tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News June 16, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
and everything i love. neither should you. tell your doctor to lower your ldl and reduce your risk with repatha®. pay no more than $5 per month with the repatha® copay card. i'm chris rising tensions between iran and the sq present. how real is the threat of war? >> the international community condemns aransas although the freedom of navigation and the targeting of innocent civilians. chris: the trump administration calls iran a nation of terror. placing the blame for those tanker attacks squarely onto ron. and the president calls out u.s. intelligence agencies after every port kim jong-un's murdered half-brother was a source for the cia. we have secretary state mike pompeo about all of this when he joins us live.
then, who is up and who is down ahead of the first democratic debate of 2020? we will debut the latest fox news poll. and -- >> we must recognize in the 21st century, economic rights are human rights. >> what is bernie sanders vision for democratic socialism? will ask him in our 2020 sit down. only on "fox news sunday". plus, will ask our sunday panel about president trump saying he would take research on his political rivals from other countries. and a special power player of the week. jon stewart calling on congress to support 9/11 first responders. >> shameful, it is an embarrassment to the country and a stain on this institution. chris: all right now on "fox news sunday". hello again and happy father's day! from fox news washington. the trump administration is
once again turning up the pressure on iran. blaming the islamic republic for attacks on two oil tankers, the pentagon now considering sending thousands of more troops, warships and place the region. in a rating later saying they have no interest in dealing with the us. in a moment we'll talk with the secretary of state, mike pompeo, but first, rich is the latest on the escalating tensions with iran and another mass protest in hong kong against chinese interference. >> rn has released the crew of one of the oil tankers attacked last week in the gulf of oman. isthe associated press says that the cells arrive safely after the situation deteriorates again. >> arena forces remove an unexploded mine from one of two targeted ships. that is according to u.s. central command. attacks on the tankers happened
near the strait of hormuz chemical shipping passage were about 20 percent of the worlds oil passes through. chris iran is lashing out. because the regime wants are successful maximum pressure campaign lifted. >> to germany for mistresses the u.s. video is not enough to blame iran. british government says it's almost certain a branch of iran islamic revolutionary guard corps is responsible for the attacks peter randy doesn't deny involvement. president trump says he will negotiate when iran is ready the president says he is in no rush. meanwhile, massive demonstrations in hong kong. even though it is beijing act chief executive extended a controversial bill. it will allow those accused of crimes in hong kong and mainland china they assumed hong kong in 1997 under a position to resume his lifestyle for 50 years. >> is been substantial demonstrations over this and
other issues targeting their attempts to erode freedoms there. chris? chris: rich, thank you.
joining us now to discuss this and more, sector state mike pompeo, mr. secretary, welcome back to "fox news sunday". >> chris, great to be with you. chris: president trump's is flatly iran was responsible for the attack on the two tankers in the pentagon has released this video.which appears to show a revolutionary guard crew removing an unexploded mine from the hull of one of the ships. they say this is not enough to have a video and the owners of one of the ships says he believes from the crew it was hit by a flying object not a mine. two questions. how certain are you that iran was responsible for the attacks? and do you have more evidence that you can share with us? >> chris, it is unmistakable what happened here. these were attacks by the islamic republic of iran. a commercial shipping on the freedom of navigation with clear intent to deny transit through the strait of hormuz. there is lots of evidence, the
world will come to see much of it but the american people should rest assured, we have high confidence with respect to who conduct the attacks as well as half a dozen other attacks throughout the world over the past 40 days. >> want to talk to about this because last month after the first attack on four commercial ships, president trump took a very hard line, here he is. >> we'll see what happens with iran. it will be a very bad mistake if they do i think i'm hearing little stories about iran. if they do anything they will suffer greatly we'll see what happens. >> aranda and surrogates as you noted have responded to the president's maximum treasure campaign with more aggression, not less. attacking tankers, firing missiles, in iraq and saudi arabia and targeting u.s. drones in yemen and the persian gulf. question, mr. secretary, what is the administration going to do about it? >> remember we took over.
