tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News September 17, 2017 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT
law. that's all we have for you. join us again next week when the next revolution will be televised. next. >> i'm chris wallace. a north korea fires another missile. have no problem kickint to general mattis because he has other options. chris: the president's message to the international community on north korea, iran and terror with national security adviser general h.r. mcmaster. then does president trump have an immigration deal with chuck and nancy or not?
>> we have reached an understanding on this issue. we have to work out details. >> we had an agreement to move forward. >> to wall to me is vital fi don't get the wall, then we will become the on obstruction. chris: we will break down the discussion, democrat dick and republican roy blunt. plus, big tech comes under fire, we will ask our sunday panel about how russia used facebook in the 2016 election and our power player of the
of course, that's where the rockets are coming from. rockets know that we ought to probably not laugh too much about because they represent a grave threat to everyone. it's a global problem. chris: let's pick up on that. here is what you had to say on friday. >> we've been kicking the can down the road and we are out of road and so for those who have said and commenting about the lack of military option, there is military option. chris: general what does that mean, out of rogue? the fact is you want to give sanctions one more time. you're not about to go to war? >> it really depends on how we see it continue to manifest itself and the judgment of how much time we have. we are out of road because in the past the approach taken with the problem of north korea and kim regime for decades has been to enter long-drawn negotiations to enter into unsatisfactory agreement, agreement that then the knot korean regime breaks, with that agreement that's particularly dangerous often times, what has been all the
time in the past, lock in the status quo as the new normal and this regime is so close now to threatening the united states and others with a nuclear weapon that we really have to move with a great deal of urgency on sanctions, on diplomacy and preparing if necessary. chris: how do you decide we have reached the point, we have to move to a military option now. how long do you give sanctions? >> the president asked us to work on this. we can't speak about timelines or conclusions. we have been working very hard, very hard to make everything we are doing militarily, diplomatic, diplomatically, economically and with our allies and partners to be as effective as we can and we recognize is not really much time. chris: the administration, i want to pick up on part of that, the administration is talking about getting tough with north korean trading partners.
here is secretary mnuchin this week. >> we will use economic sanctions to bring north korea to the table. >> stop and trade with china? >> stop and trade with anybody, nobody would be off the table. chris: but the u.s. did $648 billion of trade with china last year. there-- they are the single lart of importing goods and we are not about to cut trade with china. >> this is an indication how serious threat of north korea and it's in interest to resolve it. of course, we need china to help as much as they can. great deal of economic power over north korea and certainly we think that chinese agree it is in their interest to have a denuclearized peninsula. we are not going to cut all trade with china. >> restrict trade in anyway we
can with the regime to choke off resources to allow regime to continue to prioritize their military efforts, their missile efforts, their nuclear efforts over the well willing -- well-being of their own people. chris: he talked about this week about having equilibrium, nothing that can be done economically that will stop him from pursuing the effort? >> what he should conclude is exactly the opposite, makes him more and more vulnerable and makes him less and less secure. chris: let's turn to another subject. the president is also going to talk about getting tougher with iran at the united nations but this week he had the opportunity to reimpose sanction that is were lifted as part of the nuclear deal. he didn't do that, for all of his talk about tearing up the agreement, i know he asked to
recertify whether or not they are complying with it. isn't that correct, isn't he going to live with it and try to find other ways to confront iran on other fronts? >> well, we have to see what live with it means. live with it can't mean giving this regime cover to develop a nuclear capability and so a lot of things have to happen immediately. rigorous enforcement of that agreement. it is underenforced now. we know iran has violated -- >> iaea says they are complying with us, sir. >> we have identified some of the breaches that iran has then corrected. what does that tell you about iranian behavior? they are crossing the line at times. there has to be much more rigorous enforcement of the deal and we have to recognize the fundamental flaws in the deal. as the president said, it's the worst deal. it gave all the benefits to the iranian regime up front and the benefits now that they are using
to foement the catastrophe, support for hezbollah, support for proxy forces like 80% of effective fighters fighting on the side of brutal regime in syria, we have to recognize the broad range of iranian destabilizing behavior and we can't allow this deal to enable that. their missile programs, for example, the way they are seeding the network with destructive capability that puts neighbors at risk. chris: i want to bring the next subject, the president calling for the un for the world to continue war on terror. here is what he had to say this weeks. >> we have done better in eight months than the previous eight years against isis. chris: but i don't have to tell
