tv Lou Dobbs Tonight FOX Business March 2, 2014 8:00pm-9:01pm EST
until then, i am matt welch and good go evening, everybody. russian president vladimir putin putting his military on hgh alert, ordering up to 1050,000 russian troops stationed along the ukrainian border, what russia calls battle-ready drills. moving to secure his black sea fleet stationed in sevastpol. russia's defense ministry claim% the movement is purely
coinciden coincidence. ththe obama administration responding with what uld be an ominous threat, secretary of state john kerry warned russia any military in ukraine would be a quote, grave mistake. >> russia needs to be very careful in the judgments that it makes going forward here. we are not looking for confrontation. but we are making it clear that every country should respect the territorial integrity here. the sovereignty of ukraine. russia said that it would do that and we think it's important that russia keeps its word. >> kerry's counterpart in russia fired right back. he warned the west against forcing any decisions upon the interim ukrainian government. >> translator: it's dangerous and counterproductive to force upon ukraine a choice based on
the principal you're either with us or ainst us. ukraine has to be a part of a global european family in the full meaning of the term. >> the crimea the scene of fierce clashes todaybetween pro and anti-russia protesters. the opposing groups were carrying russian and ukrainian flags. two people were killed in those demonstrations. and riots. more than 30 hoitalized. our first guest tonight says vladimir putin is close to achiing exactly what he wanted, drawing ukraine back into the russia sphere and it's not likely he's going t allow this prize to go without a fight. joining us retired marine corps lieutenant colonel bi cower.
as we're watching this unfold, we hav the secretary of state, kerry, making what i think is unexpectedly severe warning. your reaction to that warning from secretary kerry first? >> lou, i think that president putin just laughed off whatever secretary kerry had to say. i don't think the russians think for one minute that is administration is going to do anything at all if they make a move on ukraine. but having said, i think putin is a very smart guy, he's not going to do anything in the smart term that really damages his world standard. they did well in the olympics. there were no incidents. he's really the guy for solving the problem in syria. hifriendsin iran is moving forward with nuclear weapons. everything is on putin's side right now. i don't think he wants to damage that by using force at this time.
he's an old kgb operative as you foe, lou, he'll try to recreate what happened in georgia, back in 2008, russian troops went into two of the provinces of georgia because ethnic russians in there were being threatened by the orgia government. he'll try to pullhat off in the ukraine. >> his foreign minister stating the stage precisely withhat with his words. i thought, frankly, his use of the expression of the glob community, talking about ukraine's membership therein the european community, as if russia itself were at the head of that particular table. it was artful language and an artful tone. and president putin hasn't said a word even as president obama and the white house, secretary kerry are making some rather, well, bell koss statements, i'm
not certain this president can back it up. >> there's no military situation under which we would probably use forces. but putin doesn't want to damage that reputation and standing that he has in the world community by introducing those forces. nothing wng with having troops on the border as a demonstration of force. and reminder to those in the ukraine who are paying attention, that he in the past he has used force. over the long term, we'll see the ukraine divided into two distinct countries and two distinct region, one of them being crimea and the rest of the area down there, that's mostly ethnic russia and the other half of the ukraine, kiev, those who demonstrated to get the president out last week, tilting
toward the eu. >> turning to the afghanistan, your son is serving a fifth tour in afghanistan, general dempsey there, making some, i thought, exceptional remarks today, talking abouthe importance of u.s. forces in afghanistan, the strategic importance, even as his commander in chief, you know, halfway around the world, is saying get ready for the zero option, this is peculiar language for general dempsey, is it not? >> it is, lou. i feel for all of those men and women er there who are still engaged in the fight and they're living in this edge of uncertainty. particularly what general dempsey said about the possibility of afghan forces siding with taliban and turning on our people. these are difficult things for them to be heing. lot of talk in washington about when the new president gets in afghanistan, we'll be able to
keep our people there, a security arrangement, i'm not sure what thishite house wants. this president wants to get all of our people out of afghanistan. i think we're going to pay the penalty, lou, in the long term. by not having a presence in afghanist afghanistan. >> we thank you for being with us, bill cowan. tensions flaring in ukraine. pridentbama focusing on domestic policy and his agda, going to a restored train depot in minnesota. there to ask congress to update the nation's highway and raways. he talked his $800 billion stimulus package. >> this project symbolizes what's possible. it was renovated and expanded with the help of what we call tiger grants.
