tv Outnumbered FOX News January 9, 2018 9:00am-10:00am PST
>> that was a fast hour, lots of news. i loved it. >> come on back. >> thanks for joining us. >> "outnumbered" starts right now. >> harris: fox news alert, a big meeting right now happening inside the white house. president trump is hosting a bipartisan group of lawmakers that are talking about immigration policies. the white house has a long wish list of reforms and border security measures that it wants in the deal. emma kratz want to make sure the so-called dreamers are protected from deportation. and the standoff may make a whole host of other pressing problems a lot more complicated to work out. this is outnumbered. i'm harris faulkner. here today, sandra smith. anchor of the intelligence report on fox business bringing, trish regan. a former deputy spoke person for the state department, marie harf. joining us on the couch today,
brian kilmeade. host of fox and friends in the nationally syndicated brian kilmeade show on fox news radio and author of andrew jackson and the miller m. i have another two or three symptoms. outnumbered, welcome. >> brian: i thought we were going to go to amnesia. other should have been an animation if you guys walking across the screen or something. i regular story or on the phone. put put it this way when they put my name on the calendar for today, i was hoping there'd be news breaking would be running a repeat but there were so much going on including what is taking place in washington. >> sandra: we are happy to have you. >> brian: i was worried about that. >> harris: while compared let's get to the news. president trump is hosting a bipartisan group of lawmakers inside the white house right now. republicans, democrats coming together to talk about immigration policy.
the white house once a border wall and changes to the visa lottery and chain migration program. democrats want protection from deportation for hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the united states as childre children. chief white house correspondent john roberts is live at the white house now. >> >> good afternoon to you in y second now, we should hear for the president and some of the members inside that room where they are immigration. they went in about 20 minutes ago and still not out. so i would imagine that the president is probably waxing on about his plans for immigration. a group of 20 bicameral bipartisan members of congress that means republicans and democrats from the house and the senate were here meeting with the president, interesting to note that not among the group are chuck schumer and nancy pelosi on mitch mcconnell or paul ryan for that matter but some of the notables that are in this meeting house majority leader met kevin mccarthy, judiciary committee chairs and cochairs chuck grassley, dianne feinstein and bob goodlatte. mike mccall and betty thompson for the chair and ranking of the
homeland security committee in the house in lindsey graham, heidi heitkamp. the president says he is willing to cut a deal on the dreamers, but he wants some things in return for giving the protectio protection. the white house is going to deliver a series of proposals not necessarily demands, but just point for the president wants to get across here in this meeting as to what he wants done. that includes movement on the wall, president of course want construction of a wall. what to do about detainees and immigration loopholes ending chain migration and the number of new i.c.e. agents at the president wants to put on duty to enforce customs and immigration laws. the white house legislative director marc short a while ago on fox business said construction of a wall for democrats based on their legislative history should be a no-brainer. listen here. >> is also something that 54 senate democrats voted for. $40 billion in port security including physical barriers in 2013. as the 2006 secure act that
chuck schumer it voted for. they all were devoted to do these things. they try to politicize it now because donald trump is president but it's what is needed for the security of our country. >> interesting to note that neither chuck schumer nancy pelosi or at the white house. they wanted to put together a group of policymakers. they still have two months to get this done, but the legislative calendar as you know moves quickly. a lot of this talk about the dreamers is also tied up in budget negotiations, so they really have to get moving on this if they want to get something done. >> harris: john roberts, thank you for teaching of the facts for a spirit will bring it out to the couch now. so you just heard that schumer and pelosi are not there in the white house, one to get something done but you have quite a few democrats at that table. >> brian: i think it's great because are you will be away from leadership or did they tell you what to think? my sense was that lindsey graham said when we were in the thick of the tax debate, the final lap on the tax reform the president passed, he said behind the sims,
