tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News September 6, 2015 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
>> he was always very smart. but from what we know now, maybe he was a little too smart. [ laughter ] he was always very smart. but from what we know now, maybe a little too smart. [ laughter ] i'm chris wallace. police officers targeted as anti-cop rhetoric reaches new lows. what can ease the tension? we've heard black lives matter, all lives matter, cops lives matter, too. >> at some point in time, you have to stop yelling and screaming and start listening and discussing. >> we'll discuss the deadly attacks on police as well as rising murder rates at major city americans with two top cops. philadelphia police commissioner charles ramsey. and milwaukee police chief edward flynn. then president obama gets enough votes in congress to
insure his nuclear deal with iran. we'll take a pact. we'll talk to dick cheney and his daughter about that. and we'll ask our sunday panel about donald trump's change of mind. >> i will be totally pledging my allegiance to the republican party. >> all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. like a lot of people, we noticed a deeply disturbing trend this week. a policeman gunned down north of chicago became the 24th law enforcement officer murdered in the line of duty this year. since ferguson last august, 44 officers have been shot and killed. and this comes at a time of growing anti-police rhetoric and a spike in murders in some of our biggest cities. we are joined today by two leaders in law enforcement, philadelphia police commissioner
charles ramsey and milwaukee police chief edward flynn. chief flynn, you said recently every cop in america is looking over his shoulder and they don't feel that america has their back. is that contributing to this rash of police shootings? >> i think we have to look at a broader context. but i certainly think it's an element. a number of things have happened and i'm wondering as we look at both the police shooting phenomenon and the increase in homicide in our major cities, you can't disaggragate the two phenomenons. we have to discuss it later that has to do with a tipping point. we aren't sure if we have a spike or a real tipping point and a change phenomenon. but there are concerning issues and one is the relentless p lel propaganda war being waged by the television stations. it's been most distressing to watch them try to link six or eight questionable video recordings of police misconduct
and turn that into a national narrative of what the state of police community relations are. it's a false construct but it is a dangerous one. >> okay. we will get into that in a moment. commissioner ramsey, though, let's talk about the problem you faced at firsthand and said you were trying to talk about police community relations in philadelphia. and you, in effect, were shouted down by protestors of the black lives matter movement. here's a clip. >> what do you want? >> justice! >> when do you want it? >> now! >> commissioner, when you see that and the protestors in minneapolis chanting "pigs in a blanket. fry them like bacon." does that contribute to the sense that it's open season on cops? >> well, it certainly doesn't help. i think it's ignorant to do things like that. but i also think that, you know, the people that are serious in this movement are missing an
opportunity to really make a difference. if all you want to do is get up during a meeting and yell and scream and shout and then walk out, then you're not going to get too far because there's no opportunity for dialogue. i mean, there are a lot of issues that are driving crime in our neighborhoods. it's not just about policing and how policing is conducted. you've got very, very serious issues taking place that's driving crime. and that's why police are there to begin with. if they want to really deal with the issue of black lives and the number of homicides to take place, then you have to look at the crime that takes place on the streets of our city. black on black crime. if you don't address that or address the drivers of crime, then this is going to just not result in anything at all positive. >> but there clearly has been something of a breakdown or at least a worsening of the situation between police and the communities that they're trying to protect. chief flynn, you were in a situation last november, you
were at a hearing about a police officer who had shot and killed a disturbed man. and some of the protestors criticized you for looking at your phone during the hearing. and you made some comments that went viral. here they are. >> i was following developments of a 5-year-old girl sitting on her dad's lap who was just shot in the head by a drive-by shooting. if some of the people here gave a good god damn about the community crime, i would take this more seriously. >> chief, does this embody a breakdown in trust between the police and the people in the inner cities? >> i think one of the great myths is there's some dramatic breakdown in trust between the people at the grassroots level and their police. it's a canard. some self-tile activist that i never met before or had ever seen in a community meeting is running their mouth off about racist oppression in the police department. if you can get 40 people in a