competitive grants that we created as part of the recovery act, also known as the stimulus, which actually worked, despite what everybody claims. >> incredible. five years later, still campaigning for approval on a stimulus package that is long spent. we're still waiting for that 5% unemployment rate that team obama promised along with the stimulus that was passed. too embarrassing incidents for federal and state lawmakers. a new rept says atf agents have lost track of guns over the past five years. dallas police recently engaged in a six-hour standoff outside of an apartment complex that ended when they learned no one had been at home. we're coming right back. standing up for the first amendment the fcc commissioner
hey, buddy? oh, y, flo. you want to see something cool? snapshot, from progressive. my insurance cpany tolme not to talk to people like you. you always do what they tell you? no... try it, and see what your good driving can save you. you don't even have to switch. unless you're scared i'm not scared, it's... you know we can still see you. no, you can't. pretty sure we can... try snapshot today -- no pressure.
the federal communications commission has suspended its controversial so-called studies of newsrooms in an effort to develop, quote, understanding, quote of perceived station bias. my next guest is one of the critics of that. and he's the man largery responsible for bringing this to the public's attention. he's fcc commission er pi.
i want to thank you for bringing this to the public's attention, because this is such an outrageous intrusion on the first -- you know, in newsrooms and on the first amendment. it's just incredible to me that the fcc would even think to undertake a so-called study of the way news is both developed and covered and the decisionmaking process therein. >> that's part of the concern i had when i looked into this how this study was being designed. going to newsom across the country and ask basic intrusive questions, how do you gather news and does your station have a bias? >> the idea of those questions being posed, it's not, of
course, unfamiliar to journalists to be asked those questions by scholars, studying journalism, studying the news business and trying to understand it better, but to have a government agency, in partular the fcc, just simply trample the first amendment by becoming involved in a newsroom, it's stunning, even by this administration's standards if i may put it that way? >> i think it's troubling to a lot of people not only because the government would be intruding into the newsroom, but also, because, as you know, lot of stations across the country hold licenses that are granted by the fcc. they may not view these questions as entirely voluntary, that's not something that we want to have in a country that cherishes the first amendment. >> what has been the reaction since your article? >> the op-ed in the wall street
journal, people from across the country have come together and said, we don't think that this is a good idea, everyone from lanny davis, on the left to people on the right, who say, we don't want the government in the newsroom. i find that heartening. people can unite that newsrooms should be able to decide what they want. >> and, the so-called study of newsrooms, and the news dismaking process, would be led by two organizations. the university of southern california and the university of wisconsin at madison, working in league with the gency, your reaction to that combination? >> and i think that's one of the concerns that people have esz pressed is the process by which the study was created and the
study implementation would be done the commissioners don't get to vote on these proposals or the structure of those proposals. i didn't have any input. that's one of the questions that people have moving forward. >> one of the questions would be then, who runs the commission if not the commissioner? >> traditionally the chairman's office decides on proposals like this, entering into contracts and deciding studies. as a general matter, it wou be good for all commissioners to have a say in this department. it would make us accountable. >> well, it's certainly it's a controversy and it is not going to go away because this study has been suspended it very much sounds like an effort on part of the chairman's office to simply wait until the temrature outside goes down a bit before going ahead and carrying out
exactly what they intended. >> one of the things that fcc announced on friday neither this study or any future study would involve or require media owners journalists to answer some of these intrusive questns. one thing i pointed out was the study has been suspended. it's not cancel. if there's going to be a study that it doesn't intrude those rights. >> we appreciate your time, commissioner. >> thank you for having me. the obama administration is big on enforcing just some laws and attorney general holder has some advice for state atrneys general. on the constitutional confusion of this administration. (vo) you are a business pro. seeker of the sublime.
you can separate runway diculousness... from fashionhat flies off the shelves. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose anyar in the aisle... and go. and only national isanked highest in car rental customer satisfaction by j.d. power. (natalie) ooooh, i like your style. (vo) so do we, business pro. so do we. go national. go like pro.
city of charlarlsba officials e insistin these detected levels remain well below of a public or environmental zard. a group of scientists is now estimating that the radiation from japan fukushima's plant could reach our west coast. scientists are being careful of what they're sayi about the radio activity move iing along h it. not obligated to defend laws that are discriminatory. i'm joined by two fox legal analysts. this is a peculiar thing for an attorney general to say. >> certainly when you have a federal attorney general telling states what to do. that's odd from the beginning.
what attorneys general, what they are u.s. attorneys, et cetera, what are they poised to do and elected to do in some capacities is to defend the constitution. >> that's a process that this administration has undertaken. it's selective. it's choosi what to choose. >> what he's saying, if you have a moral obligation to a law, that has a discriminatory bias, you can't uphold that. you would still have segregation, you still would have women couldn't vote. the states stepped in. those state officials stepped in and say, we can't abide by these laws they have to be challenged.