dick durbin, lindsey graham are heading up a rotating number of bipartisan people to meet on immigration. they said they were making great progress on it. so as we start making some progress here, i wonder did you take that progress to 2018 and if you took that progress to 2018, are you legitimately going to negotiate or have you been told they leadership we are way ahead in the polls, we are close to taking back at least one chamber and the last thing we want to do is give any sense that president from can negotiate. >> harris: all of those dreamers are caught in the middle of this conversation. >> marie: the democrats have put multiple ideas on the table as have some republicans to protect the dreamers and to get a deal done here. i think the odds are probably mixed at best if i had to put a thought up there about what i say this going. but the real sticking point is going to be what some say could be $18 billion, some portion of that funding for a border wall that we were promised mexico would pay for. not u.s. taxpayers. so i think you can get a deal on
everything else. it's how far president trump and the white house want to push the border wall piece of this that will determine whether we can get a deal i think. >> sandra: don't you have to be more realistic and ask and i'll ask you, too democrats really want to get a deal done? >> marie: if it protects dreamers, absolutely. >> harris: are so angry at your party right now and nancy pelosi. because i think they're most angry at donald trump to be very clear. >> harris: they weren't by merging his lectern. >> marie: there much more angry at donald trump for putting them in this position that they are in today. we can talk about the history there as well, but i think that democrats absolutely want to deal if it will protect the dreamers but there are some red lines here they don't want to cross. >> harris: so this talk about who started where, this wasn't on president trump's watch when this was put into place for this program. >> trish: i think that both parties have always shown a commitment to want to get immigration reform done. it's the right thing to do and is taken on frankly a life of
its own, this whole idea of now we need to keep our boaters open. we never wanted to keep our borders open. that's never been a principal that this country is about despite the revisionist version of history that you hear over and over and over again. this country has not always been as welcoming as everybody would like to make it seem. >> sandra: even going back as we sit in as president obama and president clinton talked on 40 security. it just makes you wonder if democrats are sort of singing a different tune. >> brian: it was just at the rio grande sector and they pointed to areas which are not allowed to build a fence, the environment doesn't allow it. we know there's not going to be a wall from sea to shining sea. and there were areas in which the president can show compromise in victory and say the president is not going to get a complete wall, is going to get some fence but they were areas in which those prototypes that are in san diego will clearly work. >> harris: so couple of things on that. the clock began ticking on dreamers under president obama's watch. i just want to put that out
there. i don't know where you going with that but that is a fact. space is a legal case had not been resolved it went president trump made this decision. it was still going to the courts. the supreme court had not ruled on dreamers yet. president trump made a decision before the legal case rolled out. >> harris: senator roy blunt told me that he agrees with the president in terms of finding a way to protect the dreamers. if republicans can come forth with the deal and democrats are not of the table, i have said it before, it will be politically punishing for them. because there are some things that republicans are willing to do now like protecting families, that's a lever so they have where they have not been there at least on paper and at least so publicly before. >> brian: absolutely not. upon further review, looks like the pressures on republicans majorities in both areas in the white house. if you see what happened to senator schumer when they stormed his office, you see what happened and nancy pelosi when she tried to make a speech, you see the affiliates from hispanic groups that we saw this morning on "fox & friends," you see the fact that they don't have all the power, they can't play wait and see.