demonstration, i can guarantee you four tv cameras and a news helicopter. but the reality is day after day after day our coppers are in the neighborhoods, not just literally protecting people with their lives, but in the meetings organizing communities, listening to their problems and providing the service that they want. what we have is a historical challenge of the neighborhoods and communities that need quality policing. the most historic reasons are harboring some levels of distrust. but the grassroots level, those relationships are much healthier than any national network would have you believe. >> you have talked about this and we'll address this head-on, this question of whether or not it's the media and maybe some politicians who are exploiting a few isolated incidents. there certainly have been a series of incidents over the last year. you can say it's not a lot but they have been dramatic. a lot of them recorded on body cams showing police acting recklessly or the original story
didn't add to up what actually happened. you have a case like that in philadelphia. don't police actions add to some of the mistrust? >> sure. there's no question about that. but the problem is, when that becomes the only thing that's shown, and there are hundreds of thousands of interactions that occur between police and community every single day that you don't know about because they absolutely went well. but we have taken 2,000 guns off the streets in philadelphia without a shot being fired by a police officer. now these are illegal guns being carried by a person. those are left with nobody injured. nobody talks about that sort of thing. so i think it really does distort the view of what's going on in policing. we've got some issues that we've got to address. we've got police officers that engage in misconduct, but when the only thing that gets shown is that shooting that is bad. i had an officer that was murdered on march 5th of this year. there's video of that, which we will not show because we don't want to expose the family or anybody else to it, but those
are the kinds of things and the dangers that police officers face every day that gets overshadowed by the few incidents of misconduct. >> there is and we eluded to at the very beginning another side to this story, chief flynn, in major cities across the count industry, the murder rate, and take a look at it, has risen dramatically from what it was at the same time last year. in your city of milwaukee, murders are up 76%. chief, how do you explain it? >> well, i think the question we have to look at is what are the variables right now. you know, when you think of the concept of the tipping point, you're thinking of the environment, of the few people that have made maximum impact and what are the changes to bring on this phenomenon because you end up with a sudden increase, not a gradual increase. what we are seeing right now is the same percentage of the criminal population, which is 6% to 9%, is again driving this crime rate. but a number of us have suffered from recently weakened gun laws that have made it much, must have easier for our criminals to gain access to firearms when the major cities met a few weeks ago
here in d.c., we all noticed the phenomenon that a lot more rounds are being fired in each shooting. and overwhelmingly the homicides are driven by people with criminal records shooting people with criminal records. and that's the slice driving our homicide rates. >> there is another theory, commissioner, and that is the so-called ferguson effect. and that's the argument that with police feeling they are being targeted, either in the media or on the street, and with emboldened criminals that police are not going into neighborhoods as aggressively as they used to. and one of the case examples people cite rightly or wrongly is baltimore where six police officers were indicted after the death of freddie gray. do you think there is a ferguson effect? >> well, i mean, baltimore is kind of a unique situation with what took place there. i haven't seen it in philadelphia. now, that's not to say that we don't have some officers that perhaps are not as aggressive as they were before. but it certainly -- when you
look at our numbers, it certainly is no indication if that's the case. we have a slight bump in homicide. 5%. but we stay on top of it. and i think it's also important to keep this in context. we've had historically low numbers in terms of homicides and shootings for several years now. and so our numbers are being compared to that. and we are starting to have an upward trend, which is something to be concerned about. we don't want to go in that direction. but it is also important to remember just exactly what we're being compared to. there is a problem out there, no question about it. certainly ferguson has had an impact on us in policing. so what extent? i don't know. >> this has become political as well. critics know president obama seems to speak out more emotionally and vocally when young black men are shot down, like trayvon martin or michael brown, than when policemen are shot. do cops notice that?
