0 out because it was jammed. are we to believe that this didn't get any communications out back to beijing because it was effectively jammed all the way through by either the intelligence agencies or the military? >> yeah, well, dealing with the first thing, it's obvious, i think, given the action we took against these three unidentified objects, we did not act accordingly when air space was about to be violated by the spy balloon in alaska, did not shoot it down, that reacted in i think what may be an overreaction to the others. he has to be absolutely clear what we are going to do about it. i don't think he's going to fess up to the fact that they may have made a mistake in permitting it to go across the united states. i believe he did, he's going to get questions around that. in terms of what did we learn and did we shut them down, i'm not a technology expert but my gut tells me we would never know for sure about that until we get ahold of the devices which we have in our hands now and are able to examine them. and that's why certainly if a spy balloon is going to enter the united states, we should destroy it before it has the opportunity to take that information. that just seems obvious to anybody looking at this and i think the american people get it. shoot it down before it can do harm. >> sandra: i'm just looking, just yesterday, 22 hours ago, prior to what we are about to hear from the president, mike mike pompeo, former secretary of state, general keane, sent out a statement, shooting down four objects over american territory is not normal. president biden owes the american people an explanation. news worthy that the president will be speaking moments from now. that being said, general, do you think we will learn anything about the balloon that china claimed and what it was able to retain during its time over american territory? i'm just reading directly from one of our own stories, a u.s. official said the balloon could have been externally maneuvered or directed to loiter over a specific target but it's unclear if chinese forces did so. do you expect any clarity on questions like that, general? >> i don't expect it, but it's obvious those who are now attempting to say the wind took it off course and moved it and maybe in a direction that china did not want, the absurdity is on the surface. we are talking about a balloon that sat owe an icbm nuclear field a couple days and transited near some other significant military bases, one i used to command, fort bragg, that is not the idle movement of the wind directing it and now appears people are trying to support the administration are coming up with these sort of lame justifications in terms of what took place. listen, the american people, i've been talking to them about this ever since this incident took place, they want to know really what happened, why did it happen, and what are we doing about it to make sure it does not happen again. the president has got to give some reassurance to the american people and maybe educate us a bit about this incident. we are trying to do it ourselves and help us understand some of the details and ramifications of it. but one of the things i want clarity on, what have we learned here about our own detection and our own surveillance of spy balloons going forward. are there places that are vulnerable. don't have to get into the specifics of it, but if there are, give the american people some assurances we found some gaps in the surveillance and detection capability and we are going to fix that as priority one. don't try to hide it. be honest about it. and that helps reassure trust and i think trust has broken down over this issue. take the politics out of it completely. it's not about a democratic or republican president, this is our commander in chief talking straight to the american people about the american people's own security, and this is job one for him. >> john: we'll see what he says, general, coming up. so far he said this to him was not a major incursion. a lot of people beg to differ. general jack keane, good to talk to you. appreciate it. >> sandra: thank you, general keane. >> john: peter doocy live at the white house and a lot of people are interested to hear what the president has to say, as jack keane was saying, shooting down objects in u.s. territory does not happen very often, unless i'm incorrect, the last time when george welch and ken taylor took down more than six japanese planes at pearl harbor. >> the first time the commander in chief actually talks about the command that he gave to deploy u.s. military assets over the u.s. for the first time in decades. why did he do it? we hope to find out in a few minutes. >> he will speak to the united states response of the aerial objects, the chinese high altitude surveillance balloon and putting the safety and security of the american people always first. >> should it impact the u.s. and china relations. vice president says it does not have to, does the president agree? the verbiage the white house is using, response to recent aerial objects, not saying balloons, not saying spycrafts or ufo, but recent aerial objects. and president biden's visit to walter reed for a physical, he did not have one in 2022, but in 2021, some acid reflux, stiffened gait from degenerative changes to his spine and some small benign polyps on his colon. and check-ups like this could influence a very important decision. president himself has said so. >> do you plan to run for re-election? >> yes. but look, i'm a great respector of fate. fate has intervened in my life many, many times. if i'm in the health i'm in now, if i'm in good