>> sandra: in real time, getting some of the player from the president speaking at this bipartisan meeting happening right now. we are learning he just said we have something in common. we like to see this get done. he said i really do believe democrat and republican on the people sitting in this room really want to get something done. i hope we are going to come up with an answer for daca. >> harris: neither party can afford to let the government shut down right now. we talk all about the politics and the optics of shut down and nobody can afford that right no now. >> trish: americans don't like it. once again, it symbolizes their frustration with washington which is washed and can't do a darn thing. and if they shut down, the anger may be more directed at republicans because they are seen as in control. but on either side, it is completely lost. there was no one there. economically speaking, we can handle it. we actually can and what you typically see is a rebound in
the economy shortly thereafter after the shut down. we've been through before, no big deal. but i think it doesn't sit well with the american people because they think you guys are so messed up that we have to shut our government down. >> brian: that's the problem. if this president get something done and is the first compromise since the clinton years perhaps, it makes president trump looks good and that's what democrats fear. we don't even matter in this. the voters don't even matter. it's about them getting political gain. >> trish: i agree with you on that and i am less optimistic that something can happen because i think the democrats really and truly will come back to that very issue and they do not want to see the president succeed on anything. >> harris: specific to what they have to get done by next friday, january 19th, they kick the can down the road over christmas which is why it felt like it was just yesterday. it hasn't been that long. the children's health care program is a huge one. benefiting 9 million children, congress extended it by
$2.85 billion and apparently it wasn't enough to get it through march. so where are we on that? >> marie: we will see. these are the things that i think democrats actually would work with republicans on. i don't think that it's all a zero-sum game. believe me, there's always politics but democrats want to be funded. they want the dreamers to be able to stay. >> harris: both parties want that. but they extended it. >> marie: they haven't done it permanently. some states are in danger of running out of funding. >> harris: they say they are and that they will freeze their program. >> marie: is exactly and that's some of that we should probably try and check because we don't want them. >> sandra: the democrat from illinois has been very outspoken on the issue. he is sitting with the president in that meeting right now and he said democrats will find support on some elements of border security noting that as of marcy will lose their daca status. lives are hanging in the balance. we've got time to do it. so it seems like some optimism
at least, is that fair to say coming out of this meeting with the president? >> marie: yes, and i think democrats will get there. if the deal is the right one, i think they will. >> harris: so on the wall, i don't know if you guys caught up with "the new york times" is reporting this morning that in order to pay for this border wall, they may have to do some things like ease up or completely take out or delay border surveillance money, radar testing, not testing but technology, more border agents, patrols, those things that work. why would that be the case? >> brian: i'm not really sure because anyone .8 with million to finish the rio grande sector which they think is the most telling part of it. so 1.8 billion would be enough to get something done. the president is going to go in a couple of weeks and see that prototype you want to put there. >> marie: we don't have money for it. >> harris: am i wrong about that? the more you put on the table? it is a negotiating point? >> trish: i know that they were this money is and it gets
at that something that's really wonky and we don't have time for but they did not close the carried interest private equity with loophole. you have a lot of a lot of fat cat billionaires which are not paying income taxes on their income. they are treating their actual income as an investment. that's what gets you $180 billion. >> harris: we are having a fire drill so you're about to hear the announcement get louder than my voice. >> brian: if there is a fire drill, the word is the guy has to go as a representative of "outnumbered." do i have to represent? >> harris: is just listen and make sure they're not calling us by name. >> brian: smoke in the subway. >> harris: i want to tell our viewers what's going on because this is important. we have a concourse level that sits beneath us that connects to a lot of avenues here across rockefeller center. so this is one of those announcement that they make and you to be able to hear it in one of our live studios. >> sandra: if i could get back to the news for a second, the
president said that the g.o.p. representative will be introducing a bill of love. >> brian: didn't we try that? >> harris: we will get out of this. when we come back, you'll only hear our voices hopefully. we are awaiting remarks coming out of that meeting with the president and a bipartisan group of senators inside the white house about immigration. stay close
running a small business is demanding. and that's why small business owners need more. like internet that's up to the challenge. the gig-speed network from comcast business gives you more. with speeds up to 20 times faster than the average. that means powering more devices, more video conferencing, and more downloads in seconds, not minutes. get fast internet and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more per month. comcast is building america's largest gig-speed network to give small businesses more.
call 1-800-501-6000 today. >> sandra: fox news alert, north and south korea holding their first high-level talks in more than two years. and that is breaking news. alive look at the white house right now because we know there is a major important meeting happening in the white house right now, a bipartisan talk going on at the president, republicans, democrats, all coming to the table to talk immigration reform. it was supposed to talk about that and not about north korea. that is happening right now, brian kilmeade. this is an incredibly important day because this is setting up to be the legislative priority of 2018. but at the same time, they've got to come together and find out how to fund the government by january 19th. we three maybe i'm overthinking this, but the president evidently in a full report is in between them while he's talking about something bipartisan. do you think its symbolism
instead of sitting there with paul ryan and mitch mcconnell in saying these guys don't know what they're talking about, him saying i want to get something done and having a democrat? >> harris: we look at the list of people who are on here, yes. he is somebody like lindsey graham who just came out and said glowing things about the president yesterday and defending him with all that's going on recently with the book. it's interesting because these are handpicked players almost in terms of people who say they can work with each other. by the way, the groom was so crowded they couldn't find chairs. but it's not. >> sandra: so far what we've heard is a president very optimistic that it bill will get done, bill of love. >> brian: hammer it out. the president can order and lunch. or deliver. >> sandra: here's a fox news alert. north and south korea holding their first high-level talks as we mentioned in more than two years, and now we are hearing that north korea will send a delegation to next month's winter olympics in the south. this is opening the door to talks about reducing tensions.