you a bomb went off in a london subway this week that's the fifth terror attack in great britain just in year and experts say as we succeed and we are succeeding in pushing iraq, isis back in iraq, shrinking territory, it is only getting them to focus on launching attacks in europe and the u.s. >> well, the president has told us that we have to do three fundamental things very effectively. the first is to ensure that these terrorists have no safe havens and support basis that allow them to organize, plan and conduct attacks against us and against our allies. the second thing is we have to cut off their financing, the way they they resource these kinds of operations and the third, we have to defeat their evil ideology and this has a lot to do with prime minister may's top priorities to constrict ability to use the internet and communicate effectively with each other and none of this is a
substitute for important law enforcement actions across the world and improving even further our ability to share information and to gain visibility of these terrorist networks and defeat them. chris: there is a report this weekend, i'm sure you've read that says that president trump has decided he is not going pull out of the paris climate accord, that we may reduce our commitment to curve greenhouse omissions but he will live with the agreement. stay in the agreement, reduced commitment, is that true, sir? >> no, that's false. it's a false report. the president decide today pull out of the paris accord because it was a bad deal for american people and because it was a bad deal for the environment. it gave the worst polluters the ability to continue polluting and admitting carbon and without significantly reducing those levels. the president is committed to the cleanest water on earth, the cleanest air on earth, to an
energy policy that reduces carbon and generate growth in this country and globally and these priorities, he felt we could not pursue effectively within this flawed agreement. chris: so he's out of the paris climate accord? >> he's out of the paris climate accord. at some point in the future, if there can be, if there can be a deal that addresses these fundamental -- chris: the allies said they are not going to renegotiate. >> the president's ears are open though, if they decide to come forward with an agreement that addresses the presidents legitimate concerns about paris. chris: one final area, it's widely known that you and steve bannon have sharply different views of the world, one of the first things you did as national security adviser is kick him out as a regular official member of the nsc, he had dismissed you as
globalists and sharply disagreed with the decision to commit to double down in afghanistan. question, is the administration better off with steve bannon out of the white house? >> the administration is better of when we can serve the president by coordinating in all of our departments with agencies with key allies and partners and to present the president with multiple options and based on his decisions to help the president implement these policies that prioritize protecting the interest of the american people. and so what's important is to have an inclusive process, not to try to manipulate into a particular decision or to advance your own agenda. we are advancing the president's agenda and we are -- we are advancing policies and strategies that are for the american people. chris: you strike me as a pretty straight talker, steve bannon
was manipulating and trying to work around and advance his own agenda? >> the national security council i think has served the president well in bringing him multiple options. there were some who tried to operate outside of that process for their own narrow agendas and that didn't serve the president well. chris: does some people, does that include steve bannon, sir? >> i think this has been too hyped on one individual. the reports of feuding, it didn't really happen. i mean, we had our doors open to all perspectives within -- within the national security council and it was up to those individuals whether they would walk-through that door and permit -- and participate in open and transparent process. chris: general mcmaster, thank you, you are a busy guy, we covered a lot of ground there in about 12 minutes. >> always a pleasure. chris: thank you, we will watch the president's speech on to the un, sir. two leading senators about the
president's move to cut deals with democrats. how would it affect the trump how would it affect the trump agenda and how long will ity hu, huh! we gotta go. come on. ♪ "grandma! grandpa!" ♪ thanks mom. here we are. look, right up to here. principal. we can help you plan for that. 3 toddlers won't stop him.. and neither will lower back pain. because at a dr. scholl's kiosk he got a recommendation for our custom fit orthotic to relieve his foot, knee, or lower back pain, from being on his feet. dr. scholl's. born to move.
and it's also a story mail aabout people and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you trusted battery for your son's favorite toy?t maybe not. maybe, you could trust he wouldn't leave the upstairs water running. (woman screams) or, you could just trust duracell. ♪ whuuuuuat?rtgage offer from the bank today. you never just get one offer. go to lendingtree.com and shop multiple loan offers for free!
free? yeah. could save thousands. you should probably buy me dinner. no. go to lendingtree.com for a new home loan or refinance. receive up to five free offers and choose the loan that's right for you. our average customer could lower their monthly bills by over three hundred dollars. go to lendingtree.com right now.