>> isn't that for the courts to be decide? you bring that up to the courts, they decide it and how do they decide it, both cases write briefs, both sides argue it. >> what am i missing here? what does do to the idea of separation of powers? also, the balance of power? when you have one attorney general saying to the states' attorneys general, you guys, that's how i feel about that law. what kind of attitude is that? >> lou, it's very clear. you as the federal government have to stay in your lane, you can't dictate what the states to do. that'shy there's so much objection to what eric holder is saying. look, if you have this discriminatory bias, the local rules are written that way --
>> what happened though -- but that will happen in the courts. they'll overturn these laws. i don't disagree in the sense that we move forward by bringing it to the courts. it's not the attorney general's place to make that decision. >> we have seen all democrats in six states, all democrats, refusing to defend bans on same-sex marriage, pennsylvania, illinois -- >> but i think it's more than that. they can say, look, we're going to look at a separate part of the constitution. this is an equal proction argument. you can't then target a group of individuals, u.s. citizens, and say, because you have a sexual orientation, you're not going to ha the same rights. >> i completely agree with you and the sentiment behind what you're saying. it's a process thing for me that's the courts to decide.
>> where does the momentum start? >> support the constitution. >> they have to follow and enforce the laws. >> when the laws are changed -- >> but lou, where is the momentum going to come in? >> i want the legislatures to step in. >> the state attorney generals don't have the standing to object the laws. >> really? first of all t momentum has already started in the legislative, in the populouopul. >> it's all very curious to me. i can't make hide or tails of this administration thinks.
but, we'examples of executive f, this is an administration that has actually executive action and ordersless frequently thhn certainly his predecember so, less than president clinton and others, but he's the first president to say the reason i'm doing this is to go around congress and constitution, how can the supreme court stomach of a president saying that and then carry out -- >> ultimately, if the challenge goes up there, the u.s. supreme court is going to say, there's checks and balances of power. you have the judiciary, legislative and executive branches.
>> the word you started out with, ultimate, meaning ultimately that's what will happen with the sreme court. ultimately it's going o take a loft time. >> even if we call for an expedited process. i love that word. >> expedited process. >> that doesn't happen in the judiciary. >> thank you. >> thank you. former goldn sachs trader and fraudster has a new job, will be teaching at the university of chicago this spring, congratulations, university of chicago. up next, a controversial but blockbuster new film "son of god." sold nearly 500,000 tickets, sold nearly 500,000 tickets, it's not even been released
up so we're up early. up late. so we'thinking up. gamehanging ideas, like this: dozens of tax free zones across new york state. move here. expand here. or start a new business here... and pay no taxes for 10 years. with new jobs, new opportunities and a new tax free plan. there's only one way for your business to go. up. find out if your business can quify at start-upny.com you are gonna need a wingman. and with my cash back, you are money. forget him. my airline miles will take your game worldwide. what i'm really looking for is -- i got two words for you -- re-wards. ♪ there's got to be better cards than this. [ male announcer ] there's a better way with creditcards.com. compare hundreds of cards from all the major banks to find the one that's right for you. it's simple. search, compare, and apply at creditcards.com. first round's on me.