but so far, north korea is reportedly not talking about its nuclear program. this began at camp david. president trump said his efforts led to the new talks and there are reports the white house is not turning down the heat. according to "the wall street journal," u.s. officials are debating a possible limited military strike against north korea. it would come in response to a nuclear or missile test did it's reportedly called a "buddy no strategy. demonstrating potential consequences openly without igniting all-out war. what you make of these developments? this is a sign of progress, the talks between the north and the south? >> brian: sure. my fear is there going to loosen up the sanctions and give the economic gains of the president has worked very hard to begin to choke the regime out. so this liberal leader who didn't want to have an affinity to the u.s. was looking to go to china and was so threatened by north korea they agreed to that missile system instead of an environmental study. my fear is that going to say get
this sense of euphoria and just throw them the economic needs to move this forward which means kim jong un will have achieved his goal. i don't think he sincerely wants the limericks to be successful. >> harris: normally i would see the evidence of that based on this history that we've seen but the one thing that seems to be different now, give the cia director mike pompeo saying potentially how close they are to being nuclear weapons viable. it isn't about what they would do. normally i would agree. i think we should kind of talk them out of aiming anything in our way hopefully. but it's hard to talk somebody out of this. >> sandra: seeing these talks happening between the north and south of the president camp david over the weekend took credit for that happening. >> they're talking olympics. it's a start. it's a big start. if i weren't involved, they wouldn't be talking about olympics right now. he knows i'm not messing around. i'm not messing around, not even a little bit, not even 1%. if something can happen and something can come out of those talks, that would be a great
thing for all of humanity. that would be a great thing for the world. >> sandra: all of humanity the president says. >> marie: not everything is about the u.s., i know we think it is. it's interesting because north koreans only agree to be talked after their successful i.t. bm test that they had recently. so a lot of experts look at this and say the north koreans actually feel like they're in a position of strength, not a position of weakness. that's really why they said okay, we do successful test and will come to the table. but the president is right that if these talks led to something that deescalated the possibility of military conflict, that would be a good thing for the world. that's the hope and he is right about that. we need to give them a chance. speaker of the dangers they're buying themselves a little bit of town continuing their work on the nuclear program. i said all along that there's a lot more that we can do and should do in the way of economic sanctions and not so much directed at north korea because obviously we're not doing anything with them anyway trade buys but it china because china, he saw the video that came out a couple weeks ago. they are still trading with
north korea. russia as well. and these are the countries that signed on and promised they were not going to do that. they're doing it anyway. so we need to be way tougher with china, and that means taking some pain economically on the behalf of american corporations that we are going to say we are not going to do all these trade deals with china and less you start to exert your power in a more meaningful way with north korea. >> sandra: the funny thing is let's look them in the olympics. the only problem is they didn't qualify. they have one pair of skaters that qualified but they missed the deadline to confirm that they're going to appear. so i'm all for waiving that deadline but senator lindsey graham had a response to don't let them in or we shouldn't go. so it's a little bit of a problem. you don't want this to bonnie. >> sandra: i'm kind of okay with that actually. >> harris: got the car generals, has recently said
this. it's less about what they may take aim on them or what they may try to sell on a market like your brand, place is like there is cash out there, some of it pallets of cash that have come from us and being used for other things. and that's the real problem, is the relationship that north korea has with other people. you point to china, that's a great example of where we can exert pressure. >> trish: recension one chinese bank. there's a whole bunch. we walk by it every day. if they are doing any business and i guarantee you a lot of these banks are money laundering on behalf of corporations in china that are still doing business with north korea, we need our treasury department to get aggressive and follow the money trail. >> brian: minh nguyen knows, he's waiting for the go sign. >> trish: the president has signaled over and over again that he can get the go side. so it's not just military action we are talking about but real economic damage. >> harris: we had to find out who has the sign.