health, then i would run again. >> that was from about two years ago, but it goes to show the results of today's physical could have very profound and potentially historic personal and political implications, john. >> john: sandra, are you still there? >> sandra: yes, hello, my microphone open now? peter, put this all together for us. we have the train derailment situation in ohio, pete buttigieg is being criticized for not being out there and more clear to help the communities on the ground and determining whether or not the air and water are safe. we are obviously awaiting information on these unidentified objects. there's a lot -- there's a lot on their plate right now. do you expect the president to only address the shot down objects in this speech? >> yes, it seems like they have been putting together over the last couple days a very specific, very narrowly focused set of remarks for him to give. to your point about the train derailment, that might be the thing that stuck out the most from the karine jean-pierre briefing a few minutes ago because she was asked about the official in palestine, ohio saying we haven't heard anything about the white house until two days ago. but white house officials insist the epa has been on it since the beginning, that's where there is a real difference of the story because the officials -- people -- there are plenty of examples of people in and around the area of the derailment who say nobody has showed up, nobody has called, no nothing. but here at the white house they say that's not the case. so at some point president biden might have to respond to that and explain exactly, why there is such a difference of opinion on something that should be pretty black and white, but today we just expect it to be about the unmanned, or the unknown aerial objects. >> john: he's at the auditorium and we have heard you and your colleagues have tried to shout a question at him, see if he takes one off script. we can hear that rain coming down. stay dry. >> sandra: thanks, peter. >> john: former defense secretary mark esper to talk more about this. mr. secretary, new information from the pentagon it was launched from an island, where the ep3 plane was forced down in 2001 after it collided with a chinese fighter. initially headed toward guam, then seemed to get picked up by an errant air current and headed to alaska, they watched it over alaska, over british columbia, and through montana and not until a civilian said what the heck is that and took a picture of it and started asking questions. senator john kennedy of louisiana thinks had that civilian not spotted the balloon, intelligence would have just watched this thing from the launch in china all the way across the pacific, across the united states and never said a peep about it. what do you think? >> first of all, i think it's a credible theory. my original question was what did we know and when did we know it, and if we knew it was headed our direction in the air space, why was the decision for the shootdown earlier, it could have been done once it entered the air space in part of the islands or alaska. and now that we know there was more time to make the decision and does beg the question, did they allow the balloon to pass because the white house did not want to disturb relations with beijing, particularly on the eve of tony blinken's trip to beijing. >> sandra: mr. secretary, thank you for joining. sandra here. we are told the president is making his way over to deliver this long-awaited speech to hear directly from the president on these unknown flying objects. we do know that he's going to be speaking after he directed the national security adviser, jake sullivan, to lead the interagency team for the procedures downing the china balloon, do you expect they will reveal protocol now? they did say they developed new protocol, i think it was karine jean-pierre at the white house briefing earlier this week, they have new protocols for taking down unidentified objects. would that reveal that? >> i hope so. i've been talking over a week we should review all of our policies when it comes to air space surveillance and the policy, manned, unmanned, commercial, noncommercial, and not just review the policy -- >> john: mr. secretary, if you could, hang with us. let's go to the president. >> high altitude balloon. our military, through norad, closely scrutinized our air space, including enhancing our radar to pick up more slow-moving objects above our country and around the world. they tracked three unidentified objects, one alaska, canada and over lake huron in the midwest. they acted in accordance for unidentified objects in u.s. air space. i gave the order to take down the objects due to civilian air traffic and could not rule out the surveillance risk of sensitive facilities. we acted in consultation with the canadian government, i spoke personally with prime minister trudeau from canada on saturday and acted out of abundance of caution and opportunity that allowed us to take down these objects safely. our military and the canadian military are seeking to recover the debris so we can learn more about these three objects. our intelligence community is still assessing all three incidences. they are reporting to me daily and will continue the urgent efforts to do so, and i will communicate that to the congress. we don't yet know exactly what the three objects were, but nothing right now suggests they were related to china's spy balloon program or surveillance vehicles from any other country. intelligence community's current assessment is these three objects were most likely balloons tied to private