tv The O Reilly Factor FOX News April 7, 2017 8:00pm-9:01pm PDT
will see you monday. >> we can confirm that the u.s. has launched tomahawk missiles at syria. >> bill: a bold action by president trump has caused worldwide reaction, that the usa do the right thing by attacking the brutal dictator assad? will have multiple reports tonight. it doesn't make any sense assad to make these decisions. >> bill: there is some on the fory fence who will not support american military action no matter what. we will take a look at that situation. >> the nomination of neil m. gorsuch to be an associate justice of the t supreme court of the united states is confirmed. >> also ahead, the usa has a
brand-new supreme court justice. is that a good thing for you? caution. you are about to enter into the no spin zone. "the factor" begins now. ♪ hi, i'm bill o'reilly. thank you for watching "the factor." the usa attack syria, that is -- subject of this evening's talking points memo. around 9:00 eastern time, 50 missiles were launched from american warships in the eastern mediterranean sea. 59 missiles hit their targets. the goal is to destroy an air base from which syrian planes recently dropped sarin gas on civilians, killing 30 children. 30. and 20 women, according to the syrian observatory for human rights. according to reporting based on a variety of cities, this is the fifth time, at least, the fifth time, syrian dictator assad has violated the geneva conventions
and use poison gas to go civilians get back in 2012, president obama threatened assad.e >> the use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. and if you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, they will be consequences and you will be held accountable. >> bill: but assad is not held accountable. but instead, the obama administration did what it always did, talk, and announced a dealmi with the dictator. a fascinating footnote to that is susan rice was on point alongside john kerry. >> we were able to find aon solution that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known in syria in the way that use of force would never accomplish. >> with respect to syria, we struck a deal where he got 100% of the chemical weapons out.
>> bill: obviously a false belief on mr. kerry's part. for years, assad has been protected by the russians who were warned of the attack was coming that night so they could get their personal out of the airfield. >> russia should be embarrassed and ashamed. they are the one telling people that there were no agents, no chemical weapons left. we know for the better part of the year, assad has been using chlorine bombs against population centers. a couple of days ago, the nerve agent sarin. they have been covering for assad, if it were not for the russians, assad would not be in power. >> bill: that's true. putin continues to prop assad up, and 5 million are refugees. most sane people support the missile attack lastre night. sane is the key word here. >> it doesn't make any sense for assad in these conditions to all of sudden use poison gas, i
think it's zero chance that he is going have done this deliberately. >> bill: former congressman believing that assad was set up byad someone. now the morality of the attack is certainly acceptable when you have war crimes being openly committed. a noble nation will confront that. unfortunately, noble nations are in short supply these days, and the usa is an exception to that. also, america's national security is in play because poison gas can be used byxc terrorists. assad has a very close relationship with iran and hezbollah. when chemical weapons are acceptable, the world will become a more dangerous place.n more dangerous that it isis now. talking that assad's air force should have been destroyed along time ago ago, and nato should of established safe zones inside syria to protect the innocent. under president obama, none of that was possible because of his strategy of retreat.t. the new president on the ascending a message to the world, the united states will
not tolerate war crimes from syria. the action is a reaction, so security has tightened here in the usa as we become a bigger target for evildoers. summing up, america was justified in destroying the syrian air force. rogue nations should be dealt with by the world. but if they are not, the lone superpower has a responsibility. even most of the trump haters in congress agree that if we can stop children from being gassed to death, we should do so.o. and that is the memo. the top story reaction at this hour, joining us from palm beach florida where he's covering president trump's meeting with the chinese leader, john roberts. understanding that president in china has departed from mar-a-lago. what's going on there now? i >> he left this afternoon, just having a typical friday night. he's having the rest of the week and here. the president, bill, i'm told is feeling pretty good about what happened last night. he thinks that the military did
a terrific job while one cruise missile fell into the sea, 59 of the 59 remaining hit their markc and he is praising the military to his staff and his friends that they performed marvelously here. and he's happy to see you in the most part with the international reaction is, he does know there are a couple of numbers in congress saying he should'vest come today, but he feels like he's an absolute firm ground here because as he pointed out last night this was a matter of urgent national security for the united states because i'm told the president believes that if bashar al-assad was able to do this and not suffer some consequent support this, that would normalize, at least in the area of the world, the use of chemical weapons and therefore might come back to bite the united states at one point if somebody decided, well, if bashar al-assad can use chemical weapons, will use the weapons. >> bill: i need rapid fired answers. the chinese foreign minister said they shouldn't have done it.
