tv Special Report With Bret Baier FOX News February 8, 2017 1:00am-2:01am PST
o'reilly. >> this is a fox news alert. hearing set to begin any minute now over president trump's order. i am bill hemmer in for bret baier. san francisco is the venue, ninth circuit court of appeals. both sides are given 30 minutes to argue and then a decision by a 3-judge panel may come later tonight or later this week. we have team fox coverage. anna napolitano in new york on the merits of the case. dan springer in seattle, but we begin with chief white house correspondent john roberts and how they trump administration is making its case tonight. good evening to you. >> good evening to you. tonight's hearing will not be to
determine the constitutionality of the presidents extreme vetting program. what's at stake tonight is whether the president can keep that program in effect while the constitutional case goes forwar forward. talking line order with members of the sheriffs association this morning, president trump expressed frustration that he is in a legal battle at all. >> i actually can't believe we are having to fight to protect the security in a court system to protect the security of our nation. i can't believe it. >> a career attorney will argue there is no fight over the president's power to address national security, that he has "expressed statutory authority to suspend any class of aliens to protect the national interest." that authority, the doj and says, derives from the 1952 immigration and nationality act which states "whatever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the united states would be detrimental to the interests of the united states,
he may by proclamation after such. as he shall deem necessary suspend the entry of all aliens. or impose on the aliens any restriction he may deem to be appropriate." the law was crafted at the height of the cold war, homeland security secretary john kelly said its application is just as relevant now. he fell on his sword in front of congress, apologizing for not briefing them before the extreme vetting program was rolled out. >> in retrospect, i should have. this is on me, by the way. i should have delayed it just a bit so i could talk to members of congress, particularly the leadership of committees like this to prepare them for what was coming. >> three other points the white house will make to the court, that the ban does not target solely muslims, does not bar legal permanent residents and that washington state and minnesota have no standing to bring the case on behalf of residents. what the white house wouldn't say today is with the president
will do if the ninth circuit doesn't reinstate the immigration ban. >> let's see where it goes. our goal right now is to get to a point where he can argue on the merits but we feel component based on how the court has reacted in massachusetts that were going to be good on the merits. >> the president today indicated he is in it to win it. >> we are going to take it through the system. it's important for the country regardless of me or whoever succeeds at a later date. we have to have security in our country. >> the white house stepped on its message a bit, releasing a list of 78 terror attacks it claims went under reported by the media. many of the cases did not become headlines and some were played down by the obama administration about the list also included attacks like orlando, san bernardino, paris, nice, and others. as you know from first-hand experience, they received saturation coverage for days.
>> bill: thank you, john. let's take a closer look right now at the argument. the state challenging the white house do not want the travel ban to be reinstated. dan springer has that part of the story tonight from seattle. >> with amazon and a hiring frenzy and tech giant microsoft here, the puget sound relies heavily on skilled foreign workers. filing its lawsuit against president trump's temporary travel ban from seven countries with majority muslim populations, the state of washington cited its impact on companies in the economy. >> the president is not adhering to the constitution when it comes to executive actions. it's my responsibility as attorney general to defend the rule of law. >> expedia, the world's largest online travel company, based in seattle, filed a declaration opposing the order. it claims 1,000 passport holders from the affected countries have flights booked to and from the u.s. the company wrote "expedia
believes the executive order jeopardizes its corporate mission and could have a detrimental impact on its business and employees as well as the broader u.s. and global travel tourism industry." amazonian -- amazon joined the lawsuit. the legal challenge was filed before the trump administration clarified that legal permanent residents is not affected. >> it appeared to apply with those with green cards. they do have some constitutional rights. >> washington's other argument has to do with its public universities which courts have ruled are extensions of the state. the university of washington has 95 students from affected countries while washington state university has 135. >> lost tax revenue, harms to our state universities in terms of money spent to sponsor people to come here to teach and perform research.
