tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News February 23, 2020 12:00pm-1:00pm PST
next fox news sunday. ♪ >> we won the new hampshire primary. [cheers and applause] >> and according to 3 networks in the ap we have now won the nevada caucus. [cheers and applause] paul: welcome to the journal editorial report, i'm paul gigot, bernie sanders cementing front-runner status yesterday with a decisive win in the nevada caucuses with the final yet to be reported, the vermont senator's lead is more than double of nearest rival joe
biden with former vice president nevertheless touting yesterday's second place finish as the beginning of his campaign comeback. >> we will win in south carolina. [cheers and applause] >> and then super tuesday, we are on our way. [cheers and applause] paul: let's bring in our distinguished panel, wall street journal columnist deputy editor dan henninger, columnist kim strassel and editorial board member kyle peterson. so, kim, i think the conventional wisdom is there's no denying that bernie sanders is now the front runner but the question i guess i have is how close is he to being unstoppable on the way to the nomination? >> well, when i look at the results, paul, what i see from them is that, yes, no doubt bernie had a good night and especially if you look at the breath of his win in terms of different groups he did well, unions, young people, latinos.
but what you also see from this there's still a demand among voters for a nonbernie candidate as it were and if you take joe biden and pete buttigieg whose attacks on bernie have been getting sharper in terms of medicare for all, you know, they come up with about the same vote total he does, so does one of them use this to break out in south carolina, i think it was also a good night for joe biden in that regard. paul: well, kim, bernie had been under 30% in the first two races, this time he bumped up to at least mid-40's by the partial results, that means -- it looks higher than they thought. >> absolutely, this was a big night especially the question out there that the candidates have been making is who can appeal to the broad base of the democratic electorship and there's a lot of different pieces to that and bernie did well in all of those pieces and you see him begin to go consolidate some support, my
only point is he hasn't broken 50 yet and there's clearly democrats out there who still want an alternative. paul: dan, are democrats paying a price for not having attacked bernie sanders because in the last debate they all paid attention to bloomberg, mike bloomberg and bernie kind of got a free pass? >> yeah, i think they are beginning to pay a big price for not doing that at this point, i mean, bernie sanders is a self-declared socialist, all right, he made that clear in victory speech in nevada on saturday night. and they have tiptoed around it because they've been a little bit skeptical about attacking the hard 30% progressive base that he has and pete buttigieg perhaps has gone as far as anyone in trying to go after him but maybe a little late in the game and as kim is suggesting the burden now is falling, yes, on the moderate candidates, i think it's really falling on moderate democratic voters. i mean, they realized what's going on and they've got to decide are they just going to vote for amy klobuchar, because
i think a woman should be president or do they have to start calculating who among these four including michael bloomberg could best compete with bernie sanders. paul: do you agree with kim that job has something of a comeback, something of a comeback. >> there's evidence to support that, the nonbernie alternative is buttigieg. pete buttigieg getting about 2% of african-american voters so now the race is going to south carolina, you can't win south carolina with 2% of black voters and that's joe biden's strength and if he comes back and win there, i'm the one who can take on bernie. paul: this was a blow to pete buttigieg because he needed to stay ahead of biden to have biden basically say, look, i'm going to drop out, now i think
biden is saying to buttigieg, look, i'm back in the game and you're not going to do very well with african american voters in south carolina, so this gets a chance at least in my view that biden could become the alternative to bernie. >> right, buttigieg replied, i got second in new hampshire and basically won. paul: that was last week. [laughter] >> time goes fast, that's the problem, all of the candidates have a story they can tell for why they are staying in the race, amy klobuchar was saying that we exceeded expectations. her state of minnesota is super tuesday state and seems unlikely she will drop before then. elizabeth warren is saying she's still in it and raised $9 million since the last debate on wednesday. so she's got a reason to stay in and voters, the moderate voters who don't want bernie, they seem to have diverging opinions on who is the better alternative and it's hard to make a collective move. paul: kim, what do you make of
biden's line, that's harshest he has gotten to bernie sanders calling him a socialist, the contrast between joe biden and bernie sanders, sanders hit agenda, again and again and biden was we are coming back and going to south carolina and not much about the agenda. >> yeah, well, this is the missed opportunity of all of these guys. i mean, they're going after bernie for socialism but not willing to actually tear apart his agenda on stage, the closest we got in the last debate was mike bloomberg ridiculing some of the policies and there's an opportunity for candidate as you were saying to dan to go straight after sanders on what he's proposing and joe biden needs to be making the contrast with his own policies, it's not enough, joe, he's been running so much saying, look, i was barack obama's vice president, his wing man, just as if by
association he is entitled to this mantle but he has to fight harder for his agenda. paul: all right, thank you all, when we come back as bernie sanders solidifies status sounding alarm with one reporter playing requester contested democratic convention. >> i worry that we may be very well be nominating somebody who cannot win in november. n's poin, so people are gonna look at my sign. switch to progressive and you can save hundreds. you know, like the sign says.
