tv Special Report With Bret Baier FOX News June 2, 2017 1:00am-2:01am PDT
nearly 11 pounds. >> dana: wow. >> kimberly: but i have this in real life. jesse loves them. >> dana: my "one more thing" will remain a mystery. >> bret: president trump fulfills the campaign promise, pulling the u.s. out of the paris climate accord. what it means, what people are saying, plus the epa administrator live on set. is "special report" ." welcome to washington. i am bret baier. when it comes to climate change, it appears we will not always have paris. president trump announced a short time ago the u.s. will withdrawal withdraw from the agreement. the move crosses off another item from canada donald trump's campaign to-do list. while the move has its supporters on capitol hill in small business, big business, in
the states most affected, it has also enraged a cross-section of other leaders in politics, business, even religion. we start off with john roberts. >> good evening. president trump today slammed to the paris climate accord is a bad deal for america, one that would give other countries in the economic advantage over the united states. something he said he will not stand for. >> in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect america and its citizens, the united states will withdraw from the paris climate accord. >> with the formality of the rose garden, president trump with the world and congress on notice. the u.s. will only sign onto a deal that's good for america and good for american workers. >> i'm willing to immediately work with democratic leaders to
either negotiate our way back into paris under the terms that are fair to the united states and its workers or to negotiate a new deal that protects our country and its taxpayers. >> president trump outlined what he said would be the economic burden, expense and jobs loss from staying in the accord. reaction was swift. elon musk, who stands to gain from the subsidies in the agreement, resigned from white house advisory boards " "tweeting climate change is real, leading paris is not good for america or the world. paul ryan on the other hand praised the move with a statement saying "i commend president trump for filling his commitment to the american people and withdrawing from this bad deal." in europe, leaders all but mocked him.
>> translator: the americans can't just get out of the agreement. mr. trump thinks that because he does not get close enough to the dossier to oppressively understand them. >> among the nations urging him not to abandon their accord, russia. spokesman saying "president putin signed this convention in paris. russia attaches great significance to it." the white house moved to amend some fences with russia, setting plans to return to cocompounds on maryland's shore. the obama administration ordered russia to abandon these estates. for the first time today, russian president vladimir putin acknowledge that russian hackers putin described as "patriots" may have tried to influence the u.s. election in donald trump's favor. he insisted there was no official government involvement. >> translator: they are
patriots. they contribute their opinions in order to fight against those who speak ill of russia. we don't engage on that honesty level. >> president trump seemed to integrate a a base that had gron weary. the president made no apology, saying he was elected to represent people in places like pittsburgh, not paris. >> bret: john roberts live on the north lawn. thank you. let's get reaction from the president's point man on the environment, epa administrator scott pruitt. thanks for being here. i heard you in the rose garden, obviously supporting this move, talking about the benefits of it. for people who are skeptical about it and have problems with it, what do tell them? >> that america has been leading on this issue even before paris. we are a pre1994 levels on our co2 footprint.