chris: president trump had dinner with democratic leaders chuck and nancy this week and they seemed to have cooked up at least the outline of a deal on immigration that has many of the most devoted trump supporters worried. so where do we stand on daca and who is driving the agenda now here in washington? joining us from chicago dick durban, senate's two democrat and here in washington republican senator roy blunt. gentlemen, let's start with the big question here in washington, most immediate question, does president trump have a deal with
speaker pelosi -- former speaker pelosi and democratic leader chuck schumer when it comes to daca or not and here is part of what was a shifting conversation on thursday? >> the wall is going to be built. it'll be funded a little bit later. >> it was a very, very positive step for the president to commit to daca protections without insisting on the inclusion of even a debate about the border wall. >> they cannot obstruct the wall. the wall to me is vital. if i don't get the wall, then we will become the obstruction. chris: senator i want to point on two specific points, is there a deal to protect the dreamers without funding for the wall and is there a deal to give the dreamers a path to citizenship? >> well, it's a basic understanding, chuck schumer, nancy pelosi met with the president thursday night and came to a basic understanding without the details, without the obvious negotiations that have to follow and then chuck and
nancy said to the president and the white house, we are going to put on a press release so it's clear on both sides what we have agreed to. they did exactly that. there was great pushback from the right. they didn't like the parameters of this understanding and a lot of conversation since but we are going forward, we are going forward with the understanding that we can work with the white house to come up with an agreement that includes daca, that includes citizenship for those who are protected under the dream act and also has a substantial commitment to increased border protection. those are the two pillars of this understanding. chris: very briefly, in this understanding, do you believe that the president committed to those pillars over chinese food on wednesday night? >> yes. chris: that's pretty brief. senator blunt, the president seem today walk away from at least the citizenship part of this deal later on thursday. let's take a look at that. >> we are not talking about
didn't have democrats vote for them. that's how you get the work done here in a way that allows everything else to move forward, so looking for democrats on every bill is a good idea but make it impossible to get your work done because you've lost your own side is not part of that either. >> do you think that there's the potential for a real -- not permanent but working alliance between president trump and congressional democrats and what do you say to those members, folks on the left who don't trust this president and don't trust making deals with him? >> well, of course, the people on the right and left will be critical but senator roy blunt and i are good examples of how this can work. i have joined him and applauded his leadership in dramatically increasing biomedical research in the united states on a bipartisan basis, alexander and two weeks ago schumer and pelosi sat down with the president and the other leaders and said, we
can help you move immediately for hurricane harvey assistance to have a short-term spending bill so the government doesn't shut down and extend the debt ceiling, we will do with it on a bipartisan basis, that's what america wants and the president said i will take it. we did it and we can do more like that as long as we trust one another and respect the differences that we obviously do have but try to work toward a goal. petty murray and alexander have passed more in two weeks and moving forward to make affordable care act more affordable and transparent than seven months than partisan wrangling on the part of the senate. it can be done. chris: you talk about nih spending, the trump administration wants to cut spending. let talk about tax reform, the president wants to slash corporate taxes and end the estate tax, democrats oppose
both, the president talked about paying cuts, democrats reject that, senator durbin, is there a deal given the very sharp differences, fundamental differences s there a deal to be made on tax reform? >> chris, there will be differences, that's what the senate is all about. sitting down with democrats and republicans and working out an amendment process which comes to a conclusion where both sides have to compromise to some degree. that's where you get the best legislation and you get something the american people can trust, jamming something through on one side of the other is just not the way to achieve it, we proved it with the repeal and replace, that did not achieve what america wanted, stronger health care system with more people with insurance coverage and quality insurance policies they can trust. >> senator blunt, what are the implications of all of this of the 2018 mid-term elections,
