tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News December 24, 2016 12:00pm-1:01pm PST
welcome to the journal editorial report. i'm paul. a pair of attacks this week capping off a bloody year in europe. isis claimed responsibility for the deadly truck rampage at a christmas market in berlin monday. while russia's ambassador to turkey was assassinated by a lone gunman who shouted in arabic, god is great and don't forget aleppo. don't forget syria. in this week's violence adding to the wave of attacks including the march bombings at the brussels airport and the truck attack in nice, france. joining the panel this week, dan
henninger, jason riley, and mary o'grady and bill mcgurn. dan, i remember we had a visitor from the counterterrorism group in the white house a couple months ago telling us this person telling us on background that they were concerned about europe. now we see it manifesting itself here at the christmas season. >> absolutely, paul. i was thinking very much the same thing. it was just a month ago, recall, that the pentagon made it known that they were going to move on an invasion of raqqa which is the islamic state head quarters in syria. this is a time when the iraq army and the coalition partners were trying to retake mosul. i thought that's a lot to bite off at the same time. but the pentagon said back then that they were concerned that the islamic state was going to try to project terror into
europe and elsewhere, and clearly they were right. not merely europe. yemen and jordan have both experienced terrorist attacks in the last week. obviously the west has to be on alert. the german situation raises the questions of if, in fact, some of these western societies are adequately sensitive to the nature of the attack. >> well, and i think that in germany in particular, jason, you have a couple of problems. when is the migration issue. angela merkel, the chancellor brought in a million refugees from north africa and syria. a your ago two years ago, and some of those terrorists seem to have slipped in. and then you also have the problem of the germans don't do very well from all reports on surveillance, and intelligence. >> so far germany had avoided the fate of france and brussels and some other places. but not this time. and this was the softest of soft
targets. a christmas marketplace visited not only by native germans but tourists alike. this is a huge blow for the terrorists there. angela merkel herself remains popular. she's well above 50% but the refugee policy isn't popular. around 80% of germans want more restrictions. she's going to be coming up for a fourth term. that's not until the fall. there is time for her to deal with this situation. something like this does not help. and you have to think there will be pressure on her to reform this policy. >> for all her popularity, and it's true, i think this is the sort of thing that could topple here, mary. >> she started back pedaling in the spring, actually, about the immigration policy. the fact of the matter is that these incidents happen with home grown terrorists as well as with migrants. i think the point about intel surveillance, yes, vetting migrants is important and germany took a huge number
relative to the size of the country. but in the end, really, this is something that is going to have to be fought in the middle east. the wins of isis or the potential or the perception that isis is winning is very empowering for terrorists in the west, and i think that's what germany and the u.s. have to work on is action in the middle east. >> and on that point, the ankara murder, that's really the one consequence of syria. obviously the terrorist is responsible, but germany has not done very much at all to help us and help in syria or the middle east, because they just don't want to participate in any military operation. >> i think further to mary's point, what we're seeing in europe is the failure of middle eastern policy. even the most generous country cannot take everyone from all the disruptions there.
and we need a reasonable level of stability in the middle east. a lot of people have washed their hands of it. and syria is the best example. and to mary's point, for the united states there's a lot of debate over whether we should let people in. i think the german example shows they're not very good once people are in at separating the good guys from the bad guys. one of the problems in the united states is the people trying to do that with intelligence, remember, the mapping program in new york city and how much it was opposed. if we're going to take people, we need good intelligence. -- >> the mapping of groups of people that they thought, particularly students, some came from different countries -- >> i think it was more fundamental. it was finding out pakistani neighborhoods. you're trying to separate the law-abiding majority from the minority. and the left just has a war on the kind of intelligence that is correct -- >> what do you think about donald trump's reaction?