switch to progressive and you can save hundreds. car vending machines and buying a car 100% online.vented now we've created a brand new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana.
>> before we rush to nominate senator sanders in our one shot to take on this president, let us take a sobber look at what is at stake for our party, for our values and for those with the most to lose. paul: fellow 2020 democrats sounding the alarm as bernie sanders edges closer to the nomination, report this week says mike bloomberg is privately lobbying democratic party officials and donors to throw
their support behind him in the event of a contested national convention. let's bring in marie harf fox news contributor, good to see you. >> good to see you too. paul: how big a front runner is bernie sanders, is he more than 50% chance of getting the nomination? >> possibly a little bit more than that and the biggest reason i say that is even though there have been a few number of delegates awarded, he has the momentum, a lot of folks still in the race trying to claim the bernie mantle, bloomberg has zero delegates, all the other folks are trying to say i'm the one who can take on bernie, pete is saying that, elizabeth warren is saying that but they are splitting the antibernie vote right now. paul: in reverse is just exactly what happened to the republicans with donald trump. >> exactly. paul: it is really, really
something to see it happen and republicans are saying now you know what it was like for us. [laughter] >> paul, i thought the same thing over the past few days and you have democrats stop sanders movement sort of like we had the never trumpers. paul: right. >> every time you and i have seen an establishment and a party try and interfere and tilt the balance one way or the other it always ends up backfiring. paul: here is a mystery to me, why hasn't bernie had more criticism from his competitors? seems like they've treated him for kid gloves for the most part, there's been criticism about medicare for all and cost too much but nothing like more mike bloomberg last week? >> they really took on michael bloomberg, someone with zero delegates who isn't even on -- wasn't on the ballot yesterday in nevada and they really haven't trained their fire except pete buttigieg, you
played the clip last night in his speech he's trying to draw the contrast but i think maybe in south carolina, in the debate this week we may see some of those other folks training their fire on bernie because there's a lot you can attack, there's a lot you can say both about his policies and his electability, the role he would play and some people willing to make the claims in interviews or in fundraising emails but they haven't done it to his face, maybe they will this week, i will be watching out for that. paul: they almost have to do that, does joe biden have to win south carolina now in your view next saturday? >> he either has to win or get a very, very close second, i was actually encouraged by how well he did yesterday, but he does have to do well in south carolina, one, because he needs momentum heading into super tuesday when michael bloomberg is on the ballot and 2, just to keep raising money, a lot of the campaigns are feeling pressure from not having enough money, you may see someone like amy klobuchar have to drop out because of that, so that's one of the reasons i think he needs
to do well, the interesting thing, one of the most interesting things, paul, yesterday about nevada is that bernie sanders actually got a large of the latino vote and larger share of the black shots than people thought he could, that's part of biden's argument, he's the one that can bring together the democratic base, bernie sanders did that yesterday. paul: who do you think among the nonbernie sanders competitors, who is likely to emerge to take him on one-on-one or are we going to see it get down to one-on-one? >> i'm really not sure, i hate to make a prediction right now because it feels so fluid but if
i had to bet, if i was out in vegas yesterday with the rest of the folks at the caucus i would probably bet on michael bloomberg because he has the money to stay in the race -- helped take back democrats the majority of the house in 2018. he has built a base that can take him far as alternative to bernie. paul: the money he would be advertising to cast doubt on it. seems to me that if he's going to emerge as alternative he has to number 1 race game in the game in debates and score delegates and maybe a lot of delegates on super tuesday to show that he can actually do well in primary. >> that's right, he needs to do well in super tuesday, he saved all of his momentum or money for super tuesday, betting on the fact that more people in those states would watch his ads than would probably watch the debate, he needs to do well in this debate because he did atrociously last week but he needs a better answer for some of the things, some of the
issues that are making moderate democrats a little nervous, whether it's the women issues, the things he said, whether it's stop and frisk, whether long-time support for republican candidates as recently as 2016. paul: yeah, you started the list right there. >> i could keep going. paul: i know. thanks for coming, appreciate it. >> thank you, i'm happy to. paul: when we come back mike bloomberg takes a beating on first turn on debate stage as democratic rivals go on the attack, so can he regain footing on tuesday's night rematch in south carolina? now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.