north dakota heidi, vulnerable democrats, one of the prime targets for republicans to knock her off in 2018. the president saying nice things about her, when you add that to the president appearing to compromise on some of his basic campaign pledges, couldn't this hurt republicans in 2018? >> well, on the tax front it's very important that we get something done, increase, we are almost do a decade now of very flat opportunities for families with their take-home way, a tax bill that increases take-home pay and in the future creates better jobs with more take-home pay, with more pay to start with is where we should be heading, we ought to be looking for anybody who wants to be part of that, 46 democrats sent a letter to the president that said we would be glad to work with you as long as you don't do these three things that you think are important parts of a tax package. that's not a good way to start. chris: finally senator blunt, i
have a minute left, more violent protests in st. louis overnight, people angry about the white police officer who was charged with murder in the death of a drug -- black drug suspect, i know everyone oppose it is violence but even the mayor of st. louis said she was appalled by the shooting and appalled by the verdict, so what's your reaction to the situation there and -- and the clear anger of a lot of people in the african communities? >> i talked to police chiefs that are involved and what the chiefs are doing and i also talked to community leaders and african american pastors, do i think that this is a place where we have to figure out how to come together, you do have to accept what the judge who has the obligation to look at this case determine, but at the same time you have to look at what you need to do to bring the community together in ways that both, i think, law enforcement and community leaders have been
trying to do particularly before ferguson. this happened before that happened and we need to continue to watch this, the division in this country whether st. louis or baltimore is not a good thing and we need to be working hard to make our system work. chris: senator blunt, senator durbin, thank you both. we will stay on top of how all of this worked between the president and chuck and nancy plays out in congress, thank you all, gentlemen. coming up we will bring sunday group to discuss president trump's new search for votes on both sides of the aisle. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the president's potential deal to protect dreamers without getting funding for the border wall. go to facebook or twitter at fox news sunday and we may use your question on the
>> senate democratic leader chuck schumer caught on hot mic on senate floor discussing advice to president trump dealing with democrats and republicans in congress. former speaker to have house newt gringrich rachael bade, guy benson. mr. speaker you worked with bill clinton in 1990's when he was trying to negotiate apart from both republicans and his own democratic party, is that what president trump is doing here and will it work? >> well, i think is better deal-maker. he wants things to work and the
other day he was faced with two visits the houston, terrible devastation, a hurricane coming to florida and he had the usual partisan infighting for two or three weeks or take a deal and he took a deal and it worked and i think he thought, well, maybe we will do a little more. now the challenge will be that the goals of schumer and pelosi and their base are so radically different from trump that the margins for deals maybe smaller than people would like. i think it's perfectly reasonable. i advocated for months that they start with infrastructure because it was inherently bipartisan and i think that the presidents govern best when they carve a large block of the opposition party and have a much bigger majority than just their own partisan base. chris: julie, what are they saying, you covered the white house, how frustrated are they with republican leaders and particularly their inability to deliver on obamacare repeal and replace and how much hope do they hold given that as i said on a lot of the -- as speaker said, on a lot of basic issues
what they want in tax reform, what they want in immigration, that there's such big differences, how much help do they hold working in alliance with the democrats? >> we need to put in context, with mcconnell there's not much of a relationship there, when you come out of obamacare debates, there's not a lot of personal bonding there to keep that going. there was a lot of frustration in the white house after that specific debate on the capitol and i think when the president looks at schumer more so than pelosi, but schumer in particular, you know, he sees someone he likes, this is the president who likes personal relationship. he likes to have a bond with someone. yeah, there are going to be differences on the policy and not aligned on anything but where he can make an agreement he's perfectly fine and he has been hearing from others like gringrich for months that this is an advantage for someone like trump who isn't particularly
ideological or doesn't have deep roots of the conservative movement or ideology. chris: when it comes to daca, the wall, maybe not, citizenship, maybe yes? >> you have seen the president multiple times when he's had a chance to go to the mat, i'm going to veto it over the wall, he's backed off. i think that for his base that's going to continue to be a frustration but he's certainly showed a willingness to kick it down the road a little bit. chris: we ask you for questions for the panel and on this issue of the president making a deal with democrats on daca, there was a lot of confusion from you as there has been in washington, let's put some of it up. fox moulder tweeted this, does trump even want to get funding for the wall, build the wall, got him elected, how else would he rally his base? rick connor posted this on facebook, how do you think amnesty will square with the