we took over with administration that allowed iran to create an enormous wealth, build a missile program a clear pathway to a nuclear weapons, this is where the trump administration came in. we was withdrew from the jcpoa and put in place an economic pressure campaign, one that continues. we had a ban on a number of petrochemical companies this past week. president trump is in everything he can to avoid what we do not want. we've done what we can to deter this terrine should understand we will continue to take action to deter iran from engaging this type of a behavior. i made a number of calls to my colleagues around the world yesterday. i'm confident we will have partners understand the threat. yes remember very little of our crude oil comes through the golf these days. china is relied on for over 80 percent of the crude oil japan, south korea, indonesia. these countries are dependent on freedom of navigation throughout the strait and i am confident when they see their own economy and people that they will join us in this. chris: i want to pursue their
question perhaps action and more in international action for the pentagon has reportedly considered sending as many as 6000 more troops to the area. along with warships, submarines. also talk of an international coalition to escort commercial chips through the strait of hormuz. are those on the table? and i guess basically, how far is president trump prepared to go? >> president trump has been unambiguous. iran will not get a nuclear weapon. that is the goal, that is the objective of the entire campaign with respect to iran and integrate stability in the middle east as part of the effort. i do not want to talk about optionsout there. options that , the president says we will pursue this we will continue to update actions. we have taken a handful to increase the opportunity humans iran the actions are not in their best interest. it appears that iran wants to continue to escalate the conflict. chris: but should we assume that the u.s. is going to
respond? because clearly as i said, despite the maximum pressure, ransoms beginning more aggressive, not less. >> you should assumethat we will guarantee freedom of navigation throughout the strait . the united states will make sure we have all the actions necessary to the medic and otherwise that achieve the outcome. chris: meanwhile congress, we are talking about republicans and democrats, appears ready to block an emergency u.s. arms sales to saudi arabia which is one of the major enemies of iran. if they go ahead and do that, block the u.s. arms sale that the trump administration wants, what message will that send to tehran? >> it would be most unfortunate. i think the decision was made to move forward with arms sales was the right decision an important decision. i think the events of the past week are -- i think we are 40 years of history.but even the
past 40 days demonstrate the malign activity that puts out is at risk. you remember this past week it was a rainy impact effort that flew a missile into an airport and saudi arabia. saudi arabia has the right to defend itself, the united states want to support the important defense partner in the region i think going forward these muscles made enormous sense and will continue push forward with them. >> returned to hong kong. the chief executive in hong kong appointed by beijing. they have announced she is suspending, not killing by suspending a bill of extradition. that would allow people in hong kong to be extradited to the chinese mainland. the response from the people in hong kong and there was a massive protest again, today, to protest the measure. millions of citizens coming into the street. they said the measure would allow china to crack down on critics. you have spoken out against this measurement president trump has said nothing critical about it. he simply commented about the size of the demonstrations. is he more concerned about maintaining his relationship
with president xi jinping that he is in defending human rights? >> the president's always been a big defender of human rights. i think you'll get a opportunity to see president xi jinping at the g 20 summit. i'm sure will be among the issues they discuss. we have a wide range of very important issues in the way china and united states interact, for an awfully long time on republican democrat presidents would allow china to take advantage of us on trade. and president trump has pushed back very strongly. we'll see what's happening, what's unfolding hong kong. we watching the people of hong kong speak about the things they value. we will see what the decision is in the coming days and weeks ahead. chris: in other subject. reports this week that the cia had turned the half-brother of kim jong-un in north korea, into the cia informant. before he was murdered in february of 2017.