everyone should come down. was there anythingng coming outside of the president talking with mr. trump today on the missile attacks? anything at all? any utterance? >> well, there wasn't any public utterance, but i'm told, bill, that the white house believes ip was pretty impressive show of force that the president went out last night to his chinese counterpart. and that will be taken back tot beijing and sort of turned into that whole pot with north korea where it might give them something else about leaving -- in terms of his relationship with north korea and president trump's request to lean on north korea. if they do it in syria, but they do it in north korea? >> bill: did we get anything in north korea, any pronouncement made about any better cooperation in china?n did they say anything? >> they didn't say anything there was an agreement to deal with. it was discussed. >> bill: but we don't have any joint statements? >> no concrete joint statement on that.t.
no. but the secretary of state rex tillerson, he's very disappointed with the russian response to all of this. according to rex tillerson, he said that this means russia is still in the camp of bashar al-assad. he says he's disappointed, but he's not surprised to hear what he's heard out of russia. look, this is how we'll deal with these guys in syria. if you want to deal with bashar al-assad, it's going to put you on the wrong side of history. >> bill: john, we appreciate it very much. let's bring in catherine harris joining us from washington. doesn't seem to be any chinese reaction in the sense that sometimes after a meeting, a day and a half meeting, there is a joint statement, that we didn't get any joint statements. putin postures behind the scenes. is there any serious, serious reaction tonight? >> i wouldn't say serious
reaction, but i would say the leading edge of this investigation right now is into whether russia had some kind ofi role, bill, in this chemical attack earlier this week, and whether a second strike on that town in syria was really an effort to destroy evidence and be part of a larger cover-up of that crime. and that is really where a military intelligence is focused tonight. >> bill: they had a drone, i understand?ll >> correct. >> bill: russian drone over the area where the chemicals dropped and killed children. and a russian bomber bombed the hospital where civilians weremi taken. is that what we are talking about tonight?re >> that's right. there was a drone immediately over the site where the sarin gas was released. and then about 4-5 hours later when the victims have been taken to the hospital, another drone showed up. shortly after that, there was a military strike on that hospital. the people i'm talking to tonight say that fits a pattern that they have seen before with the syrians especially and
possibly this case the russians that they wanted to destroy evidence at that hospital >> bill: we can i.d. drones anyway, so they were russian drones in that area. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> bill: okay, now. the ron pauls of the world say, "oh, no..." how solid is the evidence that assad killed these 20 kids with sarin gas? >> i was told by my contacts that we have very high confidence and there were multiple streams of information from overhead imagery to radar, from information gathered by our partners in the region. and today they release a graphic that showed radar information. and you can see the syrian government jets over the site of the attack twice within a nine minute time slot which is exactly when the sarin gas was released.
there is really no doubt. >> bill: okay. w there was always doubt among those who will not believe, no matter what you present, through them. iran has been strangely signed about this. p i haven't heard any saber rattling. have you? >> that's a little bit more worrying. what you don't know. >> bill: right. >> one of the possible plans for retaliation that they considered when they were planning this whole thing out is that syria and iran wouldns use their proxy hezbollah to launch an attack, that third party retaliation. we have not seen that yet, but that is an idea that was on the table, bella. >> bill: do we have any information on the swedishh attacks, again, president trump made that a centerpiece that sweden was destabilized by all s of these muslim refugees pouring into the country. the country reacted vehemently against president trump, but we now have -- it will take a terror attack in stockholm, right?