and my side super soft? yes! with the sleep number 360 smart bed, on sale now, you can both adjust your comfort with your sleep number setting. but can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both comfortable. and snoring? no problem. ...and done. so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise... prove. don't miss the final days of the ultimate sleep number event. save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus 0% interest for 24 months on all smart beds. ends sunday. with our moving and storage solutions. pack what you want, we store it for as long as you want. then, we deliver it where you want, so whether you need to move or store your things, pods is here to help you with flexible moving and storage solutions.
of supporting racist policies like redlining and stop and frisk. >> mike bloomberg owns more wealth than the bottom 125 million americans. that's wrong, that's immoral. paul: dan, those were the nicer moments in that debate. [laughter] paul: so what does mike bloomberg have to do, everybody agrees he botched it, what does he have to do to make a comeback? >> well, first of all, tuesday night he does have to step up his game on the debate stage in south carolina, no question about it. but, again, mike bloomberg has hundreds of millions of dollars that he has already spent and i think what he has to do is give democratic voters a reason to understand why he is running, what is he running for, like the rest of them, he's running to be president, his ads suggest he wants to defeat donald trump, joe biden says that's why he got into the race because trump had to be stopped, look, we are in a democratic primary, they all
want to stop trump and somehow mike bloomberg has got to define himself more clearly as the alternative to bernie sanders and i think a lot of the tens of millions he's been spending attacking donald trump have to be redirected at bernie sanders and in a very clear way. paul: rather than differentiate himself on policies, seems to be differentiation is i have the money to beat trump and i'm a good manager, successful mayor, i can get things done, he's not trying to differentiate himself on policy that i could tell, he's me too tax proposal, me too green new deal proposal, all of that stuff. >> yeah, we were led to understand that the one of the reasons bloomberg was getting in is he thought nobody under current rules would get enough delegates to secure the nomination, there would be to milwaukee and contested nomination and he would end up with the nomination there. but what reason is he giving to democratic voters to think they should give the nomination to him when bernie sanders is the
one who is out there accumulating delegates, he's the one who is looking like he might be able to contest the presidency against donald trump. paul: listen to bernie sanders as he makes the moral case for socialism, i am for the working person, the little guy, time and again, everything, health care, whatever, mike bloomberg makes a case, i was successful businessman, i'm a manager, trust me. i don't think that beat sanders. >> i agree, though, even though he's not willing to do that because of how he reads the progressive status of the democratic party, he could at least drive up sanders' negative -- he could find nice things that bernie sanders has said over the years about the government of venezuela and run those on super tuesday states, i agree with dan. [laughter] paul: that's not a debate issue, those are ads, right, i guess you could bring it up in the debate too. >> that's the fight he needs to pick, bernie sanders is leading in the polling in a lot of super tuesday states and in several of them he won in 2016, so that's
the fight that -- that mike bloomberg needs to make, the challenge he's running against the clock and early voting makes make it more unpredictable at least about 2 million votes in super tuesday states that have been cast and those will be mailed in over coming weeks too. so if bloomberg is going to dethrone bernie, he has to move fast. paul: the argument i'm sure is being made, kim, and the bloomberg camp counter to kyle, if we do that that's a kamakazi play, we will damage sanders but that will help biden, it won't help bloomberg, do you think that's right or no? >> no. i don't think that's right, look, you just made a really important point, you said bernie is making the moral case, mike bloomberg needs to be making the moral case against socialism and he needs to be out there making it clear that he is the alternative for all of these democrats who still have deep
reservations against bernie sanders and if he's going to come out and just look like everyone else, that's not going to help him get anywhere. >> one other point about this debate, yes, mike has to do this but it looks pretty clear that pete buttigieg is going to come out there and do that, i mean, he was saturday night, he was criticizing bernie and pete is good at this sort of thing and if he works himself up into offensive against bernie sanders, mike is going to be standing over at the end of the debate looking like -- paul: kim, amy klobuchar or elizabeth warren have any justification in your view for staying in the race or are they just kind of waiting for the eni -- inevitable? >> they won't and they will stay in the race. [laughter] >> again, the way democrats have set up their primary with proportional delegates, kyle mentioned earlier that amy klobuchar, minnesota is in the mix of super tuesday, elizabeth warren just got a lot of money
and so they are going to stay through south carolina even if neither of them do particularly well and see if they can't have a hail mary, i don't see how the -- that gets the party anywhere, but i think that the crowd we have at the moment, we will be seeing them and tom steyer too all the way into march. paul: all right, thank you, kim, still ahead president trump admitting that he makes his attorney general's job more difficult, bill barr waved an exit, we will talk about what his departure would mean for the doj and the president.