president trump seemed to tell kim this week that this kind of thing will not happen on his watch. take a look.>> i saw the information about the cia with respect to his brother or half-brother. and i would tell him it would not happen under my office that's for sure. i would not let that happen under my -- chris: is a former head of the cia, before he took this job and some of these contacts with his brother the heavenly watch is there something wrong with the us spying on north korea and even using a family member to do so? >> never comment on intelligence matters in any way, chris. thank you. i was on his direct i'll stay with that rule today. the american people should rest assured the united states is taking all the actions that it needs to take to make sure we understand the risks and the threats are posed by north korea. and in my current role in working on getting nuclear weapons out of the hands of
north korea. chris: i understand you will not say what you are doing. but the president seemed to imply that there were some kind of spying on north korea as he said that would not happen under his -- people are asking why not? >> were taking all the efforts necessary to make sure we know is going on around the world. that includes every country. chris: the struggle by another country, russia. the u.s. is reporting today the u.s. has increased digital incursions into the electrical grid of russia in effect to send a warning. you do cyber attacks on us, we can respond and we can mess up your infrastructure. president trump call this report in the new york times and i want to get the quote - right. a virtual act of treason. what can you tell us about the new offensive in what you have
to say but the new york times reporting the story? >> i've had my moments as if the new york times on issues related to protecting american secrets. they called out by name and officer that worked for me. it was outrageous, deeply inconsistent with american values. and it was unnecessary, it was a throw away, it didn't add to the storyline one iota and yet they chose to do that. i do not have anything to say about the contents of that, i will talk about intelligence matters. but president trump has been crystal clear in my two and half years in the end ministration we will do everything we can to prevent a country from interfering in any election in the united states of america. we'll continue to work hard at the i'm proud of the work administration does i only wish the previous ministration had done the same. >> finally, the present created quite a controversy this week when he said that he seemed to invite opposition research in his political rivals in the 2020 campaign from foreign governments this is what he had to say. quick summary comes up and says i've information on your opponent, do you call the fbi?
i've seen a lot of things over my life i don't think in my life ever called the fbi. in my whole life. i don't need to call the fbi. >> the director says that's what you have to do. >> the fbi director is wrong. chris: he is accepting opposition research from a foreign government, is it right or wrong? >> you asked me not to call any questions ridiculous became really close right there. president trump has been very clear. he clarified his remarks later. he made it very clear. even in the first comments. he said i would do both. he said he would call the fbi. president trump is been very clear he will always make sure he gets it right for the american people and i'm confident he will do that here as well. chris: at the risk of getting your eye or the present told "fox and friends" on friday and i agree, and walked it back. >> he did not walk it back. chris: he did because he said maybe on thursday. then friday on "fox and friends" he said he would
listen first and then if the information was bad, he would take it to the fbi or the attorney general. but he also made it clear to george stephanopoulos that he did not see this as foreign interference. i want to play a clip of the president's own words. >> i think you might want to listen. there is nothing wrong with listening. if somebody called, from a country, norway, we have information on your opponent. i think i would want to hear it.>> you want the kind of interference in our elections? >> is not interference it's information i think i would take it. chris: he says is not interference it's information for the country, not to take, dating back to george washington and saying that foreign interference in our elections is unacceptable. >> chris, president trump believes that too. i've nothing further to add, i came on to talk about foreign policy. i think is the third time you asked me about a washington piece of silliness that a story that is inconsistent of what i've seen the president do every single day. chris: i will leave it there.
i think i asked
you twice but that's all right. [laughter] mr. secretary, thank you. thank you for your time and happy father's day, sir. >> thank you. chris: up next joe biden and bernie sanders wish or a debate stage, we will have our latest polls. and a live fox sunday sit down. all that when we come right back. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast...
...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands? that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist! i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there.