>> that's right. a truck was hijacked and then it was driven right into this department store in centralig stockholm. really, at the height of rush hour, people were getting ready for the weekend. this sadly fits a profile that we've seen mostly with isis or self radicalized al qaeda followers. and they are using trucks and cars -- >> bill: to kill people. >> today, they took one suspect into custody, but we have not been able to verify his claims is accurate.e. but these are the types of plots as you know, bill, that are almost impossible to disrupt. and they go right to the heart of the economy and also people's sense of morality what is right. i mean, it's so offensive. >> bill: we appreciate it as always, thank you. next on the run down from a senior u.s. military officials are investigating as catherine just reported whether russia played a role in the chemical attack earlier this week.
>> tonight, fox news reportingng that senior u.s. officials are investigating whether russia played a role as we discussed in the chemical attack in northern syria earlier this week. also, the u.s. did give them advance notice of the attack. and in washington, chris harmers senior naval analyst at the institute of the study of war. we will begin with you this evening, that you were on "the factor" before the missiles launched last night. do you think the operation was effective? >> it was effective in two ways. number one, punishing bashar al-assad for the use of
chemical weapons and reestablishing u.s. military credibility in the region. a lot of people talk about political solutions, they talk about the poetic solutions. there is never been at the poetic solution or political solution in the absence of military credibility. we can't predict where president trump is going from here, but in the narrow entrance for punishing bashar al-assadre for using chemical weapons, and setting an effective deterrence for future use of chemical weapons, this attack was a success. >> bill: you heard of the talking points memo that the obama administration trotted out susan rice and john kerry a few years back to say, no, we negotiated with assad and he gave up all of his chemical weapons. of course, that turned out to be false. do you see this as mr. harmer does as an effective use of military power that will inhibit future chemical attacks? >> um, i think it was a very effective attack.
i think it was smart to use with cruise missiles. there are still russians at the base to attest the accuracies of the weapon systems. i do not think it will guarantee it won't be used again. i think there is a very limited message being sent to assad, a very powerful message, overwhelming force. it was as our friend already said, a narrow message well delivered. but no. i don't see this guaranteeing. i think assad will trot this out again. and if we got the russians involved -- >> bill: why would he do that though? if you trotted out again, that doesn't make any sense to me. he knows that trump is going to up it, because trump is not going to say, "okay, i'm not going to do anything after you spit in my eye after i give you a warning." the next s time instead of it being 50, it will be 150. it will devastate the whole infrastructure of syria.
don't you believe that? don't you think donald trump is going to back away from a punk like assad if he uses gas again? >> i didn't say anything about the president of united states backing up. you asked me if it's going to stopas it -- >> bill: why would he risk his own neck?. >> okay. we are dealing with a crazy man in the middle of a war with a thousand different factions, and he still has, i believe, he destroyed 1300 tons of that a stuff back in 2012-2013 and he still got it. i think you could use it againk in a few months. in small doses. i wouldn't be surprised at all if he uses it again. >> bill: mr. harmer, would you be surprised if this guy does it again knowing that the next time, going going to be ten times worse? >> i would be surprised if bashar al-assad uses chemical weapons again for two reasons. number one, he cannot afford direct conflict with the united states. he can survive with al qaeda and isis.
what he cannot do is cross a redline that has been firmly established and a penalty is being affixed to that. second of that, bashar al-assad's military is on the narrow margins of survivability. the air force and all practical purposes barely exist anymore. the syrian air army no longerns desists. that is why they need conscripts and mercenaries from afghanistan and iran and iraq to fight the war for him because the syrian people will not fight on behalf of bashar al-assad. he does not have the bandwidthal to risk conflict. >> bill: doesn't he have the iranians -- >> he didn't have it before, guys! >> bill: let's not allocate our coverage. doesn't he have the iranians helping him out, though? >> absolutely. he's got the full support of the iranian government, the islamic revolutionary guard, the full support of hezbollah and russia. with that said, bashar al-assad has a very narrow definition of success right now and that's staying alive. there is no fallback option.
>> bill: you mentioned this so he can't risk fighting with us. last night. russia. is russia stupid enough to get involved with poison gas? >> bad drones, as you talk about with catherine. i don't think -- i don't think, i know. assad is not doing anything without russian approval and russian involvement. this country was gone and lost until the russians showed up. assad is absolutely dependent on -- >> bill: if you were putin and you knew the world is horrified at poison gas killing 20 children. why would you -- i mean, why? >> i'm not sure, bill. look. why would a former kgb lieutenant colonel say okay to use sarin gas? >> bill: this kind of attention to syria because i think this hurts assad. his survivability rate just went down.