>> marie: president trump, he understands the financial world very well. he could give that sign and they could really put more pressure on china. and they haven't yet. >> sandra: i think we will leave it there. more to get to. could these two fbi officials you've heard so much about be responsible for improper agency leaks to the press? new blue link to test messages prompting the justice department to look into just that. plus president trump's lawyers responding to a possible special request to interview trump himself. what can we expect? to set put an end to the probe once and for all? yea, so, mom's got this cold #stuffynose #nosleep i got it... #mouthbreather
wgreat tasting, heart-healthys the california walnuts.ever? so simple, so good. get the recipes at walnuts.org. i needed legal advice that's when i remembered that my ex-ex-ex-boyfriend actually went to law school, so i called him. he didn't call me back! if your ex-ex-ex-boyfriend isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal. >> sandra: continuing fallout
over special counsel robert miller's russian brogue. doj officials who was demoted last year for concealing his meetings with the men behind that anti-trump.ca has been stripped of yet another high-ranking title. this coming amid reports that new x messages have come to life hunting congressional probes into whether fbi agent peter struck and lisa page are responsible for leaking details of the russian investigation to the press. catherine herridge is live and watches him with the breaking details. >> meantime, fox news has independently confirmed some of the text messages this is just contact between members of the senior fbi leadership, the media about the russia case. the patent before presidential election, lisa page texted him about a "washington post" report complaining the information was too detailed. page writes sorry, former
director comey chief of staff called. timeline article in the post is super specific and not good. doesn't make sense because i didn't have specific information to give. chairman of the house government oversight committee told fox last night that one of the lines of questioning would focus on senior fbi personnel and who actually was authorized to talk to the media. >> we have serious concerns about people with the bureau talking to various media outlets that weren't authorized to speak on behalf of the bureau. i love to tell you i'm surprised that someone at the fbi may have been leaking. >> this separate development of senior justice department official with an apparent conflict of refusing gps, the firm behind the trump.ca who has been demoted for a second time. no longer had at the law enforcement track task force. he was stripped of attorney general in december after fox news reported or had meetings unknown to his supervisors with the cofounder of cofusion gps, glen simpson
there on the left as well as former british spy christopher steele who compiled the dossier research. his wife nellie is a russian specialist who did research for the trump project which was founded by the clinton campaign. all source close said he was at the justice department now working at the office of international affairs which handles expeditions and he has kept his civil service status and looks forward to testify later this month before the house committee in a closed-door session. >> sandra: as always, thank you for your reporting on this. they continue to learn marie more and more pretending to stumble upon this "wall street journal" article that they clearly according to their text messages knew about article is out, hidden behind a wall so you can read it. "wall street journal" that was fast. should i find it putting in quotations and tell the team? these are clear indications that
this. >> marie: will see. i have always said we need to have some answers from them. i don't know if it's going before congress. i think that you just get their story out publicly and answer some of the many questions we have about their behavior and what they did. it will be uncomfortable i'm sure, but it's better. >> harris: how would they do that. >> brian: there having an affair. >> harris: i like to know how it is. >> marie: i ask they don't care about their affair. we've made a lot of insinuations or accusations based on text messages but we don't have the whole story, so i think they need to answer all of these questions about what these mean, what they were involved in, and it could be totally innocuous when it comes to the investigation or it could not be. we just don't know. >> harris: one reason we have to care about the affair as it was among two agents that might be why we even know about this in the first place because they were texting back and forth. i would say this about peter. how was it that this situation goes on and he doesn't come out in any sort of fashion in through an attorney or there are ways to get your story out
there, but i see a huge dialog bubbling in your head. >> brian: 20 of them. number one, i've been schooled on the way the fbi works. a lot of people say we have these conversations on the couc couch. you running down the fbi and hurting their morale and being critical of people that paid a lot of money into a lot of great work on the scenes. also been told keep washington away from the field offices. the field offices are just as angry about what appears to be a bad behavior as we are should it be to set direction. we have to find out more. that's what they're doing. they're pursuing investigations giving information to washington and these guys are texting back and forth trying to maneuver with the media to possibly upend a candidate. that is out of control and it's got to be cleaned up no matter who is in office. >> marie: what you think they should do? should they testify? today they need to defend themselves. you have the trying to plan stories and let's point out that they had some precedent for tha