it's better to be safe than cash back sorry. alright, good talk. your room smells. it's weird, i don't know what that is. get cash back on thousands of brands that you love. cash back. rack it up with rakuten. ♪ ♪ >> i do make his job harder, i do agree with that i think that's true, he's a very straight shooter, we have a great attorney general and he's working very hard. the attorney general is a man with incredible integrity. just so you understand, i chose not to be involved, i'm allowed to be totally involved. i'm actually i guess the chief law enforcement officer of the country. paul: that was president trump this week acknowledging that his tweets make attorney general william barr's job more difficult while asserting his right to intervene in justice department matters, the attorney general has reportedly considered quitting his post as the president continues to
comment on justice cases including that of long-time ally roger stone who was sentenced thursday to 40 months in prison, more than 2,000 former justice department employees signed a public letter this week urging barr to resign after the department intervened in the case, triggering accusations of political interference. michael served as 81st attorney general of the united states, welcome judge, good to see you. >> good to be here. paul: the letter from the former justice department officials, what do you make of the -- of that as -- as state? >> i make nonsense of it which is exactly what it is, it's virtual signaling without the virtue, the attorney general was entirely not only within his right, he didn't intervene in the case, the justice department case. [laughter] paul: well, officials intervene in the line sentencing memo but
line prosecutors. >> well, other career officials came to the conclusion he did number 1, and number 2, it is entirely appropriate particularly in a politically fraud case for the attorney general to involve himself. i involved myself in the blagojecich case. paul: that's what you are paid. >> i have the big salary and the notion that he was doing something improper is ridiculous arguing the sentencing guidelines which are not binding but nonetheless suggest a range of sentence, they were arguing in completely unrealistic way and the attorney general feels like that also, the normal sentence for a case of this sort that roger stone committed was the sentence that the judge ultimately imposed. they recommended 7 to 9 years because he had threatened a witness, even that witness didn't take the threat seriously and said so on the record.