from 2000 to 2014, we had a reduction in the co2 footprint but we have nothing to be apologetic about with respect to our commitment to using technology and innovation and ingenuity to address issues like co2. paris represents a bad deal for the country. the president hit home he's going to have an america first strategy. on issues like the environmental agreements. >> bret: i know you've heard some reactions. take a listen to some of it that we gather. >> it's a huge mistake and future generations will look back on the day is one of the worst things that's happened in the 21st century. >> we are going to lose millions of jobs for hard-working americans because the president is going to honor a promise to the coal industry rather than the promise he should be honoring to the rest of the
world and future generations. >> >> every chicagoan and illins and who depends on lake michigan for a safe, clean drinking water is at risk. >> it's an extraordinary abdication of american leadership. he has made us an environmental pariah. a self-destructive move. >> was interesting about the comments is if you go back to when paris was entered into by the nations across the globe, there were environmental groups here criticizing the deal because i didn't hold china accountable. it did not hold india accountable. the largest polluters didn't have to take any steps until 2030. india in the agreement wasn't going to take any steps until they received $2.5 trillion in aid. we are taking those steps. we have let the world in co2 reduction. we are going to continue to lead
because of innovation and technology. what we ought to be focused upon his exporting what we know to places around the globe like china and india and helping them reduce co2 emissions as opposed to spending -- targets in paris. the targets set in paris but the reduction in greenhouse gases, the previous administration, every action he took still fell 40% short of the targets. it was a failed deal to begin with and we were spinning $292 billion on one rule, the clean power plant. >> bret: there are people who look at this and say it didn't have teeth, so the u.s. could do whatever it wanted to and by not being a part of it now, and being one of the three countries, with syria and nicaragua, and the u.s. outside
of the deal, we take ourselves away from the table as far as american leadership in the world. that's what they are saying. >> we don't lose our seat at the table. we are part of the climate action committee at the u.n. when you look at the situation with india and china and the rest, people are not recognizing, it's not about china or indiana. if you go back to 2016, there were environmental groups that said now that we have paris commits the precursor to us using the core system in the country to compel regulatory response by the epa to drive awy fossil fuel and coal while china and india continue building coal generation. the president put america's interest first and said were going to remain in co2 reduction, export what we know, and to make sure we have an america first strategy but we are not going to yield to a
framework that put america second. >> bret: i saw the u.s. chamber of commerce did an analysis of jobs potentially lost from adhering to the elements of the paris accord but there were 25-plus companies that tried to lobby the administration to stay in, saying it would lose jobs. we heard that in the montage that by pulling out, it will lose jobs. >> what we know is there was a contraction occurring in energy sector jobs. $2.5 trillion reduction in gdp. up to 400,000 jobs by the u.s. chamber study. that is objectively measured. the discussions about our inability to export green technology, i don't think that's the case. some said this process concerns with respect to national security. we have done this before. we pulled out of the kyoto protocol and 2001. if you read in march and april
of 2001 the criticism levied against president bush, the comments are almost identical. >> bret: what is the prospect of renegotiating? >> europe wanted this. the president said were open to discussing it but we are not going to put america's interests second. the president took care of the american citizens today. >> bret: was their internal debate about it? we had heard that the secretary of state and ivanka and gerard were on one side, steve bannon on the other. >> i think it's the legend. what happened in the process is what happened with every decision. he had advisors around him. the debate was good and strong amongst all voices in the president made an informed decision. >> bret: if somebody looks at this and says we are stepping away from our environmental leadership.
>> we lead through action, not words. look at what we've done. pre1994 levels in our co2 footprint. american innovation and technology, not because of government mandates. >> bret: we appreciate your time. wall street having a big day, all three major indices posted record closes. dow gained 136. s&p 500 of 18, nasdaq ahead 48. weighting tomorrow's release of the main jobless figures. we learned applications for aid rose slightly. president trump says what he likes what he's saying. >> the economy is starting to come back and very, very rapidly. we have added $3.3 trillion in stock market value to our economy and more than a million private sector jobs. >> bret: let's get some
analysis from trish regan in new york. there seems to be optimism in the markets, and i know this, the paris accord situation was done after market close but did the paris accord move factor in? we knew it was going to happen. it jump more with expectations on the job numbers? >> i would point out that the market had been down earlier in the session and rally back up significantly, managing to close at new highs on the dow, s&p, and nasdaq. i think that's important and that you're going to hear a lot of hysteria. we've already heard some of it and we are going to hear more tomorrow from many members of the left that feels strongly this was a bad decision, a bad decision for our economy and our country. and i would point people back to the markets again because we are not seen the same kind of hysteria amongst investors that
you are hearing among political types. i think it's important because above all, we need our economy to fare better. we need to move forward in terms of job creation. gdp growth, and you can tell from the market that they are not that worried about not being in the accord. >> bret: and also about where the agenda is. republicans have not pushed this through yet legislatively and there is some doubt about it. health care, tax reform, still a ways to go yet the markets are at record highs. where is the connection. >> i think people are optimistic and these things have to happen. they have to get tax reform through. that's important. but i will tell you there's a sense of optimism right now in america and among american business leaders that we haven't quite seen at least in some time, and i think what you hear out of the oval office helps to set the tone regardless of what
you may think about donald trump in some capacities, i think the an economic policy standpoint, there are many people in business that feel he's on the right track. he's on the right track and perhaps his willingness to pull out of the accord was more evidence of that. >> bret: thank you. we will be back for the jobs numbers tomorrow. 11 trump administration staff members received ethics waivers. white house chief of staff reince priebus and kellyanne conway. the waivers allow employees to participate in government duties that may overlap with their previous private-sector jobs. the administration putting that out today. there is a significant in washington tonight about the prospect of former fbi director james comey telling his side of the story to a congressional panel one week from today. at issue, will comey say president trump try to get him to drop his investigation of former national security advisor michael flynn.