president's campaign promises, is this a negotiating ploy to get his agenda through, wall and all? guy, how do you answer them? >> that's what everyone is trying to figure out in town including both senators that you interviewed a while ago. i went back and tried to figure out maybe what would a deal start to look like on daca, what would the the contours seems to be like and maybe sometime in the future, unclear, but it seemed like ancient history at this point. in 2013 was the gang of 8 bill that was eventually killed in principle, democrats agree today border security and would form the basis for something that trump could potentially somewhat credibly claim a victory and i looked at the provision, $40 billion for border security, 20,000 word security border agents, that was in gang of 8
agreed to, there's a chance that while the wall maybe part of daca deal, there's going to be something that could be spun as or framed as a wall or a physical barrier. chris: how do you think? it's crazy to ask you what's the base going to do, but i'm going to ask you, what do you think the reaction of the real trump hard liners, the real base will be if they get a deal on daca that includes citizenship and doesn't include a wall as it had been commonly thought to exist? >> last week i had a long car ride so i listened to talk radio for about six hours straight and it was interesting. they opened the phone line and it was trump base voters calling in, there was some concern about where this might go, but overall there's a sense that they trust president trump, that they think that he's three steps ahead of everyone else and ultimately he has their interest at heart and that was sort of reflected across the board for most of his
supporters, so that's what i would guess would be the case unless it is egregiously bad. chris: rachel, what do you think are the prospects of a deal that can be passed on daca and prospects for a deal on tax reform? >> you talk to republicans right now they will tell you a slim chance in terms of the white house striking a deal with democrats and getting it over the line while cutting out gop leadership. you mentioned that a lot of the base still has faith in trump and they see this, they say he knows interest, do what is best for us, there's a totally different feeling in capitol hill. i heard a lot of frustration about what is the strategy, what is the end game here, basically, you know, republicans control both houses of congress, cutting out leadership is not the smartest thing for the president at this point in time, at least republicans will tell you that. take the daca deal, i was talking to folks in leadership that were saying that they don't understand why he took the wall off the table to begin with. the number one bargaining chip
they said in terms of negotiating a deal, if you're going to take it off the table with democrats, you should get something for it. they will try to push him to put that back on the table and sort of use that to get a deal that is possible that conservatives could go for. chris: what about tax reform. they are so different on tax cut that is would benefit the wealthy, on whether or not it's going to add to the deficit or not unless you put dynamic scoring and including a lot of the growth is a guess whether or not it's going to happen. >> i don't mean to sound alarmist but tax reform in trouble again. it goes back to sort of shift from the president going to working with republicans to now wanting to work with democrats. for instance, republicans on the hill speaker paul ryan, mitch mcconnell, treasury secretary mnuchin, gary cohn, they've all been writing a republican bill and they're about to unveil it. last week we saw the president come out and float the idea of increasing taxes on the wealthy which blows in the face of supply side economic and goes
100% against republican that is want to see tax bill. there's a fear that he's overstepping right now in terms of reaching out to democrats and they are concerned that this is going to undercut them, not only republican base and the president on what he wants to do. chris: quick reaction, speaker? >> the most interesting side story, democrats won this big agreement, everything was going to end in december, the democrats are going to have huge leverage because the debt ceiling ended in december, a few days leader mitch mcconnell, he controlled the paper and took out the provision that schumer most wanted. chris: extraordinary measures, which means they can keep the debt ceiling to go to march. >> february, march. i happen to be the majority leader and i control the paper. schumer faced with that reality couldn't break, he couldn't say no. we are a long way, this dance is going to continue for a while. i think the democrats face the real risk, do they really hate the wall more than they love the dreamers because if i were the president that's the way i would drive it.