and for them to play the sentencing guidelines like a pinball machine to see how many times they can ring the bell is pretty abusive and he stepped in. also it may very well be if that recommendation stood that would sort of tend to put the judge in a -- in a box publicly which is not a proper, again, it's not a proper function for the justice department. paul: well 40 months were closer to the recommendation that the attorney general and the other -- >> precisely. paul: so vindication in a sense for -- >> correct. paul: now, the president criticizing the judge in the case, is that something that you think is proper and advisable? >> it's -- look, he's within his rights but but i don't think it's either proper or advisable, he's technically correct that he's the chief law enforcement officer of country because he's in charge of the executive branch but what that means is
he's just as obligated as anybody further down to refrain from doing things and saying things that course of the case and right to a fair trial and if he does nonetheless, do that, the courts will step in and correct the imbalance even to the point of dismissing charges. so that's -- that's one problem for him. another problem is that when he makes recommendations or suggestions or urging different positions for the justice department to take in pending cases, that simply suggests that -- that simply undermines the authority of the attorney general and makes him look like the tool of the president, so that he's disinclined to reach even correct decisions that because they coincide with the president's views, the stone case is a perfect illustration, the president said that one of the jurors in the case, tamika
hardt, the forewoman of the jury, was tainted, actually he's right about that, she had posts on social media that commented not only on the president but also on people around him and commented on the case, there's a very good -- >> jurors are advised against that flat out. >> well, when jurors are screened, they are screened for bias, they have to fill out a questionnaire, there were at least 4 questions on the questionnaire that would have called for her to disclose those postings and they were made before the trial. paul: so if the president is right why is it a problem to speak up? >> because the justice department then has to take a position and if they take a position consistent with what he spoke up about, then it will look as if they are following his orders, so they may hang back, in a case like this, it's conceivable that the justice department to consider confessing error, in other words, add midding -- admitting that she was tainted and i doubt
that they will do in this case because the president already weighed in. paul: so what would be the grounds for the attorney general quitting, believing that he could not run department with credibility because of the president's comments? >> whatever grounds obviously the ag thinks are -- are sufficient, i hope and pray that he doesn't, because nobody else around that can do the kind of job that he's doing, he's a person of impeccable integrity, he fears nothing and no one, and he's made that entirely clear and i fervently hope he stays in the position. paul: you don't think the president can find anybody better? >> inconceivable. paul: the thing i like about barr he's taking up responsibility, i'm the guy, you may disagree with me but i'm going to be responsible for these decisions. >> precisely, he will testify before the house judiciary
committee on march 31, i can't wait for that. [laughter] >> i really can't, they can sell tickets and we -- we pay for a lot of the national debt. paul: all right, judge mukasey, thank you for being here, appreciate it. high-profile pardons and commutations and president trump suggests that one more may be in the upping (janine) i used to be a little cranky. dealing with our finances really haunted me. thankfully, i got quickbooks, and a live bookkeeper's helping customize it for our business.
(live bookkeeper) you're all set up! (janine) great! (vo) get set up right with a live bookkeeper with intuit quickbooks. eh, not enough fiber- chocolate would be good- snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar. glucerna. everyday progress while helping you manage your blood sugar. and i like to question your i'm yoevery move.n law. like this left turn. it's the next one. you always drive this slow? how did you make someone i love? that must be why you're always so late. i do not speed. and that's saving me cash with drivewise. my son, he did say that you were the safe option. and that's the nicest thing you ever said to me. so get allstate. stop bossing. where good drivers save 40% for avoiding mayhem, like me. this is my son's favorite color, you should try it. [mayhem] you always drive like an old lady? [tina] you're an old lady. >i spend a lot of time sin my truck.y? it's my livelihood. ♪ rock music >> man: so i'm not taking any chances when something happens to it.
so when my windshield cracked... my friend recommended safelite autoglass. >> tech: hi, i'm adrian. >> man: thanks for coming. >> tech: oh, no problem. >> tech: check it out. >> man: yeah. they came right to me, with expert service where i needed it. that's service i can trust... no matter what i'm hauling. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
♪ ♪ >> what happened to him is unbelievable. they say he lied but other people lie too, just to mention comey lied. [laughter] >> mccabe lied. go to watch the press and watch it closely and at some point i will make a determination but roger stone and everybody has to be treated fairly. >> president trump reacting thursday to the sentencing of roger stone and suggesting a
pardon may be in his future, the president coming under fire this week for some other high-profile pardons and commutations including milken and former illinois governor rod blagojevich, kyle, the accusation, the criticism of the pardons is they under mine the rule of law, what do you think? >> it's pretty clear in the law that the president has the right to do this, he has the power to do, broaden authority under the constitution. the bigger question is whether it's a smart thing to do or wise thing to do and i think that cuts both ways, i mean, on one hand, trump is someone who does what he wants to do without thinking of the consequences, the journal has been calling for clemency for michael milken. paul: full pardon. >> a lot of republicans -- paul: that was a pardon too. >> there's a plus side there