that's one of the questions. catherine herridge has the story. >> the senate intelligence committee leadership confirmed that fired fbi director james comey will testify thursday next week, first in a public session followed by a closed session later. fox news confirms that comey spoke at with robert mueller about the scope of the appearance so that comey does interfere or jeopardize the probe. >> i suspect he's not going to have carte blanche widely over aspects of h. >> the wild card is whether the trump administration would take the step of invoking executive privilege to shield the president's conversations with comey. they say the administration may be an weak position because mr. trump has been so public about the russian case. from his tweets to comey's termination letter where the president cited their private discussions. >> having the president way in on a blow-by-blow about a witness getting called her what a witness says is unusual.
from an attorney perspective, i suspect there's a little bit of indigestion. >> legal experts say there's a high bar for prosecution by the special counsel. obstruction requires intent and the president reportedly telling comey to let go of former national skid advisor michael flynn bosch vasquez may not meet the standard. >> there's best difference between saying this is conduct that shouldn't of happened or wasn't in the best interest of the united states and saying a federal crime was 20. a big difference. >> and another sign, the fbi probe is expanding, british media reporting that the u.k. politician nigel farrage who spearheaded the successful brexit campaign is of interest to investigators. he was a fox news contributor, addressed the allegations on the business channel. >> i've never been to rush out, i've never had business dealings in russia. this is a liberal elite who are bad losers.
>> the expectation is that there will be more testimony about russia before thursday's hearin hearing. specifically intelligence election and whether lines were crossed by the obama administration. >> bret: we are learning additional details about the congressional effort to unmask the officials who decided to unmask americans caught up in government surveillance during the obama administration. it's the second track of this investigation we been talking about, it's getting less coverage or emphasis in reporting. chief washington correspondent james rosen has the inside story. >> in a tense meeting at national security agency headquarters that forced me last friday, majority staff lawyers from the house intelligence committee received what they considered disappointing answers from the nsa's lawyers about documents in the unmasking controversy. sources told fox news devin nunes had been seeking nsa's
cooperation. >> it's slow, it's a slow process to get the i see to get us the documents. >> and decided after friday's impasse to move forward with the subpoenas. the nsa, fbi, cia. named as figures of interest, cia director, u.n. ambassador, adam schiff of california limited what he called a pattern by nunez of secret meetings and unilateral action. >> i don't know what the chairman has in mind. picking these people apart. if there's a problem getting information from the agency's, i'm not aware of it. the problem hasn't been shared with us. the necessity of subpoenas hasn't been shared. >> did disagreements underscore the partisan rancor that has hampered the probe. allegations that the term
campaign included with the kremlin and last year's election and allegations that obama aides improperly unmask the names of trump associates from coded intelligence reports. and then leaked the data to the news media. >> republicans want to focus on unmasking and democrats want to focus on collusion. what we have is only a senate committee and the fbi who is really focused on trying to find the whole picture. >> as of now, the panel has no witness interviews lined up. nsa told us that provided significant information to the house panel. president trump tweeted that the big story is the unmasking and surveillance during the obama administration. >> bret: james, thank you. more on this with the panel. up next to my still pointing fingers. here is what our affiliates are covering. miami, police release footage from the dui arrest of tiger woods. the images show woods unable to
follow simple instructions. or keep his balance. officers placed woods in handcuffs and he was taken to jail. he said he had an unexpected reaction to prescription medications. breathalyzer did not show alcohol. fox 4 in dallas. video of a shoot out at a car dealership. bounty hunters attempted to detain a fugitive from minnesota and gun fire all three men were killed. live look at milwaukee from fox 6. the big story is a search for two missing workers at a corn mill where an explosion wednesday killed at least one worker and injured more than a dozen others. no immediate word on what may have caused the blast. have caused the blast. we will be right did you know slow internet
can actually hold your business back? say goodbye to slow downloads, slow backups, slow everything. comcast business offers blazing fast and reliable internet that's over 6 times faster than slow internet from the phone company. say hello to internet speeds up to 250 mbps. and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more a month. call today. comcast business. built for business.