companies, recreation or research institution to study weather or conducting other scientific research. when i came into office i instructed our intelligence community to take a broad look at the phenomenon of unidentified aerial objects. we know companies, companies and countries and research organizations operate at altitudes, not nefarious, including research. i want to be clear, we don't have any evidence there is a sudden increase in the objects in the sky. we are seeing more of them, partially because of the steps we have taken to increase our radar, narrow our radar and adapting the approach to dealing with these challenges. that's why i've directed my team to come back to me with sharper rules for how we will deal with these unidentified objects moving forward, distinguishing between those that are likely to pose safety and security risk that necessitate action and those that do not. but make no mistake, if any object presents a threat to the safety and security of the american people i will take it down. i'll be sharing with congress these classified policy parameters when they are completed and they'll remain classified so we don't give a road map to our enemies to try to evade our offenses. going forward, these parameters will guide what actions we will take while responding to unmanned and unidentified aerial objects. keep adapting them as challenges evolve, if it evolves. in addition, i have directed my national security adviser to lead a government-wide effort to make sure we deal safely and effectively with the objects in the air space. a better inventory of unmanned airborne objects in space above the united states air space and make sure that inventory is accessible and up to date. second, we'll implement further measures to improve our capacity for unmanned objects in our air space. third, we'll update the rules and regulations for launching and maintaining unmanned objects in the skies above the united states of america. and fourth, my secretary of state will lead an effort to help establish a global -- common global norms in this largely unregulated space. these steps will lead to safer and more secure skies for our air travelers, military, scientists and people on the ground as well. that's my job as your president, commander in chief. as the events of the previous days have shown, we'll always act to protect the interest of the american people and the security of the american people. since i came to office we have developed the ability to identify, track and study high altitude surveillance balloons connected with the chinese military. when one of these high altitude surveillance balloons entered the air space over the continental united states, i gave the order to shoot it down when it was safe to do. it was the size of multiple school busses and a risk to people on the ground. instead we have tracked it closely, analyzed its capabilities and learned more about how it operates. and because we knew its path, we were able to protect sensitive sites against collection. we waited until it was safely over water which would not only protect civilians but also enable us to recover substantial components for further analytics, and then we shot it down sending a clear message, clear message the violation of our sovereignty is unacceptable. we'll act to protect our country and we did. now, this past friday we put restrictions on six firms that support the people's liberation army aerospace army, airships and balloons denying them access to u.s. technology. we briefed our diplomatic partners and allies around the world and know china's program and where the balloons have flown. some have raised concerns directly with china. our exports have lifted components of the payload off the ocean floor, analyzing them as i speak and what we learn will strengthen our capabilities. now, we'll also continue to engage with china as we have throughout the past two weeks. since the beginning of my administration, we seek competition, not conflict with china. not looking for a new cold war. i make no apologies and we will compete. and we'll responsibly manage that competition so it does not veer into conflict. this episode underscores the maintaining open lines of communications between the diplomats and military professionals. our diplomats will be engaging further and i will remain in communication with president xi. grateful for the work the last several weeks of the intelligence, diplomatic and military professionals who have proved once again to be the most capable in the world and thank you all. look, the other thing i want to point out, we are going to keep our allies and the congress informed of all we know and all we learn, and i expect to be speaking with president xi and i hope we have -- we are going to get to the bottom of this. i make no apologies for taking down that balloon. thank you very much. >> sir, there's been criticism this was -- criticism that this -- >> compromised by your family's business a break, man. >> criticism this was an >> you can come to my office and ask the question, we'll have more polite people. >> why have you chosen poland for the anniversary of the war and what's your message? >> speaking to president xi, mr. president. >> john: the president thinking about taking a couple of questions but could not decide which questioner to take it from, too many people shouting, he decided to turn and walk away. defense secretary in the trump administration mark esper hung throughs with all this. i wanted to point you to one thing the president said, talking about the three objects in alaska, in the yukon territory and lake huron. gave orders to take