that. of the other boss, james comey who willingly admitted that he was out there leaking threats. in other words, if they were doing that and we don't know from these text messages, but it sure doesn't look good. it looks as though they knew the article was coming, and then it did come out and they were texting back and forth, but they need to answer that question and if there leaking to the press and they're trying to manipulate this information, it's just wrong. >> brian: was october before the election. they're influencing the election in some way. >> marie: we don't know that what yet. >> sandra: how else do you those text messages? >> marie: i will say when you're in government, reporters come to you and say respond to the story, we have one coming. we knew there were stories coming before they came out not that i was trying to influence they have them but they would say do you have a comment. >> sandra: top ranking fbi officials working on the robert mueller probe. setting text when other fbi employee. >> marie: there is an
innocuous way and i know they don't look good and is tempting to go to the darkest corner of the room. that's what we need answers from them. i'm not defending them, i'm just saying we need answers and we can't assume the worst without a little more evidence. >> sandra: how about overall and i trumped bias of the fbi, should they be doing more to identify if there is further bias within the agency? >> marie: legally, you can have personal political opinions as long as it doesn't impact your work and i'm sure there were a lot of conservatives that work at the fbi as well. so we have to focus on whether that impacts work and i'm sure they're on the lookout for that too. >> harris: you brought up a couple of things because he brought up the department of justice. talking about how he just got a demotion. how was it that the juicy receipts are posted to the door? we lost one job, then he got put in the hr department would choose that he was counting off days, vacation days. but now he's been put into another position. what does it take to get fired? where is credibility?
speakers to keep pushing him until he's parking lot attendant but they don't want to let him go. another reason why he is not totally fired or police put on leave until they can find out what he did meeting with gps, his wife before this happened. >> trish: we need that. i would just add that the danger here is it makes us look no better than some banana republic where you can have some kind of coup and from the inside, they're asking a leader. in other words, we have a democracy one in which the american voter sends someone to the white house. the idea that behind the scenes, they can be conspiring to get him out, that's troubling. >> sandra: trump-is and without stephen bannon? moving on from steve bannon after his former chief strategist trash the white house and a new tell-all. what the president can still carry his populist message without one of its primary authors around. the take away from the big speech the president gave.
mom and dad got a new car... with the extra third row of seats. they think it's theirs. look at them, they have no idea! it's not theirs. it's mine. mine. mine. mine. the new lexus rx 350l with three rows for seven passengers. are you excited about your baby sister coming? experience space for the unexpected with the rx l, part of the rx family. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.
>> harris: fox news alert, here is what we have been waiting for. we know the president has been meeting with a bipartisan group of senators inside the white house. the big talk is the sticking point is they try to keep the government from shutting down. it's immigration, it's things like the dreamers program, it's also the wall, and those of the deal breakers on either side of the political wall if you want to describe it that way. they've got to get in that room and it got to work something out. we have been reporting to you during this hour, sander has been reading it off her phone as the details are coming from senators inside that meeting saying how things are going the things are going well that they're looking. next friday, january 19th, the government potentially could shut down if they don't reach some kind of a deal. democrats have said that to deal
with not deporting the dreamers from this country and find a deal on that. the president has said i want the wall, i promised americo that. make america great again in those areas where you can build it. i want to see that. you're talking about billions of dollars for the wall you're talking about the change in immigration policy for the dreamers program. so what will it take to bring everybody together? notable absences today, those big names of leadership in the party like nancy pelosi or chuck schumer. these are the dealmakers has the president sees them on both sides of the political aisle. and he wanted them specifically in the room among the democrats. about the mendez of new jersey, heidi heitkamp of north dakota and dianne feinstein of carolina. we are going to see what they are talking about inside the cabinet meeting room inside the white house right now with the president and the bipartisan group of senators.