>> bret: police in manila are looking for a gunman who attacked a mall, casino, and hotel complex. the national police chief they are says it appears robert he was the motive and that terrorism is unlikely. the chief says the gunmen stool gambling chips, shot an led monitor and set the gambling. he says the assailant did not fire people. we are following that. police in florida releasing footage from last year's massacre in a nightclub in orlando. the isis sympathizer killed 49 people inside the club. the video shows the carnage and chaos as police hunt for the gunmen. the shooter was killed by police after a three hour standoff.
the u.s. embassy in israel will stay in tel aviv, at least for now. president trump has temporarily waved a long requiring the embassy to be moved to jerusale jerusalem. president trump campaigned on a promise to move the facility to jerusalem which israel considers its capital blood palestinians claim as the capital of their future state. hillary clinton is taking considerable criticism find her criticism of almost everyone involved in her loss last fall except yourself. we covered this last night. clinton is making her second public appearance in as many days. national security correspondent jennifer griffin, who covered the campaign last fall, is monitoring the event. good evening. >> good evening. tonight is the first time hillary clinton has been back at new york's javits center since the election results came in on
november 8. clinton did not end up going to the javits center to concede the night of the election. for the last two days, we've gotten a taste of clinton's book tour slated for the fall. she has two books coming out this fall and is being interviewed in new york tonight by author cheryl strayed who wrote "wild." >> remember when our moms would tell us, if a boy is teasing you, it means he likes you. maybe that's what the republicans are doing. >> if that is the case, you know, i think enough is enough. >> on stage yesterday at a tech conference in silicon valley, clinton turned her sights on the dnc for the first time, blaming it in part for her loss. she had a stark assessment of
its organization and analytics team after she secure the nomination. >> i inherit nothing from the democratic party. >> what do you mean nothing? >> it was bankrupt. it was on the verge of insolvency. its data was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. >> money was not her campaign's problem. clinton raised nearly a billion dollars and had one of the deepest coffers in america and campaign history perigee failed to mention that her friend florida congressman debbie wasserman scholes have been running the dnc for several years with the bernie sanders campaign accused debbie wasserman schultz of tilting the campaign towards clinton. last night, tweeting "face accusations rbs and i hope you understand the good you did."
the tweet has been deleted. clinton went on to suggest that no one in the obama administration would listen to concerns that the russians were interfering. >> i believe it was unprecedented and we were scrambling. we told everybody we could find in the middle of the summer that the russians were messing with elections and were basically shooter away. there she goes, vast conspiracy. it turned out we were right. >> john brennan says he called his russian counterpart and told them to cut it out. >> bret: thank you. hillary clinton is not the only democrat seemingly waging war on president trump rhetorically. two gubernatorial candidates in virginia appeared to be basing their primary campaigns more on the president than the commonwealth. peter doocy takes a look.
>> democratic party still doesn't have a clear leader, so in virginia where the first gubernatorial race is underway since democratic powerhouse hillary clinton's loss, there's a fight over the direction of the party. senator tim kaine joins the establishment and backing ralph northam. >> i think he is a narcissistic maniac. >> senators like bernie sanders and elizabeth warren are pulling for the other democrat running the former congressman. >> i think there's a lot of voters across the political spectrum who think the system is broken and corrupt. >> a victory in the primary could signal a shakeup. >> it would be the first time a bernie sanders candidate has managed to win a major democratic nomination since his failed run for president.