>> oh, i think the president is missing a historic opportunity in which to bridge the gap between the two parallel conversations going on right now. on the one hand, we have the conversation about the holocaust of homicidal violence afflicting poor neighborhoods of color. in my city, the homicide rate for an african is 185 for 1,000 compared to 50 for a white person. it's a dramatic difference and true in city after city after city. >> this is black on black crime. >> that's correct. >>s ? not policemen or white people going in, this is black on black. >> and the challenges that these neighborhoods have is they are afflicted by high ratings of homicidal violence and other crimes and the police are trying to do something about it with them. on the other hand, you have the disparities of the criminal justice system and this conversation has to be bridged because you can't talk about the disparities in the criminal justice system unless you talk about the victimization. one person can bridge that out. so far he's only talked about half the equation and would like to see a change in that.
>> chief flynn, commissioner ramsey, thank you for coming in. we'll, of course, stay on top of this story. thank you, gentlemen. up next, a kentucky county clerk chooses to go to jail rather than bend on same sex marriage. we'll have more on that in the race for the white house. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the hillary clinton aide who says he'll take the fifth over setting up her private e-mail server? go to facebook or twitte
like this? >> i've asked you to all leave. >> someone finally took the spotlight from donald trump this week. kim davis defied a court order to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples and went to jail. time to bring in our sunday group, syndicated columnist -- robert costa from the washington post, and new york times best selling author richard pattinson who has written books on politics and the supreme court. that clerk, kim davis, says that god's law outweighs man's law, the supreme court ruling on same sex marriage and a number of republican presidential candidates including ted cruz and rand paul and mike huckabee jumped on her bandwagon. george, your thoughts about the principle and politics of the rule of law and also what about barack obama who seems to sometimes pick and choose which laws he's going to enforce? >> well, there's no question the
president's selective interpretation of the constitutional provision that the executives shall see that the laws are faithfully executed is selective and has encouraged a kind of lawlessness down the ballot. people say, well, i can do whatever i wish. but surely it is a wholesome rule that the executives should obey legitimate court orders. that's true whether your name is orville or george wallace, the democratic governor of alabama in the 1960s or kim davis, the democratic county clerk in kentucky. she made a choice, unquestionably her faith is important to her, evidently her paycheck is also because she did not resign her office. we've been here before, chris. and in 1892, a massachusetts policeman claimed that his constitutional rights of speech and association had been violated by rules governing and
restricting political activity by police. the supreme judicial court of massachusetts held against him. and the opinion written by oliver wendell holmes ruled and said the policeman has a constitutional right to engage in politics. the policeman does not have a con cistitutional right to be a policeman. she has that same problem. >> rick, as we have been following this story, i keep thinking kim davis could be a character in one of your novels sworn to uphold the law but arguing there's a higher law. >> well, i think the problems here is that george is exactly right. this is no different than her turning down the interracial couple on religious grounds. a public official simply doesn't have the right to do it. the real problem is the matter of corporal politics. this one rebibly lrebiblifies .
it separates the grown-ups from this from those seeking appropriation in iowa among the evangelicals. the problem is that's not where the american people are. the gop should hope this goes away as quickly as possible. >> we'll talk about the gop and let's turn to donald trump who this week finally signed a loyalty oath pledging he'll support the republican nominee and not run as an independent candidate. here's a clip. >> i will be totally pledging my allegiance to the republican party and the conservative principles for which it stands. >> but there's a question, robert, did the republicans win or lose by, a sense, see chairman reince priebus flying to new york going to the trump tower seemingly to formally take donald trump into the gop. >> it's a political chess game. on one side the rnc is trying to
bring trump into the tent to make sure he's not a threat for a third-party run. at the same time, i have spoken to trump and his campaign manager about this. they believe long-term they can get other republicans to commit to him to be boxed in as much as he's boxed in with this pledge. because of his standing in the polls, he will start to make a move. and in case he wins the nomination, people stick with him. >> there's another aspect of it, bob, and that is that to a certain degree he was the outsider. he was, you know, the maverick, but now with his signing the pledge and having had the laying on of hands of reince priebus, does the gop own his statements and policies more than they did? >> they do own trump more because priebus went up to new york and associated with trump. he appeared with trump at the press conference. at the same time, the rnc is trying to get ahold of this situation, this phenomenon, and when you see carson's rise, trump's rise, carly fiorina, all the outside voices are becoming
a major part of the party. and the gop is grappling with what to do. they don't have many tools to control. this is one of them, it's just a political document. meanwhile, hillary clinton's e-mail problems continue. she refused this week to say she was sorry for what had happened and refused to apologize. but she did say this. >> there was so much work to be done. we had so many problems around the world. ed i didn't really stop and think. what kind of e-mail system will there be. i am sorry that this has been confusing to people and has raised a lot of questions. >> and we've got a lot of questions from you about the decision of a state department staffer whom hillary clinton paid to help set up her e-mail serv server. you can see here's one of the questions.