>> of course it does. the russians -- thedo russian involvement in this, they haven't stopped. again, i say this. they have been in syria, assad killing his own people. which got everyone obviously upset about this is the 20 kids, babies, that were killed. >> bill: yeah, the gas. >> i get it. but he's been doing this for 5-6 years. i don't see any reason that they gave him gas. putin would say, "don't do that." >> bill: do you think putin would okay a gas attack, mr. harmer? >> i think it's a dispute that the russians weren't aware that syria was resuming its chemical weapons capacity. i don't think the russians suggested this for there's a big difference between assad being dependent on russian help, which he is, and assad functioning as a mercenary for the russians, which is a stretch. >> bill: the warships that putin is moving into the
mediterranean sea, is that just for show? >> yes, that's part of the counteraction package. they send their ships in closet proximity edge, it's is an easy way to show that they are viable, they can still stand up to us without risking escalation. it happens in the pacific, atlantic, mediterranean, it's not a big deal. it's just a show of force. >> bill: do you agree with that? >> yeah. this ship has been coming in the mediterranean a lot. >> bill: check out colonel hunt's new book "without mercy" about nukes in the hands of terrorists. directly ahead, security tightened all over the world after the attack and another alleged terrorist incident in sweden, as we mention. now judge neil gorsuch supreme court's new justice. what does that mean for you? those reports after these messages. you?
>> bill: the consequences of meeting back in syria, another truck a terrorist incident in europe, i got has just been arrested in stockholm group will tell you about that. joining us from washington will tellhe you, gillian turner formr white house national security council and president bush and obama. we'll begin with you, do you see any unintended consequences from this attack in syria? >> um, there's always a possibility for unintended consequences. i feel like the demonstration would not do this if they had not gamed out the potential side effects here. there's always a risk wherever the united states undertake military action abroad, whethers or not we have come under direct attack or not, there will beni risks here. this is not offensive action, as you know.
that the united states was very have taken. the russians shows a side in the syrian conflict a few years ago when they decided to insert themselves under it under the false pretense of fighting isis. this is a smart move and a brave, bold move on the part of the u.s. but really defensive. >> bill: you were in the obama white house, i will play two sound bites with kerry and susan rice. "we didn't negotiate it, we didn't need to go to war," that was the mantra of president obama eight years, we can negotiatee anything. and we saw, he probably destroyed some stuff, but he did destroy all stops, and that is when babies are dead. when you are in the s obama white house, did you notice there was a reluctance to do what donald trump did? >> well... i don't think you had to be at the white house to notice the reluctance to do it. >> bill: you are on the outside looking out.
did you notice that when you were there that reluctance? >> ire will go with yes. i think it would be hard to not see, you know -- the decisions that the folks made in the administration in 2013 when i was already gone from the white house, i did not see firsthand. but the results of the conversations they had were seen all around the world. and the effects are felt up until today. so it's obvious there was reluctance. >> bill: okay. colonel wood, when you saw the missiles hit the airfield in syria, did anything pop in your mind like iran is doing this and putin is going to do that? that's what we mean by unintended consequences. >> i think there will be unintended horizontal consequences where putin will not see whole opportunity to up the game in syria, especially if he doesn't want to go to war in the united states. but he can do that in other
theaters, ukraine continues, dismembering that country. much more provocative action against the baltic states. very concerned about what they are doing in the baltics and the arctic sea. there are a lot of other places where putin can play a strong hand to stymie u.s. efforts, dismember alliances, and certainly with a veto power on the u.n. security council, they can create all kinds of havoc. anything to do with israel or u.s. efforts to get sanctions against north korea. reactions in the south china sea against china, i think it's a pretty broad playing board and putin will move his checkers where he thinks he can get an upper hand in other areas. >> bill: but i can't imagine that vladimir putin cares about assad on a personal level or -- the chinese were interesting because the foreign minister came out and he didn't really condemn the action.