my son. >> don't be afraid. everything is possible with god. >> a clip from the upcoming movie "son of god." it hits theaters this friday. it comes after last year's hugely successful history channel miniseries, the bible, also produced by our guests who join us now. "son of god" producers mark burnett and roma downey. good to have you both here. i want to start with old news and say congratulations on the
"the e." >> thank you. >> thank you so much. it's been a real labor of love for us as we brought this to the screen. >> now, "son of god," the idea of now moving from a miniseries on television to the theater, what inspired you, the success, the huge success of "the bible." >> no, we were filming in morocco, as the jesus narrative began to unfold, i said to mark, this is spectacular, it deserves to have a stand-alone experience. we began it there and we sh additional footage. thus was born "son of god." >> it stas this friday. is it a nationwide release? released in 3,001 screens.be >> that's nationwide, folks. >> last october, we have film
finished we didn't know if we could get it distributed at all. but 20th century fox saw it a said we want to put it o wide. >> put it out wide and 3100 is wide. at the same time, how many tickets -- i have numbers in front of me. i want to hear the numbers from you. how many ticke have been sold? >> there's a story this week that said 500,000 tickets bought in advance by church groups. some are buying every screen. >> i mean, that kind -- that assure you i would think that it's a smash hit and how long -- what does it take for you to call it a smash hit? >> i think that the fact that jesus is back on the big screen
is success, that we haven't seen him on the big scree for ten years and we haven't seen his whole life presented in this way for almost 50 years, l, since the greatest story is ever told. we know that there's a whole generation waiting to see this story brought to life. it's a beautiful, beautifully made movie, it's exciting and dramatic and epic on one hand and it's deeply intimate and personal on the other. >> you're right. we don't think about it in that context. after the bible, what's next? but for this to be ten years, everybody talking about what a secular society we have become, the interest in jesus, the interest in the bible, it's absolutely stunning, really, given sort of the tone of the times. >> lou, i think the tone of the times is a lot of the media, to
be honest with you, speaking as it's speaking for the nation. 100 million americans made it the number one series. in canada, the bible series beat hockey. >> that's incredible. >> that's a miracle. >> the fact is, this movie, starting with the miniseries, "the bible." there were a lot of controversy surrounding it. there were a lot of pushback. i'm talking about in the popular media until it hit and it's as if your immensed success with that moie, well, of course, it's going to be -- it was brilliant thing all along. >> what was greatt genated a much larger conversation and around water coolers and around kitchen tables, people are talking about faith and talking about god and we're hoping,
after friday, we'll be talking about jesus. >> mark, thank you for being with us. roma, we wish all of the success in the world. i would say it's ensured now. that has to feelood to have this advance box ofice. >> it's been a blessing. to do it together as husband and wife, yeah and we're stl speaking to each other. >> and you still look like -- >> we' best friends. and the backlash against this cartoon. they published this cartoon yesterday. al gore taking things to new extremes, imagine that, warning
that if we don't act to fight global warming the dust bowl will be coming right back to kansas. a new york times hatchet job on new jersey governor chris christie, why are they doing that? the a-team take up the reasons. that's next. announcer: where can an investor be a name and not a number? scotade. ron: i'm never alone with scottrade. i can always call or stop by my local office. they're nearby and ready to help. so when i have questions, i can talk to someone who knows exactly how i trade. because i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. that's why i'm with scottrade. announcer: ranked highest in investor satisfaction with self-directed services by j.d. power and associates.
lou: "the new york times" the new york times out with what should i ca it, a hatchet job article suggesting that new jersey governor christie is damaged political goods because of the bridgegate scandal, their evidence -- a christie town hall yesterday. the times that he was allegedly badgered and heck eled and ju assaulted by constituents. make up your own mind. does he look like he's under
durress here? >> if you go ho tonight, would you destroy all of your produce springsteen cds. he's not a friend of yours, governor. >> well, the -- the cds can be destroyed. i have it on my iphone now. >> the poor governor, so loyal to springsteen that he couldn't bring himself and such a politician, he didn't want to get in the way of that. christie's approval, an impressive 59% in new jersey. let me repeat that, 59% inew jersey. 65% before bridgegate. christie, by the way, doing pretty well in the money-raising depament as well. he took in a record $18 million since he took over as chairm of the rga.
let's find out what others think. joining us is the a-team kevin willia williamson and kaitlin burns. kaitlin, your thoughts on the new york times article, talking about the hostility and the first thing you se as we showed you there, our nstituents expresng some concern, that was really a very kind gesture? putting up with your enemy and christie was the top surrogate for a lot of candidates across the country because of his ability to fund-raise, bring in cash, promote the party, he's considered a big party leader. the cash flow that he's bringing in is a sign of that. >> yeah, he seems to are
preserved s stripes with the political party, fund-raing is any way to measure. kevin, what do you think? the times is being -- >> the times is being the times. sign of times, that $18 million figure, whether that was a lot of money or not. i can remember when $18 million used to be a lot of money. we're talng about trillions all the time. it's about president christie. people in new jersey don't care very much about it. it's not having much affect on his role at the rga ann you know, he's always been a fairly good guy at fund-raising. about shaking people down for money. and i don't think it -- he's not going to break his stride. >> democrats have been hammering christie for you know like months now. i wonder if that helps his cause among the base. >> that's wonderful point,