>> washington's lawyers say restoring the trump ban would create more chaos just has travel is resumed. critics of the lawsuit say it's all about politics and point to shrill statements from the democratic governor. >> in american history we have never needed checks and balances like we have needed it today. stick with the state of minnesota signed on to the lawsuit and the state of oregon is attempting to do the same. oral arguments began a few moments ago and they are being conducted over the phone because all three judges are in their chambers in different parts of the west. the ruling is not expected today but most likely later this week. >> bill: thank you for that, dan. the arguments are underway. they get 30 minutes per side, and just to give you a sense of how this is being conducted by way of telephone, just drop in and listen for a few seconds. >> has to do with the assessment of risk the president made in balancing our interests in
welcoming people in the country with our interest in making sure procedures are secure so that the risk of terrorism is acceptable. >> the headline on behalf of the administration when it comes to national security. while that continues, we will monitor it and bring you headlines when we get them. as we await more on that, let's talk about the merits of the case and the judges involved. andrew napolitano, our fox news senior judicial analyst is with me. good evening to you. fundamental question here to be decided. do the states have the right to bring a case? >> yes, that's the threshold issue. lawyers and judges call it standing because the constitution doesn't permit anybody to sue the government just because they disagree with what the government has done. they have to show it was harmed by what the government did. when dan springer summarizes the
arguments of the state of washington that it's doing it on behalf of corporations harmed, the responses why aren't these corporations with plaintiffs in the case? if the court finds there is no standing, that the state of washington, minnesota do not have standing to bring the suit, it's over. the executive order is back in force. if the court finds there is standing, they have to go to the next issue. >> bill: part of that issue would be did the judge in the state of washington act within his right to issue this temporary restraining order? >> yes. temporary restraining orders are rarely overturned on appeal but the government's argument here, the federal government's argument, the president's argument here is that they were given very little opportunity at the initial hearing because the department of justice lawyers were new. the administration is new. the proceeding only took
15 minutes grade there were very few papers filed and there should've been a far more thorough analysis by the trial judge before he enjoined the president of the united states of america from protecting the united states of america at every airport in the united states of america. >> bill: i am looking at 43 cases brought forward, 17 state attorneys general, half a dozen labor and civil rights groups. if all of those are still out there, outside of the case we are watching right now, how is that resolved, judge? >> that's a great question, bill. we are focusing on one of those cases. chief justice john roberts has the authority and he's done this in the past to take all the 43 cases and assign them to one judge so they are tried at one time in one place before one judge rather than having 43 or 44 or 45 trials that are essentially attempting to litigate the same issues.
if this case survives tonight, i expect all those cases will be tried at one time and in one place. not necessarily before this judge in seattle. sometimes they will pick someone in the center of the country because people are going to have to do a lot of traveling to get there. >> bill: quickly, i am seeing a judge assigned, an appointee on behalf of president obama, an appointee on behalf of george w. bush, and president jimmy carter. those are the three hearing the argument. i asked you about the merits. what do you believe the results will be? once the decision, judge? >> i think the panel of judges tonight, it's my prediction, for which you have asked, that the plaintiffs do not have standing. the two states in this case cannot bring a case on behalf of others. only the others who are actually harmed and bring the case. >> bill: thank you. we are watching and waiting and
listening along with you. andrew napolitano, thank you. the other big story tonight happened on capitol hill behind me. the senate has confirmed president trump's choice to run the department of education, but it took a never before time breaking vote from the vice president to get this nominee across the finish line. chief congressional correspondent mike emanuel live on the hilt might. >> good evening. betsy devos has been sworn in as a new education secretary after vice president mike pence made history by being the deciding vote. >> dea's are 50. the nays are 50. the senate being equally divided, the vice president votes in the affirmative and the nomination is confirmed. >> despite two republicans defending -- defecting, devos is going to be the secretary.
>> it is not democrats were bitter about the election. it's the american people who are bitter about the nomination of betsy devos. that's why millions and millions of calls, almost unprecedented on a cabinet nomination, have poured into the capital. >> democrats spent about 24 hours trying to pressure one more republican to reject devos. >> is this the best of the best? is it a knowledgeable candidate who understands the federal law? is this a candidate who comes to us without conflict of interest? >> he republicans defended devos, noting president trump did not someone -- want someone from the education establishment. >> would you be surprised that a republican president would be for charter schools? are you surprised a republican president has appointed a secretary who wants to give low income children more choices? >> final confirmation vote
likely tomorrow evening if democrats insist on running out the clock again. texas republican senator says democrats can stall but the president will eventually have his cabinet. >> they know we are going to be successful, so stunts like staying up all night and making speeches, i'm not sure who they are trying to impress other than their dysfunctional face. >> mitch mcconnell predicted "dysfunctional fatigue will set in if democrats insist on burning 30 hours for each cabinet secretary particular since the remaining three are all excited to be confirmed." >> bill: 's lack a manual on the hill. president trump transfer labor secretary admits he employed a housekeeper who was illegal. fast food ceo andrew puzder says he fired the woman as soon as he found out and helped getting her legal status. his confirmation hearing has been postponed several times.