phil mayfield sent this on facebook, if the panel offers immunity to that staffer, can the aide be come peopling to testify or risk being charged with contempt of congress? >> absolutely. he has the first amendment right not to testify. i assume he would testify in that case as opposed to going to jail. richard, you talked about being thrown into the briar patch when it comes to same sex marriage. hillary clinton cannot get out of this e-mail conversation. if she had not had time to think through the e-mail situation, wouldn't she have just used the state department system that was in place? this is a controversy that is not going away. it's going to be here for months and it is costing her dearly in two ways. her reputation as an honest and trustworthy person, but also the ability to talk about some other issue. >> what do you think about the fact that this fellow, brian
pagliana says he'll take the fifth. hillary clinton says there's nothing improper or unethical or illegal. and here's a guy taking this in as self-discrimination. >> a washington post story said he was being personally paid by the clintons. now maybe there's nothing wrong with that, but it's an example of exactly the opposite of what you're supposed to do when you have a big political problem like this. rule number one, the story is out there. maybe you apologize and move on. and hillary clinton has failed to do those basic political 101 steps on controversy. >> george, we seem to have sort of given a temperature here every week. is hillary clinton in better or worse shape in the e-mail scandal at the end of this week? >> well, worse. because they obtained this person absent-mindedly. she said, i was so caught up in fixing relations with libya and russia and all the rest that i
absent-mindedly set up an alternative e-mail system. you have a lot of democratics willing to take a shot at hillary clinton. this struggle is pretty much behind her and people are reluctant to make it a battle. >> what are you saying then? >> i'm saying this is an issue, when i talk to republicans, they say this is an issue. when you are on the trail in iowa or new hampshire, democrats are not thinking this is a big issue for her. >> rick, we're friends from martha's vineyard. the bastian of liberalism. what are your friends saying about the e-mails and hillary clinton? just a right-wing conspiracy? >> well, what robert said is right. this is a general election problem. she's solid in the democratic
base among women, labor, minorities, everyone but white progressives. in the george -- dan quayle not being able to spell potato, that's a difficulty. >> and then there's also the fbi investigation which might take on a whole life of its own. we'll take a break and see you a little bit later. up next, president obama secures enough support to get his nuclear iran deal through congress. we'll sit down with former vice president dick cheney and his daughter liz who say it's another example of disastrous foreign policy.
president obama got the votes he'll need to ensure congress won't be able to block his controversial nuclear deal with iran. that victory for the white house is bad news for two of the president's toughest foreign policy critics. former vice president dick cheney and his daughter liz, a former assistant secretary of state. they have written a new book "exceptional: why the world needs a powerful america." welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you, chris. >> you compare obama's deal to neville chamberlain and hitler in 1938. really? >> yes. when you look to the respect of the iranian deal, the only winner were the iranians who got everything they asked for. the losers are the united states, are the friends and allies of the united states in the region, israelis, saudis and others. the overall outcome, i think, will be the shift significantly to balance the power in that part of the world for the iranians.
i think they will end up dominating, partly not because of the nuclear deal but because of the embargo and ballistic missiles and conventional weapons. so i think it's a major defeat in my mind in terms of the opposition in the region. >> but secretary of state kerry says if the u.s. backs out now, that our european allies in the u.n. will lift their sanctions and will be all alone. here's a clip. >> it is clear that if we reject this plan, the multi-lateral sanctions regime will start to unravel. the pressure on iran will-lesson and our negotiating leverage will diminish if not disappear. >> liz, kerry says that there's no chance for negotiating a better deal. >> well, you know, secretary kerry may not have been able to negotiate a better deal. but, in fact, what they're saying now is totally disingenuous. we know the sanctions were working. they were starting to bite.