he just said that everyone should calm down. that's why i was looking for a joint statement of any kind by the chinese president and donald trump, but today we didn't get anything. all they did is they had snacks at mar-a-lago i guess. i don't know what else they did there. >> they sidestepped out of the got on the plane. >> bill: there wasn't any -- >> we will settle on out off here.>> it was strange. i can't imagine how awkward, like, you know on the protocol level that must've been for these two leaders the first time they've ever met face-to-face? so many issues between them and meanwhile there is this huge elephant in the room, which is that the president is going back to his room at night and, you know, dropping bombs in syria. it's a little bit -- >> i don't think it was awkward for trump at all. i he saw this as a big advantage. comes in big and bold, taking military action against a bunch of vile people, dropping sarin gas on babies at all.
it came from a competitive any --ge in discussions with the leader of china. >> bill: the chinese never t show their hand.no they never let you know what they are thinking. the chinese bureaucrats i'm talking about. >> sure. >> bill: so you don't know, you know. there is face they put on. i was looking for something out of t president xi, we don't even know if he liked the food or anything. >> is that what you want to know, bill? "how were the burgers"? >> it was very aggressive, no warning, he just acted. and ten hours later, the chinesa government is trying to figure out with that. i'm not surprised by the silence or having to recalculate their interest in north korea. keeping mum was probably the best course of action for the chinese. >> bill: they would do that anyway on american soil. but it was fascinating to see donald trump -- oh, president
xi, past the tea. by the way, in 3 minutes, 60 tomahawk's launched into, syria. would you like a little bit more tea? during the dinner, that's where they all went. i thought they would wait until "factor" would finish. we will talk to the white house advisor, dr. sebastian gorka about the world reaction from the missile attack. now the judge gorsuch is on thee court and liberal americans are not happy! stay tuned for those reports.
>> bill: earlier today, the sena >> bill: >> bill: earlier today, the senate voted 54-45, now neil gorsuch is to the supreme court to replace the late antonin scalia. -- is this good for the folks? professor, cut through the nuclear option and all the stuff. the regular people, the regular americans, many of them who don't even know who judge gorsuch is or what he does.ul is this man going to improve the country for the folks? >> i think he's going to improve the court. i think this country is better off when you have people who are intellectual leaders. too often we select nominees because they have never had an interesting thought in their lives. we really need people who see a
horizon that can describe where the law should go. this is a conservative president that has the right to nominate a conservative -- >> bill: but how conservative is mr. gorsuch? >> he is conservative. >> he is a textualist, i don't think that's a vice for a federal judge. he stays close to the text, he is very conservative and how he is interprets the constitution. he looks back at the original intent behind these words. none of those things should bar him from the court. a lot of people share those views. b >> bill: you've testified for judge gorsuch. >> i did. >> bill: what did he say? what did you see. >> iju sense that gorsuch is something of a departure, welcome departure in that he has a long record. he's not a blank slate. we know what type of justice he will be. he will be a very good one for people might not like his
conclusions always, but i think he's an honest intellectual and that honesty may take him across the h ideological spectrum. >> bill: that's what i said last night. there is a chance in some of these rulings that conservatives will be angry if it is not like scalia. scalia was a conservative who promoted that way to view never seen neil gorsuch promote that. >> that's the key people conservatives, i've said for months, you should be not trying to replace a conservative with a conservative, but an intellectual with an intellectual. that is what gorsuch is and that is what scalia was.. >> bill: okay. do you believe that judge gorsuch will be sworn in monday morning got caught up in the trump hate campaign? >> honestly i don't see a basis to oppose gorsuch, so i hope he doesn't carry a lot of baggage into this. a lot of democratic senators didn't feel they could vote for him, which i think is a terrible shame. >> bill: why? why didn't they think they could vote for him?