>> on the republican side, there are three candidates. one of them is doing all he can to align himself with president trump. >> i used to say i was tromp before trouble was trump. >> he trails to ed gillespie. his campaign is far from a trump attribute. >> and the administration is putting forward policies that are good for regina, i'm going to make hard to make sure we get those policies enacted. >> virginia elects a governor the year after the country elects a president. >> from 1969 22013, the governors races, half of the governors races predicted what would happen in the next year's midterm elections. so history is as good as a coin
flip. >> seems like this states governor's race will be a new test of the old adage, all politics is local because it seems like lawmakers from other states and the president are getting just as much attention as local issues like improving schools or raising virginia's minimum-wage great >> bret: thank you. president trump makes his decision about the paris climate change deal. the u.s. is out. we will get reaction from the panel after a quick timeout
for 10 years my tempur-pedic has adapted to my weight and shape. so i sleep deeply and wake up ready to perform. now through june 11th, save $600 when you buy select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com. >> as we follow through on the commitments that this paris agreement embodies, history made judge it as a turning point. >> we are getting out. this agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial
advantage over the united states. we don't want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore. and they won't be. i was elected to represent the citizens of pittsburgh, not paris. >> bret: that started a whole bunch of reaction all over the place. >> the agreement says we need to reduce our carbon output but china doesn't have to do anything for the next 20 years. how can that be fair? >> we are going to lose millions of jobs for hard-working americans because the president is going to honor a promise to the coal industry. >> why do we need to enter into an agreement that's fair for other nations and their political worldview? >> the president talked about
putting america first and has now put america laughed. together with syria, which is in the midst of a civil war in nicaragua which stopped the agreement didn't go far enough. he's made us an environmental pariah in the world and i think it's one of the most self-destructive moves i've ever seen by any president in my lifetime. >> other commentator said the president resigned as the leader of the free world. all kinds of reaction. let's bring in the panel. steve hayes, editor-in-chief of "the weekly standard." mara liasson, public radio. mollie hemingway, senior editor at "the federalist" and syndicated columnist charles krauthammer. >> the hysteria from the left is a good reminder that the hysteria is not just because of donald trump because donald trump is president but it's based on policy. some of the comments that you've heard. saying the united states had resigned as the leader of the free world, saying it was a traitorous act of war. it suggests how invested in the
left is but there is a deep irony. it is, as you have described, a nonbinding, unenforceable, voluntary, nonratified agreements. how is it on the one hand that you have the left crying about this meaning doom for the planet and on the other hand it's not having any enforcement mechanisms. >> bret: when talking about this in the framework of how president obama signed onto it and how he put into it, it still wasn't a treaty. it never went to the u.s. senat senate. >> they would have voted it down. as steve said, the goals were voluntary and chosen by each country individually. if it was toothless and not binding, what's the harm of staying in. there was hysteria on the left about getting out but the picture that donald trump painted.
he wasn't getting rid of all of the mechanisms. this was something every single country in the world except for syria and nicaragua has agreed to. the interesting thing is, even today when white house officials briefed, they could not say whether president trump president trump are believed human activity causes climate change or not. that's a consensus, an overwhelming consensus around the world. >> bret: mollie, the environmental leadership. as you look at the map and the three countries, the u.s., syria, and nicaragua. >> we are talking about how it wasn't binding but it's true that the idea was to set up agencies within the administrative state to enforce what we had committed to under this accord and that would have cost $3 trillion the next few decades, would've cost more than 6 million jobs. i'm not taking part in an
agreement that causes a great economic damage for no environmental benefit is not a bad thing. it's a mark of leadership to say why would we do this? spewing the president saying in a statement that he is open to renegotiating the deal. >> if the obstructionists want to get together, let's make them nonobstructionist. we will get back in the deal and make a good and we won't be closing up factories and we won't be losing our jobs and we will sit down with the democrats and all of the people that represent either the paris record or something that we can do that's much better than the paris accord. and i think the people of our country will be thrilled. >> i don't know how sincere or realistic that is but that's the right idea. i'm all in favor of an international treaty on climate
and on controlling emission of co2 but paris wasn't that. that was one where it said the u.s. is going to export its coal industry to india and china who don't have to do anything for 20 years. the argument of the developing countries was you have a 100 year head start and were catching up so were not going to stop our development now when you're already developed. to which i would say we are not going to apologize for having invented the steam engine. we are where we are, if we are going to have controls on admissions, it's going to be equitable. you're not going to have a 20 year hiatus where the chinese don't have to reduce anything and the indians are going to double their emissions from coal so i think withdrawing -- i didn't like the language around it that the president said.