when my dad and i were in the middle east a year ago, we had leaders saying specifically the sanctions are working, why are you alleviating pressure now? now you have a situation where having conceded the most important things including the rights for the iranians to enrich, the obama administration is saying, if you don't vote for this deal, we'll have war. the reality is because of the pathway to a nuclear arsenal the deal provides, because of the other concessions with respect to the conventional missiles and funding, this deal makes it more likely, not less likely. >> but the vice president, you say that president obama never put a serious nuclear option on the table. but you and president bush, the bush-cheney administration dealt with iran for eight years and i think it is fair to say there was never any real serious military threat. and during your time, let's put these numbers up on the screen, iran went from zero known centrifuges in operation to more than 5,000. so in fairness, didn't you lead
the bush-cheney administration leave president obama with a mess? >> well, i don't think of it that way. in fact, there was military action that had an impact on the iranians. it was when we took down saddam hussein. there was a period of time when they stopped the program because they were afraid what we did to saddam we were going to do to them next. we also when we took down saddam, gadhafi surrendered his nuclear program. we went and got his supplier, we did a lot to limit nuclear proliferation in the region while we were there. >> but the centrifuges went from zero to 5,000. >> but that happened on obama's watch, not our watch. >> but 2009 they were at that number. >> right. but we did a lot to deal with the arms control problem in the middle east. we signed on with the international friends and allies and the europeans and started the negotiations process. so what we did not do is what obama did. he never had the military option
on the table. he talked about it repeatedly but nobody believed him, especially after he waffled on the syria deal. there never was a military option that the iranians had to worry about. so the situation also involved paying cash to the iranians to get them to the table. lifting sanctions just to get them to come to the table. we always dealt from a position of weakness which i don't think we would have done. >> there also are programs underway that have been reported in the press about which people can't speak, that had an impact covertly on the iranian program according to press reports during the bush administration. which were leaked during the obama administration. >> well, you can't talk about that. i assume you're talking about the warfare, stocks and so on. we'll move to iraq and the rise of isis. liz, you blame president obama for pulling all u.s. troops out of the iraq area in 2011. but the fact is the original status force of agreement that
called for the withdrawal of all troops was negotiated by president bush. and critics would argue that the rise of al qaeda and other terrorists in iraq started after the invasion of iraq in 2003 by the bush-cheney administration. >> the reyal was there was always the intention of stay-behind forces. once combat forces, there would be another agreement negotiated to allow forces to stay behind. that's what the obama administration refused to do. eventually, ending up with agreeing to a small number of u.s. forces it would not have been effective in terms of providing security in iraq. the other thing that is indisputable is when barack obama took the oath of office on january 20, 2009, the situation in iraq ordered under the bush-cheney administration was stable. al qaeda and shia were defeated. even president obama and vice president biden claimed iraq was
a success at that point. what you have seen now, and not just in iraq, but what you're seeing in terms of the refugee crisis all across europe, the tragedy there is a direct consequence of barack obama's middle east policies. walking away from the middle east and creating chaos, creating a vacuum that isis, that iran, that america's enemies are now feeling. >> let me pick up, because this is obviously a huge story right now, mr. vice president, the migrant crisis. do you hold president obama and his policies responsible for what's happening across europe now? >> i think what's happened is he's created a huge vacuum and made it clear he's not using military force. the vacuum that was created once the caliphate was formed and so forth in the enormous violence moving forward in syria has contributed to directly the refugee crisis. i think when the u.s. plays the role there, it would have been
much easier to manage this situation. today what you have is a crisis of major proportions in syria supported primarily by the iranians. and that's driven hundreds of thousands of people to look for refuge some place else. they are all headed for europe and it's a terrible tragedy. >> mr. vice president, what do you think of donald trump? >> i have -- i don't know the man. i have never met him personal lip. i have refrained from judging any of our candidates, positively or negatively because we have been primarily concerned about the book and getting the national security front and center at the debate this year. at some point we may endorse but haven't yet. >> i know you're an avid news follower, reader, watcher, do you think he's prepared and fit to be president? >> i'm not going to judge any of the candidates until we get farther down the road, on our side. >> we'll talk about hillary clinton in a moment. but here's what trump has said about your administration, sir.
