video inside the elevator and outside. even if ray rice's story was he was defending himself. his fiance, i'm not sure if you see her, her name is janae palmer, now his rice, is very small. for ray rice this knockout punch
for all involved is inexcusable regardless we didn't see the punch inside, she was knocked out dragged away from the elevator. when security came they both walked away and arrested and ray rice was indicted. when you're indicted for your head coach to say you're a heck of a guy, you know that is going to bring the weight of nfl fans and players and league down upon you. >> it's a humongous development because there have been a lot of problems with other players, in the nfl, domestic violence, this is very swift action albeit delayed. stay with us, and we will take a quick break and have more news on ray rice being official ly released from the baltimore ravens, when the role story comes back. i'm j-a-n-e and i have copd.
i'm d-a-v-e and i have copd. i'm k-a-t-e and i have copd, but i don't want my breathing problems to get in the way my volunteering. that's why i asked my doctor about b-r-e-o. once-daily breo ellipta helps increase airflow from the lungs for a full 24 hours. and breo helps reduce symptom flare-ups that last several days and require oral steroids, antibiotics, or hospital stay. breo is not for asthma. breo contains a type of medicine
that increases risk of death in people with asthma. it is not known if this risk is increased in copd. breo won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden copd symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. breo may increase your risk of pneumonia, thrush, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking breo. ask your doctor about b-r-e-o for copd. first prescription free at mybreo.com
from the team. it comes just hours after this video was released by tmz, video inside the elevator at the rebel casino back on february 15th earlier this year. this is ray rice knocking out with one punch his then fiance, janay palmer, his then fiance in atlantic city. now the ravens are taking action saying quote they will release him, all they're saying. they called for a press conference tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern and we don't know if that will still happen. jim gray is on the phone with us right now. what do you make of it? >> it's the right decision by ravens. you wonder how law enforcement and ravens and nfl didn't have this information before. now that it's come to light by tmz, this is the right thing to do. he should not be permitted to play in the nfl albeit under these circumstances albeit light
the commissioner in his soft touch on initial punishment said he didn't get it right. further action would be taken for guys now and ravens, it's been put on their plate and this time they've gotten it right. >> it's my understanding the nfl is still saying they had not seen the full extent of the video on our screen right now actually inside the elevator, jim, where you can actually see ray rice, with one punch, take out janay palmer. she is out on the floor. what we originally had seen you're seeing right now, the aftermath of ray pulling her out of the elevator as she is still knocked out and on the ground. do you believe the nfl did not have access to this as they were determining such an important decision as this one a couple months ago? >> yes, i believe them because brian mccarthy the lead spokesman regarding the video they requested it and didn't get it, they had not been able to see what had gone on inside the
elevator. they are saying it wasn't made available to them until today. it makes you wonder why the national football league couldn't get from the prosecutors an important piece of evidence like this. however, i don't believe the national football league would blatantly say something and put the commissioner and his credibility on the lean, brian mccarthy and the entire league on the line and saying they had seen something they had not seen. why they couldn't get to it is a whole other story. seems to me if the national football league requested something like this and prosecution finished with it made their determination what they were doing with ray rice why they wouldn't give it to the nfl is beyond me? >> interesting. rebel casino just went bankrupt and closed its doors. i don't know if that has anything to do with it. ray rise helped them win the super bowl in 2012. a pro bowler.
what kind of precedent does this set for football players and any criminal activity and football players. >> particularly with domestic violence, if you put your hands on a woman, you will suffer the consequence of your action. that's the right policy. roger goodell has said now it will be a minimum of six games. if they're a repeat offenders, lifetime banishment and can apply for reinstatement after a year. it can't be tolerated. yes, they play a violent game and, yes, violence is conducted on the playing field within the confines of the game. the second you step outside those boundaries off the field. if you handle a woman or you do something wrong in this nature, you're going to suffer and you're going to pay the price. it's the right policy. it can't be tolerated. i agree with what the commissioner has done. six games, i think they have to get it straight with the union going forward, gretchen. the union has to accept this is
going to be the penalty. in our country, you're innocent until proven guilty. i think in these instances, when you're seen dragging somebody out of an elevator, i mean, it didn't just to, the guilt, withe prosecution, that would be the shape she would be in. so, i think that the union is going to have to accept that the commissioner is going to be able to dole out this type of punishment for these type of things. the good news is, this is very rare. >> it's also rare that you capture it on video tape, which is one of the reasons he is now not on the team. >> i think you have to assume one thing. if you're a public figure anymore. it doesn't matter whether you're a politician, entertainer or sports figure, newscaster, everything, everything is on camera. >> all right. jim gray, fox news contributor, sports analyst extraordinary anywhere. thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> we are going to have more continuing coverage on the ray rice situation and also have a good news story. one woman helping police and kids in a huge way.