these people are so ideological, they would rather sacrifice the dreamers. chris: all right, gridlock breaking out in washington. all right, panel, we have to take a break here. when we come back, growing tension between washington and silicon valley, powerful internet companies face talk of war, government oversight. we will bring back the panel to discuss congress' new scrutiny of big ♪ this is a story about mail and packages. and it's also a story about people. people who rely on us every day to deliver their dreams they're handing us more than mail they're handing us their business and while we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country, we never forget... that your business is our business the united states postal service. priority: you ♪ (baby crying)
>> but the fact is i don't think facebook has put the resources, the time, my understanding is they didn't even go back and check all of those accounts to see if they had put out other ads. chris: democratic senator mark warner of virginia after facebook admitted it sold $150,000 worth of ads in the 2016 election to groups linked
to russia, spurring investigations by both congressional committees and special counsel robert mueller. speaker gringrich, how big a development is this and are we begin to go see the end of washington's hands off approach to big tech and specially the huge internet companies? >> look, i think this is probably four to six years behind the curve. these companies are so big, they control so much of our lives, they can set so many different policies internally with no supervision, having not just the russian angle, but really looking at the underlying nature of these companies, what they do, how they make decisions, these equivalent of gigantic utility. i don't think you can have power that's hidden away in secret controlled by billionaires. chris: mark warner tech before going into politics, are you
saying what government clamps on us? >> it's exactly right, several of these companies are so enormous that there's some sense of what does it mean to us as a free society to have global corporations run by founding billionaires who have been effect totally out of control and internally can wipe out a company, they can be anticonservative, antiliberal and do all sorts of things and there's been almost no supervision just to surface the information. chris: rachel, president trump and democrats generally had a pretty cozy relationship with the big internet companies like facebook, like google, like amazon. is that changing on capitol hill now as the speaker suggested it should and is there a partisan divide in how republicans an democrats see the internet
behemoths? >> they are basically coming to an end right now. look, for a long time congress had light touch with the tech industry, democrats are furious about russia links ads ran in 2016. republicans are worried that google is oppressing conservative voices, both sides are concerned about people's private information being gathered and what happens if they're hacked and so those are all concerns. so, yes, generally republicans control everything right now in washington and they're typically antiregulation, but it's safe to say that this sort of darling entry is becoming a target as much as anything else. chris: the rubber hits the road, how do you allow the companies to grow and prosper but with some guardrails? >> i think that's the question is the hill grappling with, how do they do and continue to grow and influence everyone's life, there's a test case, some
hearings coming up in the senate this week to examine whether big websites and tech companies can be held liable for child sex trafficking on the internet. right now they cannot be sued if a user would have put elicit content on the internet. so the senate is going to look at re-examining this, the tech industry is putting a lot of money into case to lobby against this but i think this is an interesting first test. like, if they can't -- if they are not going to see something as heinous as child sex trafficking as reason to regulate, it's safe to say that tech has a lot of power. chris: amazing the big center of lobbying in washington there was a chart in wall street journal that show showed lobbying expenditures skyrocketed in the last few years. julie, where are president trump and his administration on this, you talked about utilities, speaker gringrich, steve bannon used to talk about traiting
facebook and google public utilities with regulation? >> different from the obama administration which wrapped arms around googles, facebooks, presented them as examples of american companies that are growing strong and dominating on those global stage, trump, i think, has been turned off a bit by the fact that leaders of the company are not particularly pleased with his administration and spoken out on a lot of issues. i don't think you can divorce the conversation from that. also taking on amazon not just for jeff bezos' role owning washington post and amazon on twitter account, i think that you are seeing some of this stiming from the president's populist message in general as well. he looks at wall street and some of the big firms there and, i think, looks at tech somewhat in the same way, massive company that can get out of control and
looks at his base, he can see frustration with that, frustration of small business owners who see themselves taken over by giant like amazon. chris: there's the whole question before i get to you, guy, about internet sales don't have to pay taxes but mom and pop stores have to pay taxes. >> it's interesting if this comes on the discussion on the hill on tax reform if we end up talking about tax reform package. chris: that would add a lot of revenue. that would get the lobbyist busy. guy, another aspect, that's growing presence about the culture in silicon valley, you had three former female employees of google just filed what hay hope would be a class action lawsuit charging them with pay and promotion discrimination and as you know there's been a number of
complaints and lawsuits alleging sexual harassment in these companies, so the wild, wild west applies to culture in silicon. >> that's right, you'll have democrats in particular focusing on those problems and equal pay, is there discrimination in silicon valley and then you'll have on the other side as rachael alluded to, look at what happened a few years and brandon ikes branded out for having traditional values on marriage. how might that play out in terms of average users having information potentially stifled in searches. there's real concerns about that on the right. big tech might be waking up these days and saying, oh-oh, we have relate problems culturally on the left and right and that can be a problem on capitol hill
and lawmakers on both sides try to dig in. chris: there's no question that these companies have been engines of huge economic growth in this country. is there a downside to washington -- obviously a downside, how big a downside to washington getting more involved in regulation of the internet? >> a huge downside. some of the concerns that the speaker raised are reasonable. my faith in ability of government to respond to that well through regulation is very low. i think it is -- government is slow-moving, the opposite of innovative and the internet is a miracle and wouldn't exist as it does today if the government's clumsy hand had been on day one and more hand on the neck and applying for measure on dc, i'm not sure that works out well. chris: 15 seconds to respond. >> the fact is that no time in american history a huge concentration of powers are not
directly challenged by government and that's overall good for protecting. chris: all right, we will continue this debate. this is an important subject. thank you, panel, we will see you next sunday. next week the power player of the week. the doctor that keeps the washington redskins and nationals healthy while breaking down barriers in pro diabetes can be a daily struggle,
even if you're trying your best. along with diet and exercise, once-daily toujeo® may help you control your blood sugar. get into a daily groove. ♪ let's groove tonight. ♪ share the spice of life. ♪ baby, slice it right. from the makers of lantus®, ♪ we're gonna groove tonight. toujeo® provides blood sugar-lowering activity for 24 hours and beyond, proven blood sugar control all day and all night, and significant a1c reduction. toujeo® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. it contains 3 times as much insulin in 1 milliliter as standard insulin. don't use toujeo® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar or if you're allergic to insulin. get medical help right away if you have a serious allergic reaction such as body rash or trouble breathing. : which can be life threatening. it may cause shaking, sweating, fast heartbeat, and blurred vision.