in 2008, he said, president bush should be impeached for getting us into iraq. he said that, quote, would have been a wonderful thing. he got us into the war with lies," and in 2011, trump said this about you. here's a guy who did a rotten job as vice president. nobody liked him. tremendous divisiveness. >> people said worse things than that about me. again, chris, i don't want to get into the business of judging candidates now this early. i want to see how they respond and react to this basic question of whether or not national security is the foremost issue on the campaign and what they are going to do about it. >> like those responsible comments on national security. >> i'm not getting into the business of getting into a dust-up with any of the candidates or support or oppose any of the candidates at this stage. you have to ask, that's the answer. >> that's kind of what i figured you might say. but i have to ask. finally, hillary clinton's
e-mails. liz, i expect you to be equally close to this, she says she never sent or received any e-mails that were marked classified. is the that a defense? s. >> no, marked classified is the sort of things the clintons have come up with now backing off what she said originally, which is that she never sent anything classified. it is beyond baffling that the secretary of state believes she can conduct personal business on a server. we know she had the server set up and paid a state department separately to maintain it. that it was wiped clean when the e-mails were under subpoena. she's got a big problem. i think it gets worse for her every day she's not able to -- this obviously calls in question her being fit to be commander in chief. >> how do you write hillary clinton's time as secretary of state, both on the e-mails and
more importantly on her foreign policy initiatives? >> i think she has responsible as anybody in the obama administration, other than the president who carried it out. she traveled a lot of miles but it is hard to find anything she did. i think they kept her on a short leash at the white house. this white house operated very much out of the national security council, the state defense, the generals, the diplomats i don't think had much impact on policy. i think she was there basically supporting everything barack obama did and bears responsibility for. >> and you agree with your daughter, your wise daughter. >> i think it raises questions on how she operated. when you operate in that environment, you're consciously aware of the material you deal with. it is just part of the -- well, you go to a national security council meeting in the situation
room in the west wing basement and there's a basket there. everybody has to put their lek stronices in the basket before going in to participate in the conversation. that happens every day. >> vice president, thank you. up next, a spiraling migrant crisis in europe. hundreds of thousands of people fleeing isis, war and poverty. now this tragic image is finally bringing worldwide attention to the chaos. we'll bring back the panel to discuss what is going on. plus, what should you do? how should the world deal with the refugee crisis in let me now @foxnewssunday. growing up, we were german. we danced in a german dance group. i wore lederhosen. when i first got on ancestry i was really surprised that i wasn't finding all of these germans in my tree. i decided to have my dna tested through ancestry dna.