caitlin, there's an inverse corra corraly. here. >> well, ted strickland, the former governor of ohio, i mean, he went after -- he went after the good governor from new jersey tooth and basically just tried to eviscerate him. the result as you see is 59% approval rating. pretty strong stuff. iant to talk to the former number two at the cia, mike morrell, now congress wants him back. the talking points on benghazi, that lead. what do you think? is this going to be a big deal or is this part of an endless process of nonsense that is in the end a stone wall, highly
effective stonewall by this administration in. >> it should be a big deal because the american public is not geographically sophisticated enough to know what benghazi is. serious things like this, whatever happened in ben e gassi and lying to congress about something like this is a fairly serious crime. it's not going to capture the public imagination. >> and particularly, with the national liberal media not ca y carrying out its traditional rule in oversight, as the fourth estate and a watchdog. >> congress will certa be taking this up throughout the year, i mean, this is a top issue for house republicans, in a midterm elections, and with perhaps hillary clinton being on the ticket in 2016, in recent
public polling shows that the interest in this issue is waning. >> 66% say they want congress to continue to investigate benghazi in a fox news poll. a divide between the accomplishment and the tea party, a divide at seems to be widening rather quickly and without a lot of notice at least to this point between the business elites, the business roundtable, the chamber of congress and conservatives, this isstarting to look a big deal. what do you think? >> the problem with capitalism is capitalists is what has been say. the chamber of congress wing of the conservative party, they want things that aren't good for the public but also things that
aren't good for the republican party. if the republicans cave in on the amnesty table they're going to get blood bath. one of the few times when the sort of angry populous energy happens to be on the right side of an issue. i can't see what's in it for the republiccns in the long term, other than a few extra bucks from the chamber of congress gu. >> and if you know tea party republicans in the house are the more consecutive republicans in the house don't view thatas their base, their constituents. after 2010, we learned a lot of the money came from these kind of grassroot organizations and smallerer, not the wall street types they don't see that as the base there. >> and, without, you know, aski asking, not too far into the
crystal ball, is there any sense that the republican party is changing, embracing the middle class, focusing on small business rather than being drn to the money that flows from u.s. multinationals? >> you hear this from people like ted cruz. rand paul is actually pretty good at unctioning that big business isn't your friend if you believe in big markets. on things like wage stagnation, something that republicans don't want to talk about but it's real issue to be dealt with. so, i think therepublicans are smart, which is saying if the republicans are smart, you can normally end the sentencethere.
if some of them are smart, they'll start talking about this. >> i think we're going to see some of the continuation of these messaging bills that have come out of the republican conference. last year they passed a bill targeted towards working mothers. we'll see more of that knowing that they have to refine their messaging towards that group and especially in an election year. >> caitl, thank you very much. caitlin and kevin williamson, thank you. up next, my commentary on,
our intelligence agencies surveillance activities, i trust the men and women who serve this nation in our defense department and their sacrife that keeps our nation free and safe should be respected by all and i trust not at all those who lack the courage to at least quietly question why commercial enterprises are allowed to violate our private lives, our personal information, our privacy if you will, and usually with a comment let alone criticism, our cell phones, our pcs, macs and tablets and all, tell comes. our names are synonymousour num.
we're tracked across the internet wherever we go. apple's i-beacon can track our movement and all that you spend your money on. the dating app tinderuffere a secuty breach cently according to slate magazine, that breach allowed to some pinpoint a user's location, we're told that breaches that been fixed. companies like google, facebook and of course others and streaming devices, we're under constant surveillance for purely commercial purposes but with no guarantee that our privacy will or can be protected. the national liberal media in some opportunist, i would say on capitol hill, have chosen to
ignore the threat of commercial violations of our privacy and personal information and instead, burden further those whoprotect our national interest, which is after all under civilian leadership and congressional oversight and to burden them with even more hearings, more investigations, while the questions that need answers that should be directed in my opinion to the country's biggest technology companies, it would require far more counsel i believe to demand answers from those powerful corporations than those agencies serving our interests. did i mention as wellnder the president's command? let's turn to some of your thoughts. bud in colorado wrote in to say about obamacare -- the republicans should cease
referring to the affordable care act as obamacare and call it what it's really is -- robert in washington wrote -- if we hear obama "if you like your constitution, you can keep your constitution, then god help us all. and riy -- i wonder ho our government would feel about putting a reporter in every government office? that's my favorite comment, by the way, of the month. keep your comments coming. we love hearing from you. mail me at lou. follow us on twitter. or go to our facebook page. reminder, we're giving away
copies of my book here on the broadcast. that's it forou dobbs tonight. have a great weekend. good night from new york. (voseeker of the sublime.ro. you can separate runway diculousness... from fashionhat flies off the shelves. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle... and go. and only national isanked highest in car rental customer satisfaction by j.d. power. (natalie) ooooh, i like your style. (vo) so do we, business pro. so do we. go national. go like pro. iwe don't back down. we only know one direction: up so we' up early. up late. thinking up game-changing ideas, like this: dozens of tax free zones across new york state. move here. expand here. or start a new business here... and pay no taxes for 10 years.