>> i think my positions are going to be with the people in this room come up with. i am very much reliant on the people in this room. i know most of the people on both sides have a lot of respect for the people on both sides, and what i approve is going to be very much reliant on what the people in this room come to me with. i have great confidence in. if they come to do with things that i'm not in love with, i'm going to do it. because i respect them. thank you all very much. i know her very well. i did one of her last shows. she had donald trump. her last week, and she had donald trump and my family was very nice. i like opera. i don't think she's going to ru run. i don't think she's going to ru run. i know her very well.
it's phase two. i think comprehensive will be phase two. i really agree with that. we get one thing done we go into comprehensive the following day. i think it'll happen. let's wait one second. thank you all very much. i hope we gave you enough material. this should cover you for about two weeks. >> harris: so the price gets enough material to cover us for about two weeks he said. he did do a lot of spitting rhymes there we might say. we have a lot of information out of that and i haven't seen brian kilmeade ever lean that far forward. he said i have great confidence in "what people in this room come up with even if i don't agree with it, am going to go with it because i have confidence in them and you said what? >> brian: that can't possibly be the case. >> harris: that's what he said. >> brian: i know he said that but i can't actually believe that he would say that. no wall, no problem.
you need 1.8 billion to get it started before we get this. >> harris: trish had the line of the day. >> trish: i think he wants to get something done for the dreamers. i think he really does. can i think that he is going to do it. he wants to do it. i don't know. the wall is a really big deal for the base, but steve bannon is out of the picture now. it's quite possible that he will want this enough. wouldn't that be amazing to see a republican of all people donald trump be the one to offer something for the dreamers? >> sandra: can he beat oprah he was asked? >> brian: i like her, i like her whole family. >> harris: said i was one of the last ones on his traditional show. spacings that can't even think about that kind of campaign, oprah versus donald trump. i can get my head around that. >> harris: too much fun for you? >> marie: that's one word for it is fun.
not towards you. i don't think ober is going to run but i do think she has a fund raising and power in the democratic party that if she puts towards other candidates she can be very powerful. >> harris: who do you think she likes? >> marie: honestly, i don't know. >> harris: maybe they liked each other at one point. he was asked about her years ago. >> brian: no question there was no president obama without opera. but she disappeared from politics. i just didn't see her anymore. i don't know what happened between them but they clearly weren't as close. >> harris: did it have to be something between them? people didn't want to watch politics. >> brian: 's you think she might've backed out. spacings was interesting is that nancy pelosi and chuck schumer aren't there. >> sandra: you don't really like the idea of an upper run. >> marie: no, i don't want to talk about anymore. i think it would be really interesting. i just don't think it's going to happen. >> sandra: you're in agreement
agreement. there were some dealmakers in that room right now. >> sandra: i think you want to get it done. >> harris: of the president want to get it done, he invited the perfect people to be in that room and we know you can do that. let's move on. did you see it? resident trump standing on the field for the national anthem at last night's college football championship. my husband said move out of the way. i was blocking. after again blasting the nfl players who kneeled, how much this hurts the game as a low ratings at least the latest ratings looked grim for the nfl. we will talk about it. patrick woke up with back pain.