stocks were up. dow finished ahead 38 points. s&p 500, up about half a point and the nasdaq jumped 11 points. from overseas, amnesty international saying that military police in syria hanged as many as 13,000 people between the years 2011 and 2015. it also says there's no reason to believe that practice has stopped. the reports suggesting the executions take place after a one to two minute sham trial and are authorized by the highest levels of the syrian government. no comment from that government on the report. a suicide bomber striking afghanistan's supreme court today. at least 19 are dead, 41 wounded, ten of them said to be in critical condition. the attacker was on foot, targeted a side door as people were exiting. there has been no claim of responsibility but the attack bears the hallmarks of the taliban and they are in kabul.
top palestinian officials saying israeli legislation that legalizes thousands of west bank settlements isn't putting the final nail in the coffin in the two state solution. conor powell has the latest in jerusalem. >> after months of debate, israel's parliament approved a controversial new law that retroactively legalizes almost 4,000 illegal israeli homes built on privately owned palestinian land. israel conservative settler community which calls the west bank by its biblical name judea and samaria, say it is rightfully theirs. they praise the move. >> translator: it's a great day for the entire judea and samaria. all settlers should celebrate. >> benjamin netanyahu initially opposed the legislation arguing israel might face severe international repercussions. he later retreated. israel's attorney general has said he will not defend the bill before the supreme court and
many others in israel's legal community believe the bill is unconstitutional. >> it's a violation of the right to property. it's a violation of the prohibition on discrimination. >> there are more than 6,000 israelis living across the west bank with 130 separate jewish settlements dispersed all over the territory. palestinians someday hoped it would be part of their future state where the international community including multiple u.s. administrations have long opposed israel settlement enterprise. in december of the united nations security council passed a resolution condemning israel saying settlements are an obstacle to peace, a position israel's government disputes. today palestinians condemned the new law. >> it is looting palestinian land. it's putting the last nail in the coffin of the two state solution. >> trump administration hasn't taken a position. the white house did recently
released a statement that said in part new settlements or the expansion of current settlements may not be helpful to achieving peace. >> bill: thank you. conor powell reporting in jerusalem. up next, the head of homeland security says the border wall will be built after all. first, here is what some of our fox affiliates are covering. fox 8 from boston where hundreds of thousands make this new orleans first where they experienced some horrendous storms earlier today. those storms knocking out power to many. still awaiting results in new orleans. this is the parade in boston, massachusetts, where the super bowl champion new england patriots are back home, riding in the familiar vehicles known as the duck boats. tom brady, bill belichick, most of the rest of the team through downtown boston. that makes five super bowl
titles in new england. u.s. army corps of engineers has cleared the way for the completion of the dakota access pipeline. the final big chunk of the 1200-mile line will be built under a lake in native american sphere a leak and are promising a legal battle. the pipeline will carry oil from north dakota to a shipping point in illinois. this is a live look at new orleans from fox 8. the big story there, reporting that the governor is declaring a state of emergency throughout louisiana. at least three tornadoes touched down in the southeast corner. much of the worst damage is in eastern new orleans, part of the ninth ward that was hit so hard by katrina in the summer of 2005. that is tonight's live look outside the beltway from "special report." as we go to break here, we are going to listening more to the ninth circuit hearing underway
where the government continues to make its case. we will take this to a break and have a listen now. >> let me finish with the first theory. the theory assumes you are asserting rights on behalf of the beneficiary. there is well-established law in the immigration context the third-party interests in the case o'bannon describes is not something that can be asserted. >> i would assert it asserts exactly that. the plaintiff was the wife of the person who was excluded. the person who was excluded may not have had any rights directly but his wife was allowed to. >> the state doesn't have the sort of constitutional right that the wife had in the case. the wife was asserting her own --
>> why isn't the states right the same? mandel was a foreigner. he may not have had rights with the court took the case out. the university of washington, washington state invite people. why doesn't the state of washington have the same standing that the scholars did in mandell? >> again, you have to look at sort of the right of the states. i guess i was discussing the right of the state on behalf of the people that it's bringing suit on behalf of. it is collapsing the inquiry. >> i understand you are moving away or i am dragging you
>> this is a fox news alerts. recapping the top story. attorneys for the department of justice trying to convince a federal appeals court that president trump has the authority to issue his executive order on immigration. the order is currently suspended. the opposition claiming the president exceeded his authority and there was a lot of opposition on that end. arguments are being made by telephone. they found sound something lik. >> this judgment was well within the president's power as delegated to them by congress, and it is constitutional. as the court in boston recently held. under section 212f, congress has authorized the president to suspend entry of classes of aliens when it is necessary or otherwise it would be detrimental to the interests of