donald trump said, look, this proves i was right all along, and i'm going to, in fact, be as tough as i said i was in the campaign in blocking immigrants from muslim countries or terrorist muslim countries that have a terror problem from coming into the united states. >> well, he's never been very clear about exactly how he plans to do all this. he's spoken very forcefully, but very vaguely, and i think the one thing that makes everybody uncomfortable whether you're on the left as bill describes people who don't want this intelligence, the one thing that unites people is that we need the local, the muslim communities, the good muslims in this country to help us on the intelligence scene. so if he institutes a policy that alienuates all muslims, it will be counterproductive. >> you can't stop this problem unless you go to the source in syria and the middle east. if you think this is just an immigration problem, you're not
going to solve. >> true, but this is one of the reasons he won. people are scared that what happened in germany will become a regular occurrence in this country. they've seen san bernardino. isis sympathizers seem to be able to strike at will. president obama says this is this norm. get used it. donald trump says no. >> we'll see how he decides to implement it. law enforcement in the u.s. on high alert following the attacks in europe. how much progress are intelligence officials making in combatting the terror and cyber terror threat here at home? i gi? that airline credit card you have... it could be better. it's time to shake things up. with the capital one venture card, you get double miles on everything you buy, not just airline purchases. seriously, think of all the things you buy.
great...is this why you asked me to coffee? well yeah... but also to catch-up. what's in your wallet? this is your daughter. and she just got this. ooh boy. but, you've got hum. so you can set this. and if she drives like this, you can tell her to drive more like this. because you'll get this. you can even set boundaries for so if she should be here, but instead goes here, here, or here.
you'll know. so don't worry, mom. because you put this, in here. hum by verizon. the technology designed to make your car smarter, safer and more connected. put some smarts in your car. ♪ something new has arrived. ♪ uniquely designed... for the driven. ♪ introducing the first-ever infiniti qx30 crossover. lease the first-ever infiniti qx30 for $299 a month. visit your local infiniti retailer. i love toast because she's a lazy diva. [camera's shutter clicking] toast makes me laugh. [snoring] [laughs] when i walked into the shelter, i knew she was special. [toast snoring]
cities across the united states bolstering security following monday's attack on a christmas market in berlin. as officials deal with the ongoing terror threat at home, there's another danger with a growing number of cyber attacks including the russian hacking of the democratic national committee this year. mitch silver is the head of intelligence and the former director of intelligence analysis for the new york city police department. welcome back. >> thank you. >> this german attack, is it the future we're going to see not just in europe but here for
these terror attacks which are basically people grabbing a truck, grabbing a car, grabbing a gun, and just making individual or small group attacks? >> you know, we saw a preview of this in israel where as israeli security forces were able to increase their intelligence and capabiliti capabilities, the type of attacks they faced in a sense become less sophisticated. people grabbing a truck. people grabbing a plow, driving into a crowd. >> or knives on a bus. >> exactly. so we saw last summer in france for bastille day and now a second example, relatively simplistic, grab a truck and plow it into a group of people. >> but does this mean the threat overall is getting better. or is it, in fact, just changing in a way that actually spreads more terror because if you're walking down the street and you think you could be just grabbed by a knife or hit by a truck, in a way it's more terrifying.
>> it is because of the diversity of the threat. but i think what you are seeing is a dim you in addition of carrying out the massive threats. that's a credit to intelligence and security forces being that much more advanced in their capabilities and having much better connections worldwide with other entities. what you're left with is is individuals or duos acting on their own who may or may not be inspired by isis or al qaeda. >> there's a report the suspect in this case had been tracked in advance by german intelligence. we've done that in the -- and then dropped it. we've done that in the united states, the tsarnaevs were on a list of the boston bombing, and then the orlando bomber, mar teen was on it and fell off. are the agencies that have to follow these people simply overwhelmed by the numbers? >> it's two things.
one is that there are limitations in resources. you can follow someone -- you can't follow someone all the time for a number of years. there's a vetting process. >> a priority list? >> yeah. even the 7-7 bombers back in july of 2005 in london were monitored by intelligence but vetted and put down on the list, categorized as less of a threat. number one, there's limited resources. you can't track everyone all the time, and number two there are thresholds. if someone fails to cross a certain threshold after monitoring for a period of time, most investigations have to get shut down. i think that may have been the case in some of these other examples of tsarnaevs in orlando, waiting to learn about how this happened in berlin. >> do we need to change our rules to allow for a more extensive monitoring instead of having expressed limited periods?