here's the latest on the flood of migrants overwhelming europe. thousands of refugees traveling by train and bus have now reached safe havens in germany overnight. thousands more are expected today. but neighboring hungary which has struggled to manage the mass lull of people warns the human tide from the middle east and africa is still on the rise. senior foreign affairs correspondent greg palcott has more. >> reporter: chris, this weekend europe is zbrapgrappling with t biggest refugee crisis since world war ii. they have taken to roads and highways in their struggle for survival. it's estimated some 340,000 refugees and migrants have come to europe so far this year, fleeing war in afghanistan, poverty in asia. there's no end in sight. >> business is usual or
incrimina incriminainwere put in place. >> many people want to go to hungary and other countries don't want to host the migrants and don't want them passing through. >> the moral human thing is to make clear, please don't come. why you have to go from turkey to europe? turkey is a safe country. stay there. >> still bringing together people around the world this week, the image of a 3-year-old turkish boy this week. he, his mother and brother drowned trying to make it from syria to europe. >> they were going for a better life. >> the u.s. has taken in just over a thousand refugees in the past year. more to be done all around. chris? >> greg palkot reporting from london, thanks. we are back now with the
panel. rick, you know the power of images and that image, which we have seen repeatedly today and over the past week of 3-year-old ilan kurdi up on the beach like a piece of driftwood. really seemed to bring this problem into focus, didn't it? >> it's amazing how most americans were sleeping until we saw that one little boy and that humanized things. the pictures of the camp -- this is the perfect storm of humanitarian disasters where there are all sorts of contributors, but one thing not noted is this is a national security problem of the first order. we stand to lose a generation of refugee kids who are not properly educated or employed. and this is where our fear of terrorism redoubles on itself. on one hand, we don't want the folks coming in because we worry about potential terrorism. on the other hand, this international failing of the first order is creating a whole
generation of dislocated people, which could really be problematic in the very ways we fear most. >> with this flood of refugees, robert, you're seeing a very troubling split inside the european union. some of the richer countries like germany have been very generous in accepting and sheltering refugees, but some of the countries that don't have that kind of money have been -- and hungary could be the prime example, one is much more reluctant to bring in refugees and are opposed to the eu's idea of setting quotas on how many migrants each country is going to take. >> you're seeing countries have economic problems, but they are not trying to bring in all the migrants. at the same time, this issue is becoming more of one in american politics. check in with the campaign, how are you handling this? the first reaction is it's a barack obama problem. it's barack obama's problem with syria, but they expect the second debate with a policy
ready. if europe is not ready to handle the situation, what is the united states' role? >> that's an interesting question, susan, because so far the u.s. has accepted somewhere between 1,000 and 1,800 refugees from syria in the last year. so the question is, do we accept more and rick talked about a national security aspect and also the national security aspect as you bring in thousands of refugees, might some of them be terrorists? >> well, i suppose it's possible. although we recognize our obligation of people having a well-founded fear of persecution in their homeland that they get humanitarian treatment. you can hardly argue that the people in hungary don't fear persecution in their homeland. the united states has an obligation there. and if we expect countries in europe to step up to the plate with this, surely the united states will be forced to step up in a more serious way than taking a thousand or 1500 syrian
refugees. there are, what, 4 million syrian refugees in much greater numbers are going to come here. and i would also say that the united states has been well served by previous ways of refugees we have accepted. by the vietnamese refugees we accepted after the vietnam war that have become a great part of our nation. so we worry about terrorism. you can't look at these biblical pictures of people walking down miles and miles seeking just humanitarian treatment and not be touched. >> shortly after we took in a million refugees from about 10, 15 years later the whole bunch of high school valedictorians were all over california. so we benefited from immigrants there. one of the questions here is is this our fault because of what happened in syria? i don't think we started the syrian war and don't have the recipe for ending it. the real problem is syria.
a lot of it is libya, a lot of the refugees come over land into europe or on a much safer treatment by greece. really dangerous trip is across the mediterranean to italy from libya. in august 22nd -- 27th, rather, two boats carrying 500 people from libya sank. in april, 800 people droid by getting from libya. what happened in libya is our fault. we went into a country that posed no conceivable threat to the united states, in an eight-monday protracted assassination attempt de-capitated the government that created the failed state that is producing all of this. the former secretary of state and some republicans who were enthusiasts will have to answer for this. one further point, some estimates are that as many as
half a million refugees are now besieging europe in the first eight months of this year. that's less than 1/20th of the number of human beings that donald trump proposes to deport. >> i have moo wrap my mind around it. are you saying that you think that the u.s. should be more proactive in bringing in refugees to this country? that we did it in the case of vietnam, and we can do it here? >> vietnam we clearly had a particularly intense obligation, because we had fought a war, sought allies and lost, but it is part of our national heritage to do our duty. >> i'm not sure there's a political appetite for that. i was in mobile, alabama, covering trump in iowa. the people supporting the republican front-runner don't seem to be in that mind-set. >> it will be heart for a lot of these contenders in they see the human condition, but they're also trying to win a primary. i don't see the voters pushing for this.