the united states. >> bill: we will keep listening, and we'll let you know the headlines when we get them. we will let you know what's happening. we will talk about that with our extended panel in a moment. in the meantime, the head of the homeland security department saying he thinks the immigration order be upheld and the southern wall will be built. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge reports on john kelly's first public appearance before lawmakers in his brand-new job. >> the largest opening in the most uncontrolled part of our border is the southwest border. >> and its first congressional testimony, john kelly did not back away from the administration's commitment to the wall and the travel band. >> americans must feel safe to walk down the street, go to the mall, to a nightclub anywhere and anytime. fear messed not become the status quo. the code lawmakers pressed kelly on whether his own border agents
think a physical wall is necessary. >> somebody told you we need a 2,000-mile wall built along the border? >> maybe there are some places that are too rugged for a wall and we cover that with patrolling and technology. >> while taking some blame for the travel ban rollout, he says the seven nations are not cooperating or can't provide reliable intelligence. >> for a number of years, the vetting is at best loose of the amount of information, some of these countries we are talking about that are in failed states. >> we will have time to enhance security checks to stop terrorists from using our immigration system is a trojan horse. >> republicans and democrats pushed kelly for evidence. >> you don't have any proof at this point. >> not until the boom. >> not until wiped? >> not until they blow something up or go into a mall and kill people. we won't know until then.
>> there's a new sheriff in town. >> president trump reinforces message hosting county sheriff' sheriff's. >> that me tell you the difference in six months. i sat in this room and i was pleading, begging for help. >> it was 180 degrees from what we heard from the previous administration. >> big difference. >> we are very proud to have u.s. president. >> secretary kelly said he's an advocate for social media screening and the applicants refused to comply will be blocked from entering the u.s. kelly said he's confident the admin's ration will prevail in court, offering lawmakers no plan b. >> bill: thank you, catherine herridge. there is an intriguing twist in the climate change controversy this evening. it has to do with data said to be manipulated by scientists and that data was given to then president obama and other world leaders at a critical moment. doug mckelway looks at that night.
>> the accusations are explosive, that the national oceanic and atmospheric administration intentionally manipulated data to hide a 12 year pause and global warming and that the study was a major influence in the 2015 paris climate summit where western nations agreed to spend billions to reduce fossil fuel use. in fact, according to john bates who recently retired as a lead scientist of the national climatic data center. his claim took center stage at a hearing today entitled making the epa great again. >> we have every reason to be skeptical that our scientific community is maintaining its integrity. >> in an interview sunday with the daily mail, bates said they had good data from bullies and they threw it out -- you never change good data that's what they did so as to make it look like this he was warmer. bates skewered the author that he "had his thumb on the scale
and the documentation, scientific choice, and release of data sets all to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus." the ceo of the american association of the advancement of science defended the study and said that bates whistleblowing is overblown. >> all he is doing is calling out a form or calling for properly following standards. this is not the making of a big scandal. this is an internal dispute between two factions within an agency. >> noaa said it stand behind its scientists and takes the matter seriously. critics note climate research surveys almost entirely funded by the government. >> a number of scientists have come to me telling me that we are before a certain time period, they were receiving government research contracts. afterwards, after making clear they didn't agree with the co2 theory, no more contracts. >> in a statement today bates
said his whistleblowing was not based on a personal feud but is focused on concerns he raised and the opportunity will be addressed. >> bill: doug mckelway in washington. we are watching a breaking story out of iran this evening. seems the iranians have removed a ballistic missile from a launchpad. jennifer griffin at the pentagon now with exclusive new satellite images. >> u.s. officials have been monitoring this launchpad since ron launched a medium-range ballistic missile from it over a week ago. new satellite images obtained by fox news for my private satellite companies show a flurry of activity at the lodge found 140 miles east of tehran. that launch prompted an emergency meeting of the u.n. security council and a day later the white house it judy strong warning. >> as of today we are officially putting iran on notice. >> this image from february 3,