>> we nigmight. for me personally, one of the most anxiety inducing events was closing down an investigation when you didn't have sufficient intelligence to keep it going knowing it could be a person that surprises you in six to 12 mon month? >> did that ever happen? was there an event after that? >> there wasn't, but it's always a fear for any intelligence official. >> let's talk about cyber. it's been in the news with the russian hacking of democratic politicians the democratic national committee. they tried to get into the republican national committee, apparently did not succeed in that. this is a growing threat generally you would acknowledge, correct? >> yeah. and i they when we're talking about cyber hacking, it takes a number of different forms. one is intelligence gathering, but what we're seeing here is not only the gathering of information, but then the putting it out on social media which is sort of a whole
strategy. >> that's a disruptive strategy they're trying. what do you think the russians were really up to. you don't doubt the russians did it, do you? >> no, i don't. >> what do you think they were up to? reducing confidence in the electoral process? >> one was to hurt the u.s. electoral process. i think the second was to potentially wound hillary clinton as a presidential candidate, and then it morphed as things moved along to provide opportunity to assist donald trump. >> as i followed the obama administration's response, they haven't done much as all. they filed a couple of lawsuits, indicted some lower level chinese officials. president obama said last week, i told putin to cut it out, and then he did it. and i told the same to the chinese president and it seemed to do good. shouldn't we respond more forcefully? >> it's all about deterrence. deterrence was an important
element in the cold war. we have not established with our deterrence doctrine is in the united states. last week something was released that said we might do sanctions, we might do indictments, and we might do covert options, but there's no information. the administration will say we want full flexibility, so we don't want to lay it all out there, that's understood. but if you go back to 2011 and iranian hacking in the financial system. 2014 and sony and then the chinese, a couple of indictments, some sanctions on north korean officials. what really have we done to demonstrate that there is a price to pay for hacking the united states? it doesn't seem apparent that there is a price to pay. so, therefore, there's no
deterrent. >> that's something that the next administration is going to have to face. thank you for being here. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> much more to come as we take a look back at the year in politics. from the stunning brexit vote in the uk to donald trump's upset victory here at home. what's behind the populous wave sweeping the west. at planters we know how to throw a remarkable holiday party. just serve classy snacks and be a gracious host, no matter who shows up. [cricket sound]
richard. didn't think you were going to make it. hey sorry about last weekend, i don't know what got into me. well forgive and forget... kind of. i don't think so! do you like nuts? ♪yea, you can be the greatest ♪you can be the best ♪you can be the king kong ♪bangin on your chest ♪you can beat the world you can beat the war♪ ♪you can talk to god while bangin on his door♪ ♪you can throw your hands up you can beat the clock♪ ♪you can move a mountain you can break rocks♪ ♪you can be a master don't wait for luck♪ ♪dedicate yourself and you can find yourself♪ ♪standin in the hall of fame ♪and the world's gonna know your name♪
they want to have independence in a sense, and you see it with europe all over europe. you're going to have, i think, many other cases where they want to take back their borders a and their monetary and a lot of things back. so i think you're going to have this happen more and more. i believe that. and i think it's happening in the united states. that was then candidate donald trump in scotland this