check your blood sugar levels daily. injection site reactions may occur. don't change your dose of insulin without talking to your doctor. tell your doctor about all your medicines and medical conditions. check insulin label each time you inject. taking tzds with insulins, like toujeo®, may cause heart failure that can lead to death. find your rhythm and keep on grooving. ♪ let's groove tonight. ask your doctor about toujeo®. ♪ share the spice of life. chris: profootball season is now in full swing and as fans dream our team will get to the super bowl, we know injuries have a way of derailing those hopes which brings us to our power player of the week. ♪ >> in sports medicine people are very highly motivated to get better. chris: robin west has a busy schedule, most of the time she's the head of nova sports medicine
in virginia except when she's the lead physician for both the washington redskins and the washington nationals. chris: what does it mean to you to be the first female head doctor in the history of both major league baseball and the nfl? >> i don't even think about it. i never -- it never really crossed my mind. i never think of myself as different. chris: we saw for ourselves at a since exhibition game. phil taylor went down on west ran in the field. she examined him there and and on the sidelines for what turned out to be a season-ending tear of the muscle. west told us how different injuries are. >> overused in baseball, a lot of shoulder and elbow issues in baseball. in football it's a lot of traumatic injuries, high-energy injuries that we have to really manage quickly. chris: that's another difference.
in baseball an injured player is out of the game, but in football -- >> the coaches are in my ear, is he going to play, i stood aside pretty quickly. i'm the player's doctor. i don't work for the team, i want the team to do well but i have to look at the player's interest interest. chris: is being a woman an advantage or disadvantage of doing your job? >> at least in football a lot of them were raised by mothers and grandmothers and they hold women in very high regard and they come to me and will tell me more information and they're very trusting, i think. chris: dr. west usually does reconstructive surgery but she sighs psychological outlook is key to getting players back on the field. >> i want my players today, a
mental fortress. they are coming me and asking for help on the mental side. chris: growing up west was interested in the human body. >> when i was 5 she got a gray's anatomy book. chris: why? >> i was fascinating by it. i think football it's the safest it has ever been. chris: got two super bowl rings, her dream now to win championships in both. >> to keep the players healthy and be successful as we can. it's a pinnacle and can't get better than that. chris: 15 medical professionals on the field and up in the stands watching to see if any player gets hurt and relaying
the information to her. that's it for today, have a great week and we will see you next fox news sunday. ♪ harvey levin: the objects people choose to keep in their home define who they are. this is... - always. welcome to my home. - so good to seeing you. i'm harvey levin, this is the story of one of the most successful and recognizable stars on tv, with ratings that even top oprah. - are we understanding each other? - yes. - you're an idiot! - ( laughter ) judy: and a scammer. harvey: but life wasn't always easy. her career was put on ice, thanks to her husband. he always viewed my job as a hobby. harvey: divorce led to a judgeship, and that opened a golden door. on your best day, you're not as smart as i am on my worst day. ( audience laughing ) harvey: she's fierce, but... are you a feminist? i don't think so. i don't think so.