three did. but why do the other things they couldn't? what you are saying is true. honest man, very smart, forward-looking, respects the constitution above all. why couldn't our democratic elected senators vote for him? >> i think it's an incredible -- we can no longer separate people from the politics. yet in honest good faith jurist that judge neil gorsuch is. >> bill: senator feinstein said she couldn't vote for gorsuch because he didn't believe the constitution was a living document that evolves as society evolves. i guess it's a living document. you have to feed it, walk it. that's why she couldn't vote for him, no matter how brilliant or
honest, it had to be a justice who believes in evolution of the constitution. you -- your head must've blown off. >> i thought that was a particularly sad moment, because i have great reservations about the cause of a living constitution because i don'tul know how it's been defined and i'll tell you -- >> bill: it's defined by your ideology, whatever you think is s the right policy. >> there is this broad spectrum that includes now with justice gorsuch on monday that people often separate originalists from living constitutions. there is this middle, good faith jurist that try to get it right. in the case of judge gorsuch, he starts with this original sense of the term that happens to be a place where i start but to portray that view is out of the mainstream is perfectly normal. >> bill: you see two more things really quick. second amendment is now bolstered by judge gorsuch. i think he would agree with that.
religious people. their respect and their rights under the law, that's bumped up too. >> bill, there is a major case that he's going to hit the court just in time to hear the trinity lutheran church case. it has a huge case. >> bill: tell me what that case is.th >> this was a church that was denied funds to a repay their playground because they are a religious organization. other nonfor profits that were given their funding. the church said that is not fair.gi just because we are religious groups, we are still nonfor profit. this is a case that could have far-reaching implications for how they handle the religion clauses of the first amendment. >> bill: i think religious people should be celebrating over the weekend, it's palm sunday and everything. that was a good discussion there, professor.e >> thank you. >> bill: you didn't come across as a pinhead. >> [laughs] >> bill: i even understood it.
you did a great job. we appreciate it. >> thanks, bill. >> bill: when we come back, missile attack defense. some people think president trump's actions were flat-out wrong. we will go to white house advisor to find out what could come nextns as president trump sending messages to the world. we will be right back.
ashford who works the cato institute. you know, a lot of people say if you are going to kill babies with poison gas, somebody's got to take care of you. and that somebody was president trump and the united states. you oppose it. why?t >> well, i think that is frankly a false argument. i think that the attacks that president trump undertook doesly nothing to resolve the syrian civil war. it does nothing to prevent the further killing of syrian civilians. it makes the isis campaign more difficult, and it risks dragging us a larger conflict in syria. those are big negatives that we should be paying more attention. >> bill: that's why we have you on the air.n so let's walk through and we will get to talk to gillespie. he uses poison gas, assad. that's against the geneva convention. the united nations is not doing anything because i never do.n so donald trump, i am personallh going to right this wrong and i'm going to hit him, and if he doesn't again i'm going to hit
him and take them out completely.. t you don't think that is an inhibitor? you don't think that's going to stop assad from using the gases? >> i don't think these tracks we undertook will do much to dissuade assad.ad >> bill: you expect assad to drop more poison gas on the civilian people? >> it's a distinct possibility. and even if he doesn't use chemical weapons, we have done nothing from this waiting him using barrel bombs and other very nasty weapons to kill thepo people he's killed. >> bill: i want to wrap up the first round with you. so if you were the president, you would not have taken any action against assad for what he did? >> i wouldn't have taken military action like president trump did. i would have tried to restart diplomatic negotiations -- >> bill: like the obama administration and you her john kerry and susan rice say "we got it all out there," but they did not. let's go to dr. gillespie.