summer following the united kingdom stunning vote to leave the european union. the now president-elect predicting his victory as a wave of populism goes across the west. joining us is our panel. bill, what do you think is behind this populous thing? >> no one defines populist. >> it's not a good or bad word. >> and it's not always popular. i think there are a lot of different motivations for people going around. the one thing they have in common seems to be rebellion against the governing classes or what they consider the ruling elite, and in the classic sense of populism it's we the people are pure and the people are corrupt. in britain, i think they had the sense they were chafing under the european union rules and regulations and so forth. in germany i think it's a lot more about migration and so forth. and in france i think it's very
interesting. you have le pen with the german anti-immigrant message but then a free market catholic that could be an alternative. >> i think, mary, a lot of this is economics. when you have growth of 3%, 4 %, a lot of the anxieties go away. when it looks like the political class is failing to deliver peace and prosperity or security, that's when these tensions exist and populism rises. >> yeah. i think the populism we're seeing right now is largely a pushback against centralization and disappointment in the united states, for sure, with washington. they feel like washington has failed them. and they want a return to something where they feel like they have some power. and donald trump is promising to return power to them. now, whether he does that by
centralizing power in other aspects, for example, industrial policy, we'll see. but for sure people are -- were rebelling against the establishment. >> it seems to me, jason, if populism mobilizes people to break up the status quo that isn't working, particularly if it leads to faster growth or economic reform, breaks up some of the special interest groups, it can do a great deal of good against elites that aren't listening. >> that's one way populism can push things, but in some of these european areas, it's not that type of populism. in france or in germany with the alternatives for deutsche, you talk about an alt right, what you have going on there. it's different. it depends on the country and
the type of populism. in europe you're dealing with ethnic nationalism. i don't think we have that in the united states to the extent they have that in europe. so it depends. >> but it's also -- >> you're correct. you have to define populism. >> i think if you had faster growth in both europe and the united states. you've had slow growth since the financial crisis. i think when that happens, people look for scapegoats and someone to blame. so it might be blaming immigrants, but it might just be pushing back against the existing economic policy. give them growth, you don't have that problem. >> and you mentioned france. it strikes me this coming election in france is an important one. he is pushing the most aggressive free market reform that i have seen coming out of a french candidate in my lifetime. you never see that in france. socialists on the right is as socialist as the left. you have that message, and it's an alternative to the blood soil
nationalism that marie le pen is pushing. >> it will be a key election in that respect. it can be summed up as people saying i'm mad as hell and i'm not going to take it anymore, except when the government starts suggesting that they pair back, say, labor regulations and rules that protect people, and at that point a lot of these mad as hell people say, wait a minute, i'm not giving up any of the stuff that protects me. let somebody else take the burden. >> i'm not giving up my entitlement payments. >> germany, italy, france. it has been the same thing. that election will be key in suggesting whether people are ready to bear that burden. >> i think dan is right. france is exciting for that reason, but i give the populist movement a little more credit in diagnosing a problem. people don't feel their governments are keeping them safe and they're right about that. or delivering growth.
and they're right about that. the question is the prescriptions. that's what makes the french election so exciting. >> growth in america, i think, can solve a lot of differences. in europe it's a different matter because you're dealing with welfare states and growth isn't going to solve all the problems. >> america's is getting bigger too. still ahead, it was the biggest story of the year and one few in the politics and press saw coming. just how did we get the 2016 election so wrong and what can we learn for next time?