withdrawing from a treaty which was toothless except that it would have been used in our courts to enforce restrictions on us with a good idea. >> bret: mara, let's talk about where climate change issues stand. fox news pulls just out say climate change, concern, trend. extremely or very concerned. in 2017, 860-40. it's breaking on fox pole 4, -- rushing meddling, economy. looking at what happened today, the reaction from environmentalists, democrats, seems like they are always losing to the argument about jobs and they are always losing to it even though the issue
seems to be more concerning for american people. >> jobs are usually the number one issue. there is consensus around climate change and it's growing. it doesn't mean it's the number one thing that motivate someone to vote. donald trump has aligned himself with his base today strongly. he said i am representing pittsburgh, not paris, even though the mayor of pittsburgh pointed out they went for hillary. we know what he meant. he is aligning himself with his rustbelt base. the general issue of climate change, which he did not address. he talked only about jobs in the economy. that's the number one issue but he didn't say what he wants and exits to about it. other than what we've already done. you heard scott pruitt say we are already making great strides. this is an issue. can the democrats somehow make the argument, as ed markey try to make, that doing something about climate change will actually produce jobs because of
all of the green technology. they haven't been able to do that yet. stick out this deal wouldn't do anything to help out with the climate change problem. it's one thing to say we intend to help out and another to actually do something. when you are asking middle americans to support this with their jobs and their loss of income and the extra costs applied to them. it makes no sense to know have no -- >> bret: it is a big deal if you move the world temperature or degree. >> he said it was tiny but it's big. >> bret: even a portion of it is a big deal. i want to get back to the moment. it's not just about the base, right? it's about the common sense when he says india is getting hundreds of billions of dollars and doubling their coal plants in china doesn't have to do until 2030.
>> it was the case that countries could set their own benchmarks for what they wanted to do. they could have said if we continue along on our current projections in terms of emissions, we will count that as success. but that's crazy to think of that. that would be like me saying i'm going to consider it a success in two years if i am just as fast as i am now. this diet is great. but i'm still gaining weight. doesn't make any sense. there is other polling that builds on what you asked mara about that shows climate change in terms of intensity is small. the number of people who regarded as the most important issue mild mired in low single digits. we have heard democrats again and again and again say they're going to marshal their forces to
fight for climate change. it hasn't worked before. i am skeptical that it will work politically. stick with the left is showing it has become an issue of almost religious beliefs. you could shutdown every coal mine in america, the effect on the climate, on temperature, would be negligible. you couldn't measure it. if this is such a popular issue, a consensus issue, when the democrats at the white house when obama concluded, why didn't he go to the senate? we have a constitution. there's a reason why we have provisions because you want to treaty to have substance and permanence. you go to the senate, get a consensus in the country, expressed by a two-thirds majority rather than some executive agreement like i would say the iran deal which they knew would not have consensus. the kyoto agreement was voted down by 99-1. because people didn't want it, and i think if democrats are so attached to this and think this
is so apocalyptic if it is withdrawn from, why didn't they go to the senate? it would never have gotten the vote. >> bret: i want to play this sound bite from wilbur ross. >> it's not that he doesn't want a climate deal. he wants a deal that is fair and a deal that doesn't cost us trillions of dollars in gdp and millions of jobs just to line the pockets of developing countries and european countries. >> bret: sounds like the trade deals. >> well, and it gets to the point about the need for democratic accountability. we have seen people not appreciating even things that are good for them but when it comes to something like this where are there so many downsides, so many cost politically and economically, and again negligible gain for what the whole reason that we are supposed to be into the scum of the environmental benefits, it's not going to pass muster
with the american people. stay on the environmentalists are not getting it done. >> the big question is, can become an issue. can they make it something different? among young voters, it's an article of faith. >> democrats are voting in the senate tomorrow if they were but why don't they? >> this is a maid's very meaningful donald trump's voters. donald trump voters are so used to people on the right color republicans and conservatives claiming they're going to get out of things like this. officially part of the republican platform. and yet you had met romney, the previous nominee, yesterday begging from -- to stay in. it was a refreshing thing for a lot of trump voters to see someone follow through with a campaign promise. >> bret: it's eight different