she is raising a ton of money to buy and then donate k-9 dogs for police departmentses across the nation, and is here live with johnny cash. right back with that good news story. angie's list is revolutionizing local service again. by making it easy to buy and schedule service by top-rated providers, conveniently stay up-to-date on progress, and effortlessly turn your photos into finished projects with the angie's list mobile app.
in your america today, one texas woman is helping kids and cops in a big way. she i raising money to buy and then donate k-9 dogs for police departments across the country. and now her organization is also helping provide these dogs to schools to help with their security. so here to explain is kyes kristi shiller and she has johnny cash with her as well.
>> thank you for having us. >> you rang the nasdaq bell -- johnny cash did. >> the first canine to ring at the bell. >> that's fantastic. tell me about your organization. >> a little less than four years ago i saw a need on television. i saw a dog was killed in the line of duty, and i tried to donate a dog back anonymously and hit red tape. somebody told me in politics in texas you need to think bigger than that. and i started looking around, seeing all different departments, over 50, that were trying through car washes, golf-a-thons, everything to try to raise money for just one dog. and i realized there was a need. >> so you started this organization, and folks out there, you should know she has been able to raise enough money for 70 doings in police departments across the country, and each dog is ten to $15,000? >> not cheap and doesn't count the training for officers. >> you're also now working in schools after the sandy hook
shooting. you thought maybe dogs could help. >> you know, a dog just shows that crime is a less level where a trained dog is, and also it's comforting. so, with a child having a dog close by, they feel more secure. grades go up, and with the proper socialized dog, the proper handler, we don't think it's going to completely save in an active shooter situation but can be a wonderful deterrent. >> you have been able to donate six dogs to schools. >> in five months. >> how can people help? >> i need america to come out and understand, these dogs have 300 to 500,000 times the strength of their nose of a human. there's no machine, there's nothing that has been invent that can duplicate these dogs. >> just johnny cash. great to see you. thank you. >> thank you. >> new reaction from the nfl and
the white house after the baltimore ravens announce the termination of ray rice. right back. you loved brad. and totaled him. you two had been through everything together. two boyfriends. three jobs. you're like "nothing can replace brad!" then liberty mutual calls. and you break into your happy dance. if you sign up for better car replacement, we'll pay for a car that's a model year newer with 15,000 fewer miles than your old one. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
[ inhales deeply ] [ sighs ] [ inhales ] [ male announcer ] at cvs health, we took a deep breath... [ inhales, exhales ] [ male announcer ] and made the decision to quit selling cigarettes in our cvs pharmacies. now we invite smokers to quit, too, with our comprehensive program. we just want to help everyone, everywhere, breathe a little easier. introducing cvs health. because health is everything. before using her new bank of america credit card, which rewards her for responsibly managing her card balance. before receiving $25 toward her balance each quarter for making more than her minimum payment on time each month. tracy got the bankamericard which fits nicely with everything else in life she has to balance. that's the benefit of responsibility.
apply online or visit a bank of america near you. thank you for being part of a very busy "the real story" today. i'm gretchen karlson, more breaking news on ray rice with john scott in for shep. >> we now know when we will learn president obama's plan for fighting and defeating the islamist state. the terrorists have murdered two american journalist in addition to thousands of innocent iraqis and syrians. we have a timeline and it will apparently take years. >> a judge now on trial, accused of forgery, evidence tampering and using public funds to pay for personal expenses. she says she is not guilty. so what what happens when a jury has toju decide the fate of a judge? the nfl and the baltimore ravens dumping ray rice after tmz looked video of him burning his