electoral college met this week in 50 state capitols voting to make donald trump the 45th president of the united states. it was the final chapter in what was no doubt the biggest story of 2016 and the biggest surprise to pollsters, pundits and many even in the media. larry sabato is joining me now. you have owned up that you got it wrong. so have i. so have most of us. as you look now a couple of months, a month, five, six weeks later, and you look back, why do you think we got it so wrong? >> paul, because all of the usual indicators misled us, and
then we misled our readers and viewers. the usual indicators being not just polling but other metrics that we've used for years when the rules of politics applied. well, the rules didn't apply this year. that's fundamentally what happened. and it happened starting with the primaries. you remember when donald trump entered and you had 16 other republicans in there, you couldn't find a leader in the republican party who thought donald trump would'v even be a finalist or a nominee. and then the general election, even trump and his people thought he was going to lose election day. >> election day. >> let's be honest. this was a surprise to everybody. it's really our generation's 1948 dewey defeats truman when truman actually deet dewey. it's the same thing. the polls, although there weren't many of them, were wrong
in '48. and 300 plus polls at least in the battle ground states were wrong this year. the polling average, interestingly, was pretty much on target and had clinton up by 3.2%. she won the popular vote by 2 .1%. >> you know some of these political science models. some of these people who build in economic factors in the previous four or eight years and look at is it a party seeking a third term. some of those models looked like they were saying a republican, a normal republican could win. were we misled so much because donald trump wasn't a normal republican and said some things that would normally be disqualifying that somehow we said we can't win one. in fact, if we look at the fundamentals oh of this being a change election, we'd say he had a very good shot. >> sure, i buy that. we carried 13 political science
models on our crystal ball website, and some of them were very accurate in predicting a republican victory, but what's interesting is the authors of the more accurate models spent most of their spacex planing why their models were wrong in advance of the election. >> this would be the exception to their rule. >> right. and that was true at least of one of the two people you mentioned. so i think essentially we all as a system, as a group of analysts, maybe we gather together too much and we try to establish a mean and we all hug it. >> i think that's part of the problem. we in the press corps we talk to each other too much and not enough to voters who would be giving us other information about this election, and maybe too slavish as well to pollsters. we look at the polls and say
they can't be wrong, but when you look at what's happened across the west, whether it's brexit or the israeli election or a couple of british elections, the polls have not always been right. >> well, that's correct. i always call polling the science of a, b, c, almost being certain, and the most important word there is almost. they are right most of the time, but every now and then you have an election that, as i suggested, violates the rules. what's interesting about this year other than trump himself is that we learned that maybe increasingly, the electoral college and the popular vote are going to be separate, at least in close elections. normally when a candidate like clinton wins by nearly 3 million votes, it carries the electoral college with it. it moves with the popular vote. well, guess what. it didn't, and i don't think it was a fluke. the more i study the actual voting patterns on election day, the more i think we've established a new rule which will eventually be broken.
>> what ever happened to the coalition of the ases dant, the obama collision, minorities, young people, women? that seems to not have delivered. hillary clinton thought it would deliver, but she couldn't replicate it. is that something still coming or is it now broken up? >> well, the gdemographics suggest it's coming. states like arizona and georgia got close. they stayed with trump. i think the coalition of the ascendant is still part of our future, but one of the problems is that they gather mainly on the two coasts, and there are so many excess democratic votes on the west coast and the east coast that don't help democrats pull in extra electoral votes. the other thing comes down to a basic that did apply this year. candidates really matter. hillary clinton was a boring candidate. she couldn't get minorities to turn out.
she couldn't get millennials to turn out. so when you're looking for a candidate, it's important to find somebody who stirs the base, and she didn't. >> all right. larry sabato, thank you for being here. >> thank you, paul. >> still ahead the blame game continues as democrats search to answers for november's election loss.