the emotional quotient of the dead children the babies, you're the president and you do nothing to assad after he does that? >> first off, it's not up to the united states to enforce the geneva conventions. >> bill: who would that be? >> we are coming out of 15 years in the middle east where we have accomplished very little other than destabilizing the entire region and creating iran -- >> bill: say on this -- >> no. >> bill: whose responsibility is this? >> the united states could start to build a coalition in the area. it's up to them to deal -- >> bill: if saudi arabia launched a few tomahawks, you would be okay with it? >> it wouldn't be the united states. as a citizen of the united states, it's not our>> business to police what syria is doing in its civil war. >> if that carries forth to other countries, you have aa
world of barbarity so nobody is going to enforce geneva conventions, you can drop sarin here. >> that is a leap of -- you know, a leap of judgment that is not borne out by the facts. >> bill: wait. we all see what's happening int north korea, iran, do -- >> do you also see what is happening in the middle east because of america destabilizing? what happened in libya after we dropped bombs in the name of humanitarian intervention? >> bill: you would hope that this is not an occupying situation. >> it's the beginning of one. >> bill: i'm going to go to dr. ashford. 30 seconds each. how would you deal with assad. specifically, dr. ashford? >> i would try and push for a diplomatic solution. i know what you are saying, but the obama administration try to do this, but president trump is in a much better situation for far better relations with the russians, taking a harder line on iran --
>> bill: so you say diplomacy? >> i do say diplomacy because it's the only way civil war ends. >> bill: dr. gillespie, how do you deal with assad? >> we do not have to deal with assad. our interest in iran right now or in the middle east has to do with islamic terrorism, not the assad regime which is a disgusting regime. d you go after the terrorists. we are not in the business of policing what the assad does. >> bill: we are going after terrorists. we are doing two things here. very good discussion, appreciate it. sebastian gorka on next. we will get the white house. world security as it stands tonight. that as "the factor" continues around the usa and all the world.ta that as "the factor" continues
>> bill: let's go back to washington and bring in sebastian gorka, deputy assistant to mr. trump. we assume that you are happy the missile attack was successful. you are a strategist, dr. gorkaa we heard a lot tonight that this is not going to dissuade assad from using gas, he will use it again. number one, i don't believe that what i could be wrong. if he does do it again, have you guys been game planning for that? >> oh, absolutely. there are people inside the of the pentagon, people on the national security council, my good friends, they have gamed out the possible scenarios. unfortunately, i don't want to disappoint you, mr. o'reilly. unlike the last administration, we are not going to give those away in advance because that is very, very unwise. >> bill: sure. i think everyone understands that. except pinheaded journalist who goad you into doing that.
you will have a plan, there are other things that may happen. am i correct on both of those? >> absolutely. >> bill: here's a key question. would you, you being the white house represent in the white house, tell assad if you use poison gas again, something worse will befall you. will that message be delivered personally to you? >> that message, i think, there are many ways to communicate strategic narratives. what you have seen in the last 48 hours is president trump being more decisive than obama was in the last eight years. messages can be given directly or indirectly. again, we are not going to give away how we communicate it. >> bill: would you give it directly because you could if you wanted to? >> yes. it's completely within the mandate of the president, secretary tillerson or even secretary mattis to do that.
>> bill: you don't love assad, you want to be on this planet, you better not do it again because it's not going to be pleasant. iran, we haven't heard much from them. usually, they've got a lot of people in syria doing bad things. can you tell us anything about their reaction? >> yes. i think is very interesting in the past eight years, they have been very, very loud, they have been very offensive in their comments even after events such as the hostage taking of our naval personnel and other, other very dangerous things that they have done. i think their silence is a very positive sign because as the sponsor of the regime in damascus, they have to draw conclusions as well. this is about messages that are sent to nations like russia, china, and iran. >> bill: let's take russia. if putin condemns the act andd sends a warship into the mediterranean, saber rattling a little bit.
you take that seriously or do you think that is where short? >> that is a classic standard operating procedure. we are the most powerful nation in the world has ever seen. this is just classic, classic showmanship. a it's not even brinkmanship. they don't have the capacity to do something with our naval vessel. it standard kgb kind of tactics coming out of moscow. >> bill: as he mentioned we did not get any chinese reaction at mar-a-lago. we did get a statement from the foreign minister that he wants everyone to calm down. that channel, do we know anything about how china processed the attack? >> if i did, i wouldn't be talking about it in front of your huge audience, i'm afraid, mr. o'reilly. >> bill: can you give me, again -- [sighs] what i'm trying to get at, where all americans, we all want safety for this country.
china is a key to our safety, we need their help in north korea, do you think they were upset that we did this to syria or they don'tey care? >> i think they are incredibly strategic. they play for the long game. if there is one nation out there that understands the long game, it's china. look at history, look at sun tzu, look at everything they publish and classify domain. i think they understand. i think the bigger part of this is a new, really, this is proofd that we have a new president and they are going to have to draw the right conclusions with regards to countries like north korea. i think it will have a positive effect because they are not irrational, bill. they are not irrational. >> bill: so you can reason with the chinese, that's what you're saying. >> yes. >> bill: what's the deputy assistant do, what do you do? >> whatever the president, whatever jared kushner wants me to do. >> bill: would you read that and give us analysis, is that what you do?