the same day the u.s. treasury announced new sanctions against 13 iranian individuals and 12 companies in response the missile test shows over the course of five days around quickly cleaned up the site and prepared another missile on the same launchpad. u.s. officials tell fox news the missile has been moved from the launchpad. it's a surprising about-face in the motives are not clear. the image verified by u.s. officials shows iran prepared to launch a missile to put a satellite in space where the pentagon is concerned because this missile uses the same components as those needed for an intercontinental ballistic missile. it is similar to a north korean missile. >> president trump has criticized the various agreements reached between iran, the obama administration, as well as the united nations as being weak and ineffective. instead of being thankful to the united states in these agreements, iran is feeling emboldened. >> today iran's supreme leader
ayatollah company spoke publicly for the first time since president trump took office. >> translator: we are not thankful. we should not be thankful. for sanctions? for setting fire to the region? they have set fire to syria, iraq. why should we be thankful? >> while it's not clear why iran moved the missile, experts say it could be a technical problem or perhaps iran is reacting to the new sanctions from washington. >> bill: jennifer griffin. thanks for the pentagon. the president's travel ban executive order goes to court. arguments proceeding and we will talk about that with the panel after a short break. as we go to break, the states are now making their case, taking questions from the judges. they get 30 minutes as well. have a listen to their case for a moment, then the panel will break it down next. >> spend as much time as you want but i suggest this may not
be the topic it's most important. >> fair enough. the only point i would make is that the review is under strict standards. if the court treats this as an appealable order, that's what the ultimate ruling will be of. if the court properly treats this as as a decision and sends it back to district court, the district court will the opportunity to enter a fuller injunction. that will be what the court can review as opposed to reviewing what the clearly -- court intended to be a temporary restraining order. >> in your view, if we left this order in place, would there then be an injunction hearing in the district court? >> absolutely, your honor. the parties have agreed to a briefing schedule.
>> bill: a moment ago we were listening to the ongoing arguments being made in san francisco. i want to drop in on a moment. we picked a section of the government's case where the judges asking the question and the attorneys from the justice department are answering. dip in and try and listen to the key aspect of the risk involved on behalf of the trump white house. >> is there any reason for us to think there is a real risk where the circumstances have changed such that there would be a real risk if existing procedures weren't allowed to stay in place while the administration, the new administration, conducts its review?
>> well, the president determined there was a real risk. that's why the president determined that the best course was a temporary, it's a short halt in entry for 90 days while these procedures are looked at. >> so that is in essence the crux of the argument they are debating in san francisco. it is ongoing by telephone. i want to bring in our panel. tom rogan, mara liasson, national political correspondent of national public radio. laura ingraham and syndicated columnist charles krauthammer. good evening. you were listening. it's ongoing. can the>> is going to be hard ie ninth circuit. the government should win. it's not easy to do an oral argument on the phone. usually in cases this important, you will do it in the presence
of the judges, argued the case. it's a little hard on the phone or you have pauses and the second time delay. that's odd. the thing that i noticed is how ill-suited judges are to sit in judgment of foreign policy or national security issues which is what they are doing here when they really examine the question of standing and the question of whether there is a rationale for this particular executive order. the issue of -- the president has the authority on the issue. you have the justice department lawyer, he's been at the just departme for a long time but he's not one of trump's guys. the other two had to recuse themselves because their old law firm is involved. this circuit is the most reversed of the country by the
supreme court. tonight they sounded a lot more like ideologues than justices. >> bill: tom, what do you think? >> i agree that if you look at the precedents of constitutional law there is a clear inclination to provide the executive with all possible doubt as issues and cases pertain to national security. i think i agree with laura in the sense that you listen to the arguments. i was surprised, even though the ninth circuit is known for this, i was surprised how emotionally vested the tenor of the questioning seemed to be. via telephone you don't see the body language. i think president trump has a challenge. >> bill: you are suggesting the questioning is more aggressive than you would expect. >> the nature of the questioning in terms of there seems to be a sort of idea that some of the
precedent on the notion of executive power on national security doesn't exist. >> bill: i want to go back to the piece we just heard. you heard the attorney for the justice department. the president determined there was a real risk here in the law has always sided, going back to the early 1950s, with the commander-in-chief. >> it's interesting the two areas that donald trump cares most about, trade and immigration, happen to be the two things that the president has the most control over. here he is exercising his control. this is kind of inning number one in what's going to be a very long fight. it will go to the supreme court and there's going to be issues of executive power and there's going to be the question of whether this is a religious test or not. they haven't gotten into that yet. this is an area where traditionally the president gets a lot of deference pair he says there was some kind of imminent risk. if we continue to let people in, even under our current system of what the obama administration