>> trish: resident trump standing before the national anthem for last night's college football game to sing than anthem. his chris is in for nfl players taking the need to bring the national anthem. >> we want our flag respected. we want our flag respected. and we want our national anthem respected also. there is plenty of space for
people to express their views into protest, but we love our flag, we love our anthem, and we want to keep it that way. >> trish: all this coming at the nfl had a disastrous ratings weekend with double digit drops for all four playoff games. surprise? >> brian: this wild card week it is usually the best we can. but first off, we have to go to harris faulkner for some breaking news. >> sandra: back to the white house, the president's bipartisan meeting on immigration reform. let's listen. >> there are many of these people who are losing the protection of daca on a daily basis. as of march with, 1,000 a day will lose daca protection. and hundred of them are members of u.s. military. 20,000 of them are school teachers. in my state of illinois and city of chicago, there are 25 of them in medical school who can't apply for residency if they lose their daca status. so lives are hanging in the balance and us getting the job done. we have the time to do it in a
matter of days, literally days. we could come together and reach an agreement. and when that happens, i think that things will happen in other places we will see some progress here in washington. >> i agree with that. tom, would you like to say something? >> thank you for inviting a cell here. i'm glad to be here with democrats and house members as well. i think on this issue, there's a lack of trust and there has been for many years. a lack of trust between republicans and democrats, a lack of trust among republicans, most fundamentally a trust between the american people and our elected leaders on not delivering a solution for many, many years about some of these problems. and i hope that this meeting will be the beginning of building trust between our parties, between chambers because i know for a fact all the republicans around the table are committed to finding a solution and i believe all democrats are as well. this is a first step to going towards a good bill and you be
objective as you stated providing legal protection for the daca population while also securing our border and ending chain migration. thank you for the invitation. >> thank you very much for having us down here. i agree with tom cotton that the american public is very frustrated with us. one of the reasons they're frustrated with us is because we continue to couple things on which we have large agreement with things on which we do not agree. this is a perfect example of that. 86% of the american people in the most recent poll are for ensuring as you have said not providing for daca protected kids to go to a place that they don't know, they didn't grow up in, and it's not their home. there americans. they don't have a piece of paper that says there americans, but they are americans. and that seems to be mean, if e
are going to move ahead in a constructive way, that we take that on which we agree, the american public will be pleased with all of us. if we do that. just as in september, you recall, we we did the extension of cr, no drama. we were all for it. you, the foreign leaders met, we came to an agreement and we passed. in my view, we can pass the protection and what i understand your position is, procedurally, it was not done correctly. you then challenged us to pass it correctly. if it's put on the floor, mr. president, i believe it will have the overwhelming majority in both the house and senator graham things it will have a substantial majority in
the united states senate as wel well. and that think is the first step to creating some degree of confidence. democrats are for security at the borders. i want to state that emphatically. there is not a democrat that is not for having secure borders. they were obviously differences however, on how you affect them. you just indicated that yoursel yourself. and you indicated this would be a first step and then we continue to talk as we are talking today about how we best secure the border. there are difference of opinion within your party and within our party. i would urge that we move forward on protecting the daca protected individuals. young people, young adults as you pointed out in one of your statements who are productive parts of our community. that we protect them and get that done, and then because i
think everybody around the table as you pointed out is for security, and the issue is going to be how do we best affect that border security, just to move as the senator has just moved on the dock the students, as a matter of fact, maybe yesterday said we need to solve the daca issue and we need to solve in a way that is permanent, not temporary. when i agree with them on that issue. >> interestingly, when you say that, president obama when he signed the executive orders that he doesn't have the right to do this so you do have to go through congress and you do have to make it permanent. whether he does, whether he doesn't, you said it. that was a temporary stop cat. i don't think we want that. i think we want to have a permanent solution to this and i think everybody in this room feels that way very strongly. >> what happened is that the senate passed the immigration bill as you know, we did not consider in the house so we didn't reach those issues.
very frankly on border security, the chairman of the committee reported out the unanimous security solution which we then included in the bill that we filed incomprehensible immigration reform. >> i also think that after we do daca and we should be able to be successful and i think we should look in terms of your permanent solution in the whole situation with immigration. i think a lot of people in this room would agree that we will do it in steps and most people agree with that. even you said, let's do this and then we go phase two. what would you like to say? >> first, i want to thank you for bringing everybody together. you got the senate, the house, both parties. i like the exchange of ideas. i think everybody has a point here. the one thing i don't want to have happen here is what i saw in the past. the reformer bills that were passed on border security years ago never got finished.
the immigration bills passed that were right back at the table at the same problem. let's make a commitment to each one and most importantly to the american people that when we get done and come to an agreement that we are not back at this problem three to four years from now. that's why we've got to do daca and i agree with you 100%. if we do not do something with the security, if we do not do something with the chain migration, we are fooling each other that we solve the problem. you know how difficult this issue you know how difficult this issue is. let's collectively, we are here at the table together. i will be the first to tell you we are all going to have to give a little. let's solve the problem but let's not tell the american public at the end that it is solved when it's not. >> i think a good starting point would be bob goodlatte who has done a bill and i understand you are ready to submit it, you are going to