>> it can be. i meet with delegation with our allies, our partners. i work with counterterrorism issues, i was asked for my opinion on the first eos, including then immigration one. i am your general player in the national security field within the white house. >> bill: you are the utility player. >> i am. >> bill: you play every position in the infield. >> that's it.ti >> bill: it's a pleasure to have you on tonight, doc. factor tip today. would you like to meet jesse watters? if so, why? the tip moments away.
first ever in the american publishing world. but you remain remembere that killing kennedy's number one, while killing lincoln was number two in 2012. i know some of you won't believe me but there was a time when i wanted to a bookstore saying i won't never get a book published, it's true. i but i persevered, the key to life. thank you all for supporting the books. prior to pearl harbor, the world atrocities all over the globe. are we going to sit idle while iran, russia, china, and north korea plan our demise? nuclear weapons have changed war strategy, countries cannot launch a large scale attacks anymore, war is now. if the liberal democrats are decrying the syrian bombing arer condoning the use of chemical weapons on babieshe which is why the liberal community really isn't decrying it, a few, not many..
the attack is justifiable on a human rights basis the liberal community is on human rights, that their dilemma. missoula, montana, where is the u.n. help on that syria, where it always is, being discussed in meetings. mr. oh, you let lois lerner off too easy, what she did at the irs was criminal and she should have gone to prison. this may come as a shock to you but i do not have the power to incarcerate. if i did, prison overcrowding would be a far worse problem that it is now, i would openrc alcatraz, i would get to devils back from france. am i rambling here? i believe i am. dan kaiser omaha, nebraska, what makes people think that even if susan rice is guilty, if director called me will not prosecute clint and he will not go after miss rice. i am so tired of congressional hearings that go nowhere, me too.
if roger ellis, north hampton england, your interview with ambassador bolton was just brilliant, certain questions and excellentgl responses, the segmt should be used as a teaching tool for college courses. i appreciate that. if killing the rising sun is amazing, although today's american warriors are just as brave, the jodi's home and on campus don't have the necessary love of country to win a war is brutal against the japanese. i've thought about that a lot and you are most likely correct. america's kids raised during the great depression during the 1930s, much tougher than m modern young people. here's the thing, future wars as i mentioned will not need millions of infantry, there will be high-tech driven. the weapons today make world war ii tactics obsolete. t after reading old school, i am rooting for global warming, it will melt the snow flakes. read old-school, you and bruce
fiercely and had me rolling with fiercely and had me rolling with laughter. we have loads of snow flakes down here, it's a white out. old-school life in the same lane is a great combination of wit and wisdom, i think you and if you're staying for running it. finally tonight factor "tip of the day," i want to thank everybody who is purchase tickets to the spin the stops here live shows. yourwh humble correspondent will see everybody in baltimore, maryland, at the royal farms arena friday, september 22nd. h the next night we scurry on down to tampa, florida, a nice venue down there. december 15th, friday will be aa caesar's palace, always be a great time, waters will be parted. finally, saturday december 16th, great early christmas gift.
we'll be at the honda center in anaheim, california, that showec almost 40% sold out after one day. waters does most of our show in the audience you might get a close look at his world. ticket info on info on billoreilly.com, shows will sell out so we hope you check it out, make great gifts for
all occasions. factor "tip of the day," that is it for us tonight please check out fox news factor website which is different from billoreilly.com. if we would like you to spout off about the factor, name in d town if you wish to opine, word of the day, do not be sciolisti sciolistic. that's. it for us today, carlson warming up in the bullpen, i am
bill o'reilly, please remember that the spinner stops right here, we are definitely looking out for
you. >> good evening, welcome to tucker carlson tonight. >> no child of god should ever suffer such horror. it is in this vital national security interest of the united states to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. >> tucker: some assume yesterday's strike must be a one-off, america demonstrating its strength to the world.