>> the president needs to step up. he's in office right now. he needs to talk about what he can do in terms of letting in migrants of international aid, even use the 6th fleet to stem this tragedy at sea that we have going on, but we also need the arab gulf states to come in. we need a coordinated response from europe led by germany. you know, this is something which can't wait on politics. people need to step up. >> if up to cure terrorism, if you're worried about terrorists, just let the situation continue to fester. >> there's another aspect, and george alluded to it in addition to talking about libya, which is syria. syria is a failed state, and it is bleeding its problems all across europe, and, you know, we now hear the russians may be coming into syria, the slaughter of one ethnic religious group of another continues. so as long as that continues, isn't there going to be just a neverending supply of these
migrants around europe and the united states, george? >> yes, there will. if we had any way to stop the fighting in syria we should do it, but i don't think we do. remember, at the end of the second world war there were about 15 million displaced people in europe. ten years later there were essentially none. we've had handled crises like this before. this is different. the europe doesn't have our tradition of assimilation of people from around the world. europeans may have to learn lesson from their transatlantic cousins, us, about how you do this. >> and there's another aspect of this, susan. to the degree -- i'm not saying that the u.s. and europe should shut the door, but to the degree that the u.s. and europe open the door, doesn't that simply ensure that more refugees, more migrants will leave syria, will
leave turkey, which is a country, you know, they go to right across the border, and will follow in their footsteps? >> we don't have a moralable base to take everybody who want to come to the united states. we do have a moral obligation for people who face this situation. up next, a man of science and faith.
director of the national institutes of health. the biggest supporter of biomedical research in the world. on a campus outside washington, 17,000 scientists work in 27 different institutes, coming up with breakthrough cures and treatments for disease. >> we are the house of hope. this is where people come to when everything else has sort of stopped work. collins is talking about the nih clinical center, the world's largest research hospital. >> now at least for some patients we have a lazarus opportunity for people who are in terrible shape to be able to recover. >> what is a lazarus opportunity? >> they get into a clinical trial to try a brand-new therapeutic that is still very much under study, and they have a dramatic response and they go home and back too work. >> all of that is the tip of the ice birk for nih which gives funding to outside program. the nih budget this year is $31
billion, which after spending cuts and sequestration is where nih was 12 years ago. what does that mean for research grands? >> traditionally we could fund about a third of those. now we're down to funding about a sixth of those. that means that half of the science is left on the table at a time of such great problem. >> collins knows about scientific breakthroughs. he led the human genome project that in 2003 announced it mapped the whole sequence of dna. >> inside each cell is a instruction book of the code. if you know the rrchts genome for that person and look at their cancer, you can see what happened, oh, that t should have been a c. now that gene is overactive. >> francis collins is not your typical scientist. he plays a go ahead tar.
he rides harleys, and written a book about his belief in god. >> how controversial was that in the scientific community? >> it stirred things up a bit. there's some question that science is poorly designed to deal with, like why are we here. that's where faith comes in, an understanding that science limits the questions that you can ask, so let's find another way. >> while he's asking those questions, he will keep working in the most powerful job in american science. >> i'm a physician. i got into medicine hope that i could help people. we have 7,000 diseases for which we know the molecular cars. we only have is treatments for 5,000 of them. to be able to steer that forward is a dream cup true. and this summer nih awarded more than $30 million in grants to help tie information about the sequence of dna into
electronic medical records. that's it for today. have a great week, and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." joi. happy labor day, everybody. i'll see you on tuesday on fox business network. >> on the buzz beater this sunday, another media frenzy at trump tower as the donald takes a pledge he won't mount a third-party campaign. sounds off from tom brady to kanye west and of course -- >> as far as jeb is concerned. i watched him this morning on television. it's a little bit sad. don't forget he was supposed to win. he just doesn't have the energy. >> but is the press digging into the charges and countercharges between trump and bush and hugh hewitt questioning trump on foreign policy. were those