joins us live bit first brand-new fox polls showing where the race stands right ♪ ♪ now. ♪ >> joe biden goes into the ♪ first round of debates with a big lead. 32 percent of democratic primary voters support him. with bernie sanders trailing at 13 percent. elizabeth warren pete buttigieg and kamala harris in their place. this may be the reason for joe biden lead. by most 3 to 1 democrats say steady reliable leadership is more important than a bold new agenda. >> i would rather run against i think joe biden than anybody. >> matchups with president trump joe biden and sanders have substantial leads among all registered voters. while the edge for warren, pete buttigieg and harris have been in the margin of error. >> we need to begin impeachment proceedings. >> despite calls for impeachment on the campaign
trail by a margin of more than two to one, voters say congress should spend less time investigating the president, not more.but voters have problems with the other end of pennsylvania avenue. the four percent say the white house should be more cooperative with congress. only 11 percent want less cooperation. >> senator sanders joins is not from burlington, vermont. for a "fox news sunday" sitdown thank you, welcome back. >> thank you so much. chris: we look at the state of the race at this point. let's take a look at the latest fox news poll. this reflected in other polling as well. you have dropped sharply from 23 percent support in march 2 13 percent now. how do you explain that? >> explain in a sense that polls go up and polls go down. but the other part of her to correctly, chris, is that i am eating president trump fairly decisively which is consistent with all of the polling that i've seen. i think quite frankly i'm the
strongest candidate to be donald trump. we come in in pasadena, wisconsin, michigan and other battleground states. it is a fight and look forward to. chris: you seem to be competing most directly perhaps on left side of the democratic race with mechanic senator, elizabeth warren. and in a new cbs news poll out today of 18 battleground states she actually leads you by one point. in the 18 states and obviously within the margin of error. she says that she supports capitalism and she supports markets. but she wants them more tightly regulated. why do you think that you are a better choice for voters than senator warren? >> senator warren is a friend of mine integrate senator. but let me just give you my perspective. chris, according to federal reserve, the average worker in america today despite a huge increase in productivity and
technology, is earning exactly the same wages that he or she earned 45 years ago. in the last 30 years, the top one percent has seen an increase in their wealth of $21 trillion. while the bottom half of america has seen an actual decline in their wealth of some $800 billion. in other words, we have an economy today that is working phenomenally well for the top one percent while the working class of the country is being decimated. meanwhile, it seems to me that if we are going to bring about real change in a country that means healthcare to all people. raising the minimum wage to a living wage. making sure that all of our young people can afford to go to college, dealing with climate change, criminal justice reform, we need fundamental change.
we need a political revolution. we need millions of people, working-class people whose lives have been decimated for the last 45 years to stand up, to wall street, to stand up to the insurance companies, and the drug companies. a political revolution that is what i believe. chris: you made a major speech this week to define what you believe in. democratic socialism. this is a clip from that stage. >> today in the second decade of the 21st century, we must take off the "unfinished business" of the new deal and carry it through completion. chris: critics, sir, so you are defining down democratic socialism to make it more palatable to voters. they say that it is not just new social programs you listen to some will get into a moment but it's actually a dramatic change and a transfer of economic power to the people. is that true? >> it means to say that we have to break up large financial institutions on wall street.
you have unbelievable economic power. it means that we have to stand up to the drug companies were charging us twice as much for the medicine that we need compared to other countries. it means that we have to stand up to the insurance companies. and move to a medicare for all payer system. we have to set up with there is enormous fraud and waste within the pentagon. so it does mean, chris, i think what you said is basically true. right now real power, most people understand this, rest with a handful of large corporations and very wealthy individuals. and the time is now for us to say you know what? we need an economy and government that works for all of us, not just one percent. and if people want to accuse me of believing in that i plead guilty. it is what a believe in. i believe in a vibrant democracy where ordinary people get a fair shake rather than just the one percent getting it all. chris: let me drill down on that because here is what the
executive director of the democratic socialist for america told the new york times last year. our ultimate goal really is for working people to run our society and run our workplaces and our economies. back in the 70s, you seemed to agree here is a quote - from you. i favor the public ownership of utilities, banks and major industries. senator, do you still believe that? and if not why? >> in the city where i am right now, we do have public ownership of our elected truck and they do a pretty good job. a lot of electric departments all over this country are publicly owned. do i believe that workers should have more say and be sitting on the boards of large corporations? yes, i do. do i believe that we should break up some of the major banks on wall street and support credit unions and
community banks? yes, i do. so i think really one of the things that we have to look at is the fact that power in this country rests with just a handful of people. have six financial institutions that have assets equivalent to 54 percent of the gdp. six institutions control the flow of trillions. when we talk about democracy means not just voting every two years it's giving working people more of a say in what goes on in the economy. >> all right, let's take a look at perhaps, your biggest proposal. you have a number of proposals. medicare for all. let's put up some of the details. half of americans, 156 million people get their health insurance through their employer. according to the kaiser family foundation, 68 percent of them give their health plan a grade of a or b. i guess the question is why take away system that millions of americans like?