liberty mutual stood with me when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. liberty did what? yeah, with liberty mutual all i needed to do to get an estimate was snap a photo of the damage and voila! voila! (sigh) i wish my insurance company had that... wait! hold it... hold it boys... there's supposed to be three of you... where's your brother? where's your brother? hey, where's charlie? charlie?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance ♪ oops. ♪
uh-oh. ♪ sorry. ♪ [crash] get on top of it before they do. every 24 minutes, tipped furniture or a falling tv sends an injured child to the emergency room. preventing tip-over incidents is easy, inexpensive, and only takes 5 minutes. learn how to secure your furniture and tvs to protect children at anchorit.gov. still reeling from hillary clinton's election loss, democrats are looking for
answers, and continuing to point fingers. bill clinton is even getting in on the action telling a local paper in new york this month that president-elect donald trump, quote, doesn't know much, but one thing he does know is how to get angry white men to vote for him. the former president went onto beat his wife's defeat on the fbi's decision to reopen the investigation into her private e-mail server saying james comey cost her to election. we're back with our panel. dan, bill clinton, i don't think he's an outlier. he speaking for a lot of democrats about what they think really happened. >> yeah, but i think bill is still in his own way an outlier. the thing about angry white men. bill clinton back during the campaign told his wife's campaign, you have to go out there and campaign more with blue collar workers in places
like pennsylvania and michigan, and they told him don't worry about it. the coalition of the ascendant is locked. we're going to win. bill campaigned in these areas two times in the 90s and got elected. i think bill clinton understands what's going on. the question is whether the clintons have any relevance to that party anymore. >> jim comey, racism, bigotry, everything except for the fact that maybe we should have campaigned in wisconsin, for example. >> yes. i have a little sympathy for the democrats here. the election was relatively close. in the electoral college, you're talking act 100,000 or so votes that could have swung this thing her way. the democrats, all these factions have a plausible explanation here. did the fbi stuff tip it, was it
bernie sanders? jill st ein. you can point the finger and say it wasn't my fault. it was your fault. the democrats need to decide on why they lost so they can move forward and learn how to make. the other mistake they want to worry about making is maybe they're all right, and maybe donald trump is a unique political figure and should they change their entire game plan because of -- to take care of the next donald trump? maybe they didn't do anything wrong. >> well, there's no examination so far at all about the agenda. no examination about the economic policies over the last eight years. no examination about their identity politics of focussing on ethnic and gender groups as opposed to the broader public. >> well, i think, first of all, they would like to delegitimize the trump win. there's a sense he doesn't have a mandate to govern, but the other problem is they're not
looking at the fact that trump was a very unpopular candidate in many ways. this should have been a walk in the park for republicans. you had eight years of democrats. you had very low growth over that period. and if you had a reasonably mainstream republican candidate, he probably would have won quite handily. the surprise was partly in the fact that trump was so unpopular. >> i think that's part of the problem the democrats are having now. it's a little bit like john on saturday night live in 1988 with mike dukakis looking at george hw bush and saying i can't believe i'm losing to this guy. how did we possibly lose to donald trump? i can't get over it. >> i have a slightly different view. i don't think it's clear that another republican candidate would have done better. i think donald trump might have done better if he didn't step on himself several times. john casing got two votes in his own party, and even the other candidates when they had him one on one, they couldn't move the
ball. trump fights. the other thing is to put that in perspective, it wasn't just trump who won. the republicans won. the democrats are in a big, big problem now. if you look at the makeup of the country, and i think though we've had issues with bill blaming comey and people blaming racism. the real e-mails i'd like to see would be between the bill clinton camp and the hillary camp, because you can bet that there is some analysis going on, and i think a lot as dan said, a lot of not just bill clinton but a lot of those people probably felt ignored and they could have won. >> i think there are two main things no one is talking about. they broke down the blue wall and rural and working class whites voted heavily for trump. however, catholics voted for trump in numbers that they normally wouldn't. i think because they cared about the court. and white college educated males voted for trump, and i think a lot of that had to do with going
into the voting booth on the last day and saying i can't take eight more years of this. >> dan, i'm going to disagree a little bit in the sense -- i think the democrats need to do something on energy and adjust their message, but the truth is they're going to come back. the opposition party always comes back. the republicans were written off in 2008 and 2009. look at 2010. if the democrats simply admit that they lost, accept the defeat and then move on and look like they're accepting it and being the opposition party, i think they have a good chance of doing well in 2018. >> i guess i'm going to disagree a little bit with that. i think they do at the national level, paul. at the presidential level for sure. and the democrat party seems to be wholly focussed on the presidential level. but they're really taking it in the neck below that level. certainly at the level of the senate, governors, state legislatures. the political map is looking very red out there.
and unless they figure out a way to broaden their appeal in a way that has relevance beyond just the presidency, i think that blue wall out there is going to continue to erode for democrats, and it's hard to see them doing that. the party is basically owned by the grass roots, the political left and the climate left. no charismatic leader like bill clinton in sight. i think they have their work cut out for them. >> another leader will show up. they always do. when we come back, our hits and misses of 2016. quit smoking. but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how.