would have said. >> bill: were going to play another clip, the closing argument. charles, you were listening. granted, it wasn't the full context of the states making their case, but you thought the attorney for the justice department was having a tough time. >> i'm not sure he was top of his class way back in law school. he was not -- if you are going to do this, you really have to be prepared with answers. clearly he wasn't. but i must say i was surprised. we only heard the first half, meaning the presentation of the case on behalf of the federal government. i found that the three judges were extremely aggressive. having not heard the second hal half, which would be the questioning of the state, the state attorney, that they would be equally aggressive. i just don't know. but from the tone of the questioning, it looks as if the
judges were extremely inclined to maintain this day by the district court. we are in the middle but we are talking about it. it's unfolding as we speak. it is rather speculative. that was a pretty hostile bench, the federal government was facing. i am not sure it was appropriat appropriate. what they were arguing was the merits of the case and i think they were sort of doing what's not in their purview. they are supposed to judge whether or not the president exceeded his authority. it's a very hard case to make but they probably will find he did. >> bill: laura, listen to the final clip i will get you to comment. >> i would strongly encourage the court, even if it has concerns with the government's position, that it immediately stay the portion of the
injunction that applies outside the boundary of the u.s. and extends beyond people who have been -- who are in the u.s. road than in the u.s. thank you. >> bill: it's a narrow issue when it comes down to it. >> that goes to the question which i think the lawyer for the justice department didn't raise early enough. do foreigners living in foreign countries have a constitutional right to come into the united states and do states have the standing to bring cases -- what they are doing is essentially bringing it on their behalf. they claim it's irreparable injury to the state if the executive order is allowed to be instituted. that is a leap. do foreigners have a constitutional right to enter the united states? that is a whole separate question but i think the answer to that is no. >> bill: here is how they made the case on the behalf of the state of washington. >> was the executive order itself that caused irreparable
harm to our states and many other states and people, as described. we believe that the federal government has shown no irreparable harm from reinstating the status quo prior to the order. >> bill: you have technology companies in washington saying they could not access their employees. how do you balance that with the national security? >> we are told national security usually trumps that. there's two things going on. you say the ninth circuit is a more liberal bench but those judges are human beings. what i wonder is, after you've had a president attack a judge and say if something bad happens, blame it on him on the entire court system, i wonder how that affects. >> they are not doing their job and they are acting unethically if they allow that to cloud their decision-making. that's not what a judge is
supposed to do. they are supposed to look at the statutes, the constitution. >> bill: laura, you believe the court will send it back to the state of washington. >> they are not going to lift the stay that the district court put on it. that's going to go back to the district court. lord knows what's going to happen at the supreme court. >> bill: the arguments are ongoing, the state of washington. how did the president react? will show you what he had to say and as we listen, we will bring you headlines from san francisco by way of telephone as the case continues.
♪ >> we are going to infiltrate the united states and other countries through the migration. and then, we are going to have to be tough on the people, again? explain that one. we will see what happens. we have a big court case, well represented. we are going to see what happens. >> the supreme court? >> we'll see. it is common sense. some things are law and i am all in favor of that. some things are common sense. this is common sense now. >> bill: back with the panel. that was president trump earlier today at the white house. we will go back to all of you. explain that one. >> look, i think a lot of people have talked about here that trump is simply trying to fulfill a campaign pledge. whatever our opinion on the refugee band, whatever you call it, i think it is a bad strategy, bad idea. i think what is going on here -- actually, the president's eyes as it is common sense, the
presidential daily brief. the level of detail that the fb fbi, domestic operations, will go into if the consumer, the president in this case wants them to, is enough to alarm anyone. that is why president's hair go gray. i think president trump reading that and seeing the national security context, to some degree, you can make the argument, it should be managed in a better way. as he sees it, simply, you put up the protective environment because he doesn't want to deal with that. >> not daily brief, you have failed states. yemen, syria, libya. charles, if you were to take that argument and rewind it five days ago, and lead with, "i'm going to tell you why this is common sense," would we be where we are tonight? >> i think what we are seeing is the kind of kabuki that we do as a way to make ourselves think that we are safer from terrorism.