>> first of all, every single year, tens of millions of people move from one plant to the other plan. second of all, what we are talking about despite a lot of misinformation coming from the insurance companies and the drug companies is allowing all of the american people to continue to go to the dr. that you want to go to. go to the hospital that you want to go to. in fact, under medicare for all single-payer system, we expand medicare for seniors to include dental care, hearing aids and vision care, eyeglasses. we expand medicare. but right now chris, you have a dysfunctional healthcare system. you have got 70 million americans who either have no health insurance or they are underinsured with high deductibles and copayments. we are paying twice as much as any other country on earth for prescription drugs that we need. we spend far more per capita on healthcare as do the people of any other country. medicare as you know is the most popular health insurance
program in the country right now. but it only applies to people 65 or older. what i want to do is over a four year period, expand medicare, to every man, woman and child in this country. it will save the average person significant sums of money and provide comprehensive care. where the only major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all people and has got to change. chris: i want to pick up on the price which you mentioned because the liberal urban institute assessed your plan back in 2016 and said that the cost would be $32 trillion over 10 years and you have talked about paying for that through a variety of taxes. >> but chris -- chris: if i may just finish, sir. a variety of taxes on individuals and companies. look, i fully understand and i can accept the idea that you want to do something for the uninsured or even the underinsured. but is that the essence of big government when you say, we know better and even if you and
they are as you pointed out tens of millions of people that like in their insurance from their employer, you say no, it is not right. we will decide what the plan is and you will do it the way we tell you to. >> well, not quite that way. first of all, use the number 32 trillion which is roughly probably right. sound like a lot of money but you know what happens if we keep the current system which is the most wasteful and expensive system in the world? their estimates of the cost will be $50 trillion. so the healthcare costs go up, every study shows that medicare for all would be less expensive continuing the current dysfunctional healthcare system. question about one minute left. what about this main point which is, you, the government, president sanders will tell people that like that they are given insurance either from their union or from their
employer, no, you have to take what we give. >> medicare itself is a health insurance program, it is far more popular than private insurance companies. people do not like insurance companies. they like the doctors and their hospitals. and we maintain that. right now chris, as you know if you're in one plan you may cost a fortune to go to the dr. you want if he or she is not in the same plan. we do away with that. people with complete freedom of choice as to the doctors they want to go to war the hospital they want to go to. they will save money, we will join every other major country on earth and guarantee health care to all. will carr prescription drug cost in half. i think it's a pretty good deal. chris: senator sanders, thank you. thanks for your time, please come back and continue the conversation, sir. >> thank you. chris: four years ago today donald trump descended the escalator in trump tower to announce his first presidential
i didn't have to call 911. and i didn't have to come get you. because you didn't have another heart attack. not today. you took our conversation about your chronic coronary artery disease to heart. even with a stent procedure, your condition can get worse over time and keep you at risk of blood clots. so you added xarelto® to help keep you protected. xarelto® - a blood thinner approved by the fda - when taken with low-dose aspirin is proven to further reduce the risk of blood clots that can cause heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death in people with chronic cad. that's because while aspirin can help, a recent study showed it may not be enough to manage your underlying risk of blood clots. in a clinical trial, almost 96% of people taking xarelto® did not have a cardiovascular event. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death. while taking, you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious,
and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. enjoy every moment - and help protect yourself from an unexpected one like a serious cardiovascular event. are you doing enough? ask your doctor if it's time for xarelto®. to learn more about cost and how janssen can help, visit xarelto.com. people, our sales now appla new low!10 frames. at visionworks, our sales are good on over 500 frames. why are you so weird? see great with 2 complete pairs for $59. really. visionworks. see the difference.