that airline credit card yout? have... it could be better. it's time to shake things up. with the capital one venture card, you get double miles on everything you buy, not just airline purchases. seriously, think of all the things you buy. great...is this why you asked me to coffee? well yeah... but also to catch-up. what's in your wallet?
presidential election. she was supposed to win in 2016. and that, of course, would be hillary clinton. it goes beyond that, paul. back in 2008 when she was running in the primaries against barack obama, it was expected she would win then. now hillary clinton has lost two big presidential elections. i'm not sure how she sleeps at night. i think it also raises questions about the future of the vaunted clinton machine. are they going to have a roll in the democratic party or are they not? are they finally washed up? >> well, it's interesting. some people are saying that maybe this attempt by john podesta and others to delegitimize trump suggests he was her campaign chairman that she wants to give it one more try in 2020. >> you can't keep the clintons now but think about her in four years. it ain't going to happen. >> jason. >> paul, this is a miss for the media coverage of the election.
when so many people are shocked by the outcome, perhaps including even the winner of the election, we're doing something wrong here. and the gap between what the public and voters were looking for in a president and the media was looking for in a president was epic this time. i think we have to do a better job going forward. >> well, okay. i didn't predict a trump victory. did you? >> no. >> what are you going to do differe differently? >> the lesson i got is humility. >> i'm going to try and not project my sensibilities in terms of what is appropriate onto voters. i think that's what i'll do going forward. >> good lesson. and maybe even talk to a few of them more often. okay. >> paul, this is a big fat miss for canadian prime minister justin trudeau. when he found out that fidel castro had passed, he sent out a message saying among other
things, that he and his wife join the people of cuba in mourning the loss of a remarkable leader. he also said that fidel castro was a man who loved the cuban people very much. the good news is that it spawned a series of messages on social media mocked him mercilessly by posting parodies praising people like stalin, polpot and hitler. in the end, he did not go to the castro funeral. >> has he been damaged by this as the perception of him as a serious leader center. >> absolutely. even people i know on the left in canada were embarrassed by the ridiculous prize that he gave a guy who just -- praise that he gave a guy who has just such a terrible track record. >> william? >> paul, among the biggest misses of the year has to go to marilyn mosby, the baltimore state's attorney who indicted
six police officers in the death of freddie gray. gray was a prisoner who was being transported in a police van when he suffered a spinal injury that was fatal. had incited riots. she indicted the officers -- outrageous charges and made statements at a press conference that you would hear at an al sharpton rally. in year she had her come up. when a judge threw out the charges against some of the first officers, then she was forced to abandon the other ones. she still blames everyone but herself. >> all right. my miss of the year is the tragedy, the catastrophe of aleppo, russia. syria. the syrian regime and iran, now they seem to have won a victory in aleppo but at tremendous human cost. tens of thousands of people dead. the syrian civil war continues. it's one of the greatest nightmares maybe of the whole century. the united states stood by and did almost nothing about it. president obama said we couldn't -- he didn't have a solution.
aleppo is what happens when the world backs off and doesn't execute leadership. you get peace, but the peace of the grave. >> people say there's no military solution, vladimir putin is imposing a military solution with assad. >> it was the russian ambassador that was assassinated. that's significant. they are now seeing -- the russians are seen as the heavy in that region. and that's -- that's what's the target. >> we have to take one more break. when we come back, our panel mitts of 2016. as i was researching my family tree, i discovered a woman named marianne gaspard. i became curious where in africa she was from. so i took the ancestry dna test to find out more about my african roots. ancestry really helped me fill in a lot of details.
time for our "hits or winners" of the year. dan? >> well, my winner of the year is the flip side of my myth to hillary clinton. and no, i don't mean donald trump. i mean reince priebus. the head of the republican national committee. paul, as any political figure in recent times, has any figure been more vilified, booed, run out of town? first the idea was he allowed 17 republican candidates to run for the presidency. what idiot would allow that? then he throws in with donald trump, and the idea is he's taking the republican party to perdition. reince priebus is now chief of staff for the next president of the united states. whatever your politics, this was an amazing story of political survival. >> and how many months do you give him working in the white house as chief of staff? when donald trump doesn't really like a chief of staff, let's face it. he wants to talk to everybody directly.