anybody who has gone on an airplane and watched as the tsa strip searches 80-year-old grandmothers understands that this is 90% psychological and useless. there are a lot of sources of terrorists. the whole list, probably at the bottom, as the idea of infiltration from these states. these are seven states, and 15 years since 9/11, there hasn't been a single murder of an american by a national of these countries. i am not against tightening the vetting. we should. but i think it was unnecessary to order an immediate suspension for 90 days, as if it was an imminent threat, that hordes of yemenis and somalis were about to board airplanes and attack the united states. that is what caused the disruption. that is what caused the k off. that what caused those scenes of very innocent looking people, doctors, students, grandmas
being separated and not allowed into the country. this is hurt the administration's argument. these people don't look like terrorists. the numbers have shown it, the public opinion polls show that, where's in november november, the majority were against the admission of syrian refugees. that has no flipped. i think it is a direct result of the fact that this is an unnecessary overshoot. yes, tighten up the vetting. but there was no reason to suspend the visits of people who were already in the air. >> bill: lesson learned, perhaps. mara. >> the other thing that the administration might be risking is if there is a terrorist attack and it is from a u.s. citizen, from someone from a country that is not on that list, from self radicalized person, you know, he has now focused so much on the seven countries, as charles said, no recent terrorist attack has been from a person in these countries. what is going to happen when it comes from somewhere else?
>> that question, laura, some of that came up today. john kelly, the new department of homeland security secretary, made his first appearance after being sworn in. he put it on his own back when he said the following today. >> we knew it was going to be released that day. the desire was to get it out, so, that was the thinking. in retrospect, i should have -- this is all on me, by the way -- i should have delayed it just a bit so i could talk to members of congress, particularly the leadership of committees like this, to prepare them for what was coming. for you to >> bill: i think that line "this is all on me, by the way. ">> it is nice to hear that, frankly. a stellar individual, a stellar cabinet member. i think the thing that we have to remember here, we didn't have anybody slitting stewardesses and pilots throats with box cutters. no one was going to rush in from
emma next week if we didn't have this review. but the idea that judges, unelected judges, in seattle, and san francisco, are able to change u.s. immigration policy, that it's in my president's view, is really what we are talking about. i certainly have questioned the merits of it. that is fine. as to this legal issue that we are seeing right now, this is a dangerous place. if the executive branch does not preserve, and a separation of powers from the judiciary, and have that ability to make these calls, then, we are going to have a lot of monday morning quarterbacks -- >> bill: if this goes to the supreme court. >> i agree with you entirely. there is a difference between legal. i think there is no question that the judge in washington was wrong not allowing this to go through and in stating it because he made no argument in
his brief that this was illegal. >> bill: charles, does this go to the supreme court in washington? >> oh, yes. i think the ninth will uphold to this day and it will end up in the supreme court. >> bill: let's leave it there. thank you to all of you. in a moment, we have something cool. do not miss this inspiring pregame speech. it is not the inspiration you . . .
tired of winning. a little league coach has some advice of his own on that topic. >> they are two types of people in this world. there are winners and there are losers. just so that we are clear, every time we step on this field, our goal is to be a winner. and if your dad has said "oh, it doesn't matter whether you win or lose, just as long as you have fun," i hate to say it, your dad is a loser. okay? one, two, three! >> bill: excellent. not a problem for my dad, by the way. i'm sure for yours, as well. thank you for watching tonight. i am bill hemmer. good night from washington. good night from washington. heather: wednesday february 8th and this is a fox news alert. any moment a decision could come down in the high stakes legal battle over immigration. the judges grilling attorneys in a late-night hearing.
>> is there any reason for us to think that there's a real risk? >> has the government point today any evidence connecting these countries with terrorism? heather: where things stand right now and what happens next. we are live in washington. >> he is, i believe, a disgrace to the justice department. abby: elizabeth warren, silence, how she broke the rules and got herself ban from uttering a single word from the senate floor. heather: state of emergency as a string of tornadoes slam the south, roofs ripped off and tanker trucks tossed like toys. janice dean tracking a winter wallet. "fox & friends first" starts right now.
♪ ♪ abby: live look there outside of our offices this morning. good morning, you're watching "fox & friends first" on wednesday. heather: i'm heather childers and thanks for starting your day was. fox news alert, a decision could come at any moment in the high-stakes legal battle over president trump's immigration order. abby: fate and epic showdown now in the hands of the ninth court of appeals. heather: griff with the very latest, this was something to listen to. >> it is, good morning, heather