>> with the president said last night shows clearly once again over and over again he does not know the difference between right and wrong. chris: president trump created quite a stir saying he would look at oppo research from a foreign government and house speaker nancy pelosi hammering him for it. it's time now for our sunday group, rich lowry of the national review, comments for
the hill, juan williams. guy benson, fox news radio and former dnc chair, donna brazil. the new fox poll has some interesting numbers on this subject let's put them on the screen. a record, pretty surprising. 50 percent think the trump campaign actually coordinated with the russians in 2016. that is higher than one year ago and higher than this just before release of the mueller report. they cleared the present of collusion. it was pretty clear to me that secretary pompeo was not especially appreciative of my asking him about it but it seems inescapably big story. but the president's answer, i would look at it. does not only add to peoples concerns about this? >> yes it was a better answer. he sort of went all over the
place and touched all the basis of he could go back and say i did say maybe i will go to the fbi. maybe you do both and he cleaned up and mopped it up on "fox and friends" next day. as for the pulley just put on the screen, with 50 percent of americans believing now there was coordination between the trump campaign and russia, i do want to read for the record from the mueller report, the investigation did not establish that the trump campaign conspired or coordinate with russian government in the selection interference. i mean -- >> but accepted information and they should have known better that this information was gained through illegitimate and criminal means. chris, what bothers me still, as of today, is that we are not doing enough to protect ourselves from the future elections. every campaign, every campaign official, every campaign staff and candidates shall receive an unclassified briefing from the intelligence community now. so we know going into 2020 what is going on. chris: wait a minute, want to go back to donna because we ask you for questions for the panel and got this on twitter. from loose on about the present saying he's ãhe would accept
information. does a single for hillary rodham clinton and the steele dossier? the question is, how do answer and what is the difference between the president saying he would accept information or at least listen to it from the russians and hillary clinton paying for the steele dossier where christopher steele actually got information from the russians? >> was led only to conflict too. the thing is bad because i can go back to abel 2016 and i can tell you what happened. now with fusion gps because i did not hire them when i became chair of the party. they were already working for the washington free beacon. later fusion gps. chris: democrats ended up paying for the campaign. chris indirectly the content campaign because the law firm paid fusion gps. do not conflict the gp reagan opposition research from the russian government and the russian intelligence service, you know it is about russian interest. i do not conflict the two.the
steele dossier, he read the mueller report.at least i did. he barely mentions the steele dossier. >> some say it is -- of course as inspector general. chris even as you go back and read the house intelligence report that came out in march 2018, the steele dossier is part of that conversation but the fbi, counterintelligence was on carter page before the steele dossier. >> a couple of things. you for the information the trump campaign got from ill-gotten sources but there was no information, they had the meeting and it came to apsley nothing. and the dossier clearly miss cued the fbi and the media from the very beginning based on information from shadowy russian sources that there was some deep conspiracy here. but there wasn't. i think the answer by trump was bad but the reason he gave it i believe is that he just does not want to admit donald junior made image to a particular meeting. after years of investigation and criminal exposure for don
junior, supposedly will take a call from russia and china and say i will do that meeting, it is completely absurd.chris: i know we can all continue talking about this to the escalating and frankly much more serious situation, the escalating tensions between the u.s. and iran. japanese prime minister shinzo abe abe brought a message from the president to the iran leader. this was the response. >> i've no response to donald trump message, i tell you somewheres but i'm not giving him any message because i don't consider him worthy of even exchanging messages. chris: how serious do you think the risk of armed conflict is between the u.s. and iran at this point? >> i think is pretty serious. personally i don't think we would be in this precarious and dangerous position at the president had not pulled out of the iran deal. they are randall give us options in terms of ratcheting up or down the sanctions. obviously we don't have that
now. andrea less international support because the other countries, the other five countries in the 2015 will have remained loyal to it. so the question is about america's credibility, the second thing to say is that -- chris: that does not excuse iran shooting down drones, firing missiles into saudi arabia that her 26 civilians. >> no but that is why -- i do not know that for a fact. there's lots of controversy about that intelligence. but i will say that when you look at iran right now, and you say, what is the likelihood of them painting nuclear material or moving forward i think he is pulling out of the deal made that more likely and you also have to consider that united arab emirates, saudi arabia, or involved in wars against iran. with places in places-- the med