♪ >> has you ever requested that the u.s. person unmasked? >> yes i have. >> have you recalled any u.s. investors asking that names be unmasked? >> i don't know, i could not answer within a confidence. >> did you seek the names of any people involved to unmask the names of any people involved in the trump transition, surrounding the president-elect in order to spy on. >> absolutely not for any
political purpose is to spy, expose, anything. >> i linked nothing to nobody and never have and never would. >> bret: there are subpoenas out for the house intelligence committee for susan rice, john brennan, and the samantha power, the former u.s. ambassador to the united nations about this unmasking issue. this is the democrat of the house until committee questioning all of this. >> i don't know what the chairman had this in mind because we weren't consulted and why the chairman is picking these three people apart aside from the fact that they were part of the obama administration. if susan rice has been a perennial target for whatever reason, but again, we have a very little insight into what the chairman is doing here and i think the only guidance we can get is what we hear coming out of the white house. if this is what the white house wants to see happen, they would rather be talking about these issues. >> bret: were back with the panel, the coverage of this is a
long -- track, not really the substance of the unmasking. >> when you're looking at the actual things that are going on with these investigations, we do have evidence of crimes, leaked u.s. persons information to end plays a big part of that, you can't leak the name of someone unless you have unmasked it. learning more about this will be key. we already knew about susan rice's involvement at this, we saw john brennan's core and what those have very specific questions that frank gaudi was asking which clearly indicated he does have some knowledge of what was going on. i'm very surprised that the ambassador appears to be powers, we have many questions, what in the world would she be doing in unmasking, she is not in an unintelligent role. things are moving along, it will be very interesting to see where it proceeds. >> republicans on the house intelligence committee believes that there is evidence that exists the trump administration
officials were improperly masked, we sought from trade gaudi. they believe more such evidence exists. the intelligence agencies have been cooperating with their requests for additional information, that cooperation ended. we need to see this additional evidence, they want to go through it because they think they will find more evidence of improper unmasking, we don't know exactly what they mean but we know we should see this, the public should see all of this and i think sooner rather than later. >> bret: there are two tracks here, even though the focus everywhere else seems to be on one track, the bigger story is the unmasking and surveillance people being on master the obama administration. >> was their collusion and were people unmasked in some kind of illegal matter. unmasking is illegal if you're one of those people with the clearance to unmask like susan rice or john brennan. the question is what what's the purpose of it and what do you do
with the information? >> bret: michael flynn, if his name doesn't go to "the washington post" -- >> that's what they have to get the bottom of. who actually leaked that. we don't know that yet. >> i think we have a consensus here on the path, there are two tracks, we don't know which is more important. the mainstream media are playing it as if there is no importance to track number two. the fact is there's more evidence of an actual crime on the second track, on the flynn story because somebody leaked his name and that's illegal then we have on collusion. i'm open to evidence of a crime on either side but all this speculation come all this smoke creation is crazy. let the peaceful testify. it looked like a trade gaudi knew the answer to his question and then it sure looked like the former cia director was a little bit troubled by it. it would be nice to actually hear him drill in on the
struggled with it. >> i think it's covfefe, however you want to pronounce it. >> covfefe, covfefe no one really knows how to pronounce it. >> covfefe, i like covfefe. >> covfefe. >> covfefe. >> what is covfefe? >> bret: covfefe, fair and balanced and unafraid mahmoud abbas it is friday, june 2nd, donald trump putting america first parting ways with the paris climate agreement. >> i was elected to represent
the citizens of bubba bubba, not paris. rob: mainstream media going into meltdown over this. >> on a sunny day in the rose garden what could be defined and construed as a dark speech, he portrayed a very dark vision for the future of the country. rob: donald trump's biggest supporters are responding to that. heather: a plan packed with passengers up in planes after hitting a flock of birds. hear from the panicked passengers. "fox and friends" first starts right now. ♪ rob: what a beautiful shot
that is. looks like friday. look at south. you are watching "fox and friends" first. heather: thanks for starting your day with us. the trump administration asking the supreme court to reinstate the revised executive order unrestricted travel. rob: in six muslim majority countries. it would freeze the lower court decision to block that order. >> they handle over social media