>> priebus himself says he thinks maybe two years. >> if he's lucky. all right. jason? >> this is a hit for the chicago cubs and major league baseball. paul, we could not have asked for a more exciting world series. a comeback, a game seven. extra innings. it's a reminder of why baseball became the national pastime. and the players even stood up for the national anthem. imagine that. >> now, i know you're a big football fan. so -- a long-suffering one with the buffalo bills. but are you saying that you think the nfl could potentially be in trouble in terms of its popularity relative to baseball? >> no. i don't think we've reached that point yet. i do think that what happened this year is something to pay attention to and that the nfl shouldn't write it off. >> okay. all right. mary? >> my hit for this year is the stock market. the dow jones industrial is up 9% since november 8th. the total value of global equity markets is up roughly $3
trillion. all of that new wealth is pouring in to 401(k)s and other savings accounts. and of course what really is left to be seen here is when donald trump regular deliver on his promises, and that will be sustainable. >> well, i think some of our viewers will say, you know, isn't that the barack obama economy, paying off for people? >> well, it didn't happen until trump was elected. so i think -- >> the most recent run-up. there's been a huge run-up in the stock market during did the obama presidency, no? >> it moved back to that, but i think you're seeing an expectation of greater growth. >> are you up short or long? >> i don't have to hold through the year, do i? >> no, you don't. at the start. >> i'm going to be a trader. >> play short, wow. interesting. i think i'm going to go long. >> i think you have to wait and see until everyone is in.
>> mine guess to a tremendous scalia, mr. and mrs. scalia. justice scalia's sudden absence sparked a newer and fuller appreciation of his role in the supreme court. mrs. scalia understood this. in october she put a trump sign on her front lawn. i'd say in the end, justice scalia even in death helped dominate the election. >> i think that donald trump would not have won the election if the supreme court had been so directly in play. you agree with that? >> i agree with that. >> does that make a lot of conservatives come out -- >> i would go further. i think the pressure on donald trump to name someone in the mold of justice scalia is a benefit, too, by coming up with his list. >> is this the easiest victory that trump is going to have going into the new year? >> i think the first one. he can claim -- i mean, you can't think of an election before where a supreme court nominee has played such a role. i think by releasing his names, he can claim he has a mandate.
>> my hit or winner of the year, ron johnson, senator from wisconsin, who was all but written off even by republicans, the republican senate campaign committee said, you're done, man, we're not giving you money. he threw out his washington handlers, he decided he and his brother, to create ads on their own -- great ads, some of the best of the campaign on obamacare, on the joseph project, jobs connection project he has in wisconsin. and he came out of nowhere, and he won when nobody expected to. and he outperformed donald trump in the state of wisconsin. >> and i think he outperformed a lot of expectations. >> for sure. >> he's written off as a businessman and showed he could do it. >> i'll give ron johnson a lot of credit, but i think there's wisconsin chiefaufnism going on here. >> wisconsin chaufennism? it was right on the money in terms of predicting the election as some of the rest of us were
not, i might add. okay. remember, if you have your own "hit or miss," tweet jer on the on the fnc. that's it for this week's show, thanks to all of you for watching. merry christmas, we hope to see you here next week. new developments in the berlin terror investigation. arrests and word of possible new connections to extremist groups in europe. hello, welcome to "america's news headquarters." >> hello, merry christmas. >> to you. >> and of course happy holidays, merry christmas and happy holidays to you, everyone. police say the berlin terrorist, anis amri, he did have help in that attack that tragically killed 12 people in the berlin christmas market. their investigation now stretching beyond europe to tunisia where amri's nephew and two others have been arrested, too. we have more live from london on the latest. hi,