option is to score some of the commercial ships through the golf but if you do that will put americans lives, you increase the likelihood of real conflict. >> your shaking your head. >> yes because first of all you neuronal sanctions are working. they're strangling his bullet which is the top tourist proxy of the regime. and it was a washington poster about a week ago but to me, the headlines today in the "washington post", trump pushes u.s. to drink with iran.if we are approaching the break and hope that we are not, iran is pushing the world to the brink by acting in this fashion. i think to push this off on the iran deal or donald trump is to almost take responsibility and the agency away from a regime that has been for decades, the number one outsourcer, number one funder of international -- >> i know you feel that way but. >> you go to the state department -- >> but i'm saying, do you
believe in regime change? the president says no. it is not about regime change. he is trying to change behavior to establish peace. this is not making them more likely. >> but there are other options too. available to iran besides blowing up ships. in the strait of hormuz. in reaction to the increased pressure. you can sit down and say we will make more concessions, destroy more of the nuclear program. they don't want to do that because they want, they love the deal because they can sit on the cusp of being a nuclear power while getting all sorts of economic benefits. >> we talk about the brink. and let's set aside whether who is pushing home to the brink. on the one hand there's talk about us being on the cusp of war. on the other hand president trump has made it clear over and over since he was elected, he has no interest in getting involved in another foreign engagement and i think we would all agree at the table, war with iran would be ugly.>> yes. this is not his natural inclination, last month when the department of defense is considering sending more troops to the region, they ratcheted
down the number because they were afraid donald trump would not approve a bigger number. adjusting is intolerable to have shipping in this immensely important commercial thoroughfare under threat for reading forces and we have to make some sort of, make it clear to them that if it happens again, we will hit them in some -- chris: have less than a minute, but i think rich is exactly right. regardless of how we got here, you can have a ram in effect trying to block the flow of oil through this vital waterway. >> i think the disagreement really comes with the notion of the maximum pressure campaign is going to give the trump administration, the united states the best options of moving forward. i think congress this week the defense of appropriation and it will have to weigh in because the maximum pressure campaign may not give us the results we want. chris: i do not know that maximum weakness will help the peer. >> the middle east is fragile
and any day, any moment something else can just blow up. chris: all right, thank you panel. see you next sunday pinafore sw song will probably still be talking about this. we come back, our power play of the week. k.jon stewart joins us live to discuss his emotional appeal to lawmakers to extend funding for 9/11 first responders. ng at me.. no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. uh-huh, where's the camel? "mr. big shot's" got his own trailer. ♪ wheeeeeee! believe it! geico could save you 15% or more on car insurance. ♪ ♪
from new york. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having me. chris: how was that performance? >> is terribly emotional. this community, the 9/11 first responder community from the pentagon, the trade center, they have been through an incredible ordeal. almost solely because of the heroism they displayed on 9/11 and in the months following 9/11. and you know when you are with these men and women, when you work with them for a long time, when you've advocated with them for a long time, everybody becomes very close. and we lose last week seven first responders died. due to 9/11 related illnesses. it is a very emotional issue. i think this community is at the end of the rope. i think there is a feeling of
disbelief that they can understand why they have to continually settle up and ride down to washington and make appeals for something that should be simple but is somehow through politics, made agonizing difficult. >> okay is tough in this kind of situation to talk about money but money is a factor. payouts from the fund have been capped at 7.4, 7 and a half billion dollars. and the fund, the victims compensation fund ends at 2020, no more claims of the 2020. >> right. chris: you to extend the fund to 2090 basically through the lives of all the people who may have become sick. and to keep it open ended march 20, 1990, any idea how much that would cost? >> it will only score something over a 10 year period. haven't gotten the score impugn
my guest and some are guessing 10 to 12 billion is going to be the figure that comes through. but remember, that's over a 10 year period. and then extending it past that, the vcf part of this is going to get smaller and smaller because even for the first responders of 9/11 community, the average age now is in the 50s where it was 36, 37 on 9/11. if you're looking for a sunset clause on this bill in terms of funding, it is there, the sunset clause, so many of these individuals are sick and dying that we talk about just extending it through 2090 to go along with the healthcare fund, that's just to ensure that none of these men and women ever had to come down and hat in hand, beg for this kind of thing again. but realistically, the money for these funds will slowly diminish.