too, it looks like there's a perception that the way to get a pardon now is to get somebody famous if you know joe montana, you know a good way to get on the president's ear and in the middle of presidential campaign where this is a corrupt administration, i think that can look swampy to some people. paul: it's not pardon per se. how the pardons came about outside of doj process, there are thousands of every day joes who have cases pending in justice department and independent voters that if you're joe montana you can get a case heard faster going to president trump. paul: kim, i cheered the pardon for michael milken. i thought it was injustice at a time when wall street was very much in the dock and they wanted
a big figure and milken was certainly one and i was glad to see that result, but do you agree with kyle on the appearance, the process by which these pardons are granted? >> so i pushed back on that a little bit, if you go back to full history of pardons by presidents, lots of them are controversial and usually those controversial ones are because they have gone to well-known people and the process by which those well-known people have got access to the presidency, they don't always go through the normal department of justice process. i see kyle's point that trump's critics will use this to suggest that this is more of trump behaving in a way that other presidents haven't, but it's not, fundamentally the way this is rolled, the way a lot of presidential pardons roland i think the ultimate outcome should be do you agree or not with who was pardoned and obviously in cases like milken
and libby this was the right thing to do. >> in the context let's talk about roger stone's sentence, this was supposedly the subject of controversy over the sentencing guidelines, all right, well, it wasn't all that long ago when federal judges didn't have much discretion in the way they handed down sentences and a lot of judges felt like they were being force today put people put in jail for long times for drug and they created compliance, algorithm, you ask a lot of questions, you pour it through the software, you come out with a range of possible sentences, supposedly this is going to give the judge more discretion, well, bill barr got involved in the process where he was going to exercise some judgment and prudence about the direction this was going, and the rule of law is always subject to some degree of judgment, prosecutors have something called prosecutor aerial discretion, they make judgments about how far they will go with prosecution, that has been a problem recently,
then you the problem of prosecutorial they push power they have too far. the political system has a role here in trying to lean on the criminal justice system and make them use judgment in a lot of the cases rather than simply have prescription on how you do things. paul: the pardon power to make amends for cases that were mistaken. kim, before we go, i want to ask you briefly, what about bill barr, if he did quit, resign, what would the damage be to the -- the administration and the president? >> well, it's hard to actually even state what damage there would be, look, bill barr has come in and uniquely situated to do something which is to try to clean house at the department of justice, that's why he took this job because he basically needs the job like he needs a hole in the head, the idea behind this is you go back and if you get rid of bill barr, you get rid of the guy who has credibility to
have a durham investigation and to actually present the results of these findings to the public and try to restore some faith in this process. i can't think of really anyone else who would be in that position to do it. paul: that's the investigation into the origins of the counterterror investigation against the president, counterintelligence on president's campaign in 2016. when we come back the u.s. reaches agreement with the taliban that could pave the way to permanent peace deal, general jack keane on the prospects of ending america's longest war next.
which of your devices are protected by daily security updates? daily security updates... daily? i don't know. the only thing... i'm struggling with this. some providers you have to manually download updates to each device. comcast business securityedge updates every 10 minutes to help keep your connected devices protected
make a deal, we want to make a deal. i think it's going to work out, we will see. paul: president trump earlier today expressing optimism that afghanistan peace deal is near, secretary of state mike pompeo announced friday that the u.s. and the taliban had reached the 7-day reduction in violence agreement paving the way for a peace accord that could end america's longest war. that deal is set to be signed on february 29 in qatar. let's bring in retired four-star general jack keane, fox news senior strategic analyst, general, great to see you again. what do you make of this deal? how good is it? >> well, the first thing here, reduction in violence, ambiguous term to begin with. it's not a cease fire. it's only 7 days. it's not a month or 90 days and what you would expect. the taliban didn't want a cease fire because they got hardliners that can't hold to it and don't
want to have any length to it and some won't go back to battlefield. what do we really have here? i think the reduction of violence has a good chance to succeed because of ambiguity surrounding that. it is wintertime in afghanistan, so in about a week or so we will see another agreement signed, which means that they'll be negotiations beginning between the afghan government and others in afghanistan and the taliban. that's a big deal, paul. that's not something that's happened before. paul: taliban has always refuse today deal with the government. >> they don't want to deal with them. this much i do know about the taliban and i'm comfortable saying this. the taliban will say anything and do anything with the single purpose in mind to get the united states troops out of afghanistan because once they believe they've achieved that, they can have their way with the government and security forces. that is where they're at in terms of strategic sentence of
this. negotiations themselves are tough, why is that? because one, we have a constitutional democracy for elections and nonetheless democracy. paul: right. >> the taliban don't want to participate in that split call process. 85% of the people reject taliban, most unpopular and they know they can't get into that process. there's big issues here that are going to keep us, keep them apart for months as this thing drags out. paul: meanwhile our troops will stay there. we are going down i gather to 8600 troops which generals on the ground believe are adequate to monitor negotiations and to prevent the taliban from -- from moving against the government. >> that's absolutely right. one of our best ever commanders is in afghanistan, been there for a couple of years, general scott miller.