not necessarily in healthcare portion but the vcf portion will get smaller. >> let's talk practical politics because that is of course the end what this is all about. it is very likely that the house is going to pass the full bill that you want extending the program through the lives of these people. then you have to go to the senate and in your testimony you said that a certain someone by which it appeared you meant senate leader mitch mcconnell, cannot be allowed to use this as a quote - political football in negotiations and other spending bills. have you had problems with senator mcconnell? >> yes. i mean, not me personally but in terms of getting the 9/11 bills passed. mitch mcconnell has been the white whale of this is 2010. in 2010, you know, this brings up something because i think it is the cynicism that is displayed by washington also causes the situation to be so emotional. they asked mitch mcconnell about the testimony after it was done he said, i think they
hear -- date he used the word gosh. we haven't looked at it in a while and we will look at it as compassionately as we have in the past. i want to make it clear that this is never been dealt with compassionately by senator mcconnell. he has always held onto the very last minute and only then, under intense lobbying and public shaming has he even deigned to move on it this is not a republican democrat issue, there are republicans on the bill.would obviously like to have more of them. but senator mcconnell has seen fit to in 2010 he used it to make sure that tax cuts would be permanent, and 2015 he took it out of the transportation bill because he wanted to extract some promises on oil imports and so in the bellringer 2019, he's been aware of this.
we were told in august that this fund was running out of money and people would have their award slashed by 30, 50, up to 70 percent. chris: less than three minutes. some questions i want to get to. some are critics and mostly republican senators say that the fund should not be open-ended and they say this should be handled by the state not the federal government. three, can i get a response that? >> it should be open-ended because cancer does not have an expiration date on it. and the gestation period of different illnesses -- you know it would be like after pearl harbor saying we not going to do anything for people of pearl harbor because the hawaii issue. this is an attack on america. they did not shout death to tribeca. and to try and push off as a new york issue, and i think they do that because they believe it is democratic and it's not as important to them.
not all republicans oppose us for all that have is a republican. and it is unacceptable. they have done it now for years, senator mcconnell, lindsey graham is the one that is head of judiciary. she's the one that will be negotiated whether it is five or 10 years. we cannot make these individuals continue to live in agonizing uncertainty of not knowing that these programs will be extended and that they will be able to move on with their lives. it has to be done. chris: a little more than a minute left.you have spent years often times commenting about washington and politics. in a real way as opposed to commenting the anchor chair, what have you learned about our politics from this experience? >> is interesting. i come from the world of show business. if you take the arrogance and entitlement and elitism that people do not like about hollywood and show business,
and you concentrate it in one city, and gave those people actual power, that is washington. there is a tremendous amount of people down there doing great work with goodwill but there is a very small concentrated group of people at the top. they have lost sight of what they are therefore and how it looks to the outside world. they criticized us for saying you're so upset that it is an empty congress but this is just a subcommittee. we knew it was a subcommittee. and they said 12 out of the 14 people were there the whole time but they weren't. you get marked as present on the subcommittee showing up for just a minute. when lou alvarez was speaking, when mike o'connell was speaking there only six members of 14. seven members out of 14. that is a failing grade and it shouldn't happen. chris: would have to leave it there, jon, thank you, thank you for joining us. we will stay on top of what
happens to this measure in the house and the senate. >> much appreciated. chris: we will be back with a final word. this is a commercial about insurance and i know you're thinking. i don't want to hear about insurance. 'cause let's be honest... nobody likes dealing with insurance. right? see, esurance knows it's expensive. i feel like i'm giving my money away. so they're making it affordable. thank you, dennis quaid. you're welcome, guy in kitchen. i named my character walter. that's great. i'd tell you more but i only have thirty seconds so here's a dramatic shot of their tagline so you'll remember it. when insurance is affordable, it's surprisingly painless.
we'll have more news on the fox news channel. see you in a bit. paul: welcome to "the journal editorial report." i'm paul gigot. contempt resolutions are flying and the rhetoric on impeachment heating up with house speaker nancy pelosi and house judiciary chairman jerry nadler reportedly at odds over opening an official inquiry. the house voted tuesday to empower committee chairs to go to court to enforce subpoenas issued to top current and former trump administration officials including attorney general william barr and former white house counsel, don mcgahn. all this as president trump fueled the democratic fury by saying he would likely listen if a foreign gover