he was actually going to reduce the forces to this number anyway because he believes he has more forces to do the mission than what's required. so -- but he was going to wait until obviously negotiations take place and fold underneath negotiations, yes, his condition is base. this is why the military is signing up for this and dod and by that i mean is they don't go any further below 8600 unless there's a permanent cease fire and peace -- a final peace settlement, not at the beginning of negotiations but a final peace settlement where the two parties agree to participate in a political process. paul: general, i think a lot of our viewers will say, you know, 19 years like the president said, that's just too long, we are police force. why don't we just pull out? what is the u.s. national interest here in staying under the terms that you've described? >> yeah, i share that frustration. i did testimony a week or so
ago, many senators, democrats and republicans have that frustration. here is the issue, you put the finger on it. 19 years we have prevented a reattack from afghanistan and the al-qaeda, we have covert bases there from which we keep our foot on the throat of the al-qaeda who are in pakistan, we know for a fact why are they so close, because the united states pulls out they will come right back into pakistan and the american people will be threatened again. this is in u.s. national interest. small force to take -- to do that to guaranty the security of the american people. i fundamentally believe it's worth that cause. paul: it's not just al-qaeda but isis. islamic state has now some foothold too. >> sadly to say isis has grown in afghanistan to a point where the taliban, if they were in control, they know full well they can't stop them. they can't take them out. so we focus on isis and we focus on taliban leadership right now and certainly we will focus on
al-qaeda if they regained a presence there. paul: i guess the question i have about the taliban, a good chunk of them don't want to negotiate at all, they want to keep using military force, aren't they likely to just negotiate on the one hand and then keep killing afghans on the other? >> that is a likely possibility. that's indisputable because of the division that's in the taliban. they are not a monolithic organization by any stretch. they are certainly not homogenous at all. their ultimate goal is to take control of afghanistan and we have to realize where they are truly heading with this. now, i think that the concern many of us have and let's be frank about it, is negotiations break down and process falls apart and taking months and months to do it, doesn't look like there's any progress being made, the president -- because he's frustrated himself, is capable of saying pull the plug
♪ ♪ paul: time now for hits and misses of the week. kim, start us off. >> so, paul, this is a hit to the four democrats in the virginia state senate who this week threw up a stop sign to governor ralph northam's extreme anti-gun agenda. the legislature has largely waived through that agenda, but it had enormous voter backlash, said no to an assault weapons ban and a ban on certain magazines. this is a warning to the national democrats who have gone all in on the anti-gun agenda. the voters are not where they think they are. paul: all right, kyle. >> i will give a hit to computer scientist who pioneered the copy/paste function back in the 1970s.
he died last week at the age of 74, and the news caught my attention because i use that about 5,000 times a day -- [laughter] just the tip of a hat to a guy whose brilliance made the rest of our lives easier. paul: have i told you we're going to have a typewriter day? [laughter] dan. >> i hope not. [laughter] paul, i am giving a mega-miss to russia meddling, not in our elections which is bad enough, but for its massive cyber attack last october on the independent state of georgia. both secretary of state mike pompeo and the british foreign minister this week condemned that attack which they identified conclusively. they were joined by the czech republic and the baltic states which are under constant threat of these kinds of psych err attack -- cyber attacks. it's not just about our elections, it's about trying to destabilize any country that's favorable to the united states. paul: all right, thank you all. and if you have your own hit or miss, be sure to tweet it to us.
that's it for this week's show. thanks to all of you for watching. i'm paul gigot, hope to see you right here next week. ♪ ♪ eric: president trump right now is headed to india. it is his first presidential visit to what is the world's largest dem cat. and topping -- democracy. and topping the agenda, a potential trade deal along with a massive rally at the world's largest cricket stadium and a challenge for the commander in chief, no steak on this visit. prime minister modi, of course, is a vegetarian. [laughter] >> me too! eric: likes to have his steak with ketchup, hello, everyone, i'm eric