them down because of a risk to aviation and the fact we could not rule out surveillance of sensitive sites. but yet he led a spy balloon fly over the entire united states. there seems to be a contradiction there. >> yeah, to me that's the major unanswered question that remains, john. he did a good job and finally speaking to the american people, covered each of the incidents, at least the last three in some details. he talked about the policy framework going forward, i think it needs to be more public, he talked about it being classified, but the two things he did not cover, why didn't he shoot down the chinese balloon down when it was over alaska. that's number one. number two, he should have taken questions at the end. the reporters have a responsibility to ask questions the american people are asking and he simply passed the opportunity to do so. >> sandra: what do you believe is the m he is -- the message he sent to china there? >> we are not going to tolerate bad behavior and he wants to work with them, but i would liked him speaking about the strategic competition the united states and china are in, and china does not have our best interests in mind. american people need to understand and hear the competition between the united states and china is real and it's going to be unending, at least as long as xi jinping is in power and the communist party rules the country. that's what we are up against in the 21st century, the democracies against the autocracy. >> and he said we don't know what they were, likely tied to private companies, recreation or research. i mean, sounds like we shot down some weather balloons. >> yeah, that he is been my hunch all along, john, likely were not chinese spy balloons at that point. mainly because they entered from the north as compared to the southwest. in terms of the policy, he's kind of writing policy in realtime, the decision was if you don't know and it's unmanned and presents some type of safety or security to the united states as he said, we'll shoot it down. it goes back to the question you asked, and i think everybody is asking, why not shoot down the chinese spy balloon before it had the ability to traverse the united states for a week. >> sandra: if these were just weather balloons, wouldn't somebody have claimed them? >> i would think someone is missing a balloon somewhere, maybe they are embarrassed, maybe the administration knows, but somebody is missing three balloons, so i suspect we'll find out in due course. >> john: so just, if we are going to go after every weather balloon that happens to pass by or end up on this newly tuned radar, what's the cost associated to the u.s. taxpayer of doing that? you have to send up f-22 or f-16, firing off missiles at $400,000 apiece, the one over lake huron missed, pretty much a million dollars inside winder missiles there. how much is this going to cost the u.s. taxpayer in the overall? >> the bigger point i was hoping to here, rules and regulations who can fly in our air space, enforce them, international, you know, rules as well that everybody else will follow, and if you don't abide by the rules and you enter without permission we will shoot you down. i think that limits a lot of this misunderstanding and confusion over the past week or so. >> sandra: do you believe that people are left with more questions than answers after the president's speech just now? to go back to the actual news that he delivered, saying no indication, john just quoted it, that these objects were related to china's spy balloon program, most likely balloons tied to private companies. this is the united states of america, that's the president of the united states, couldn't he make a few phone calls to find who owned the balloons and if he -- he's not saying definitively these are owned by private companies. >> yeah, there have been other media reports of people in the administration trying to reach out to other organizations, countries, etc. it would be helpful to learn more of that and again, i'm afraid we probably won't know more until we recover the debris and can piece it back together, unless these folks step forward. it does continue to raise questions about what these three were and more importantly, why we didn't shoot down the chinese spy balloon, and what does it mean going forward for u.s.-china relations. >> john: a lot of lingering questions what intelligence might this balloon have gathered as it was flying over sensitive military bases, including a nuclear base in montana, flew over whiteman air force base, where the b2 bomber fleet is kept. the president says we took steps for its ability to gather information, can we jam a balloon like that from the ground by targeting it with signals or would they have just covered up things that were on the ground or maybe moved the b2s into hangars? >> we can do all those things, john. we have experience, because we were under the open skies regime for a number of years, by the way, i would note during the trump administration, i pushed to get out of the open skies agreement, we felt russia was conducting unauthorized surveillance against our critical sites, so we have some practice doing that. but again, i don't think we know what they gathered. clearly they thought it was so important or were not getting enough information from the overhead satellites in space they felt the need to float a balloon, and balloons provide persistence that satellites don't. secondly, we need to see what was in the instrumentation package, signals collection gear it had, measurement gear it had, or electrooptical gear. good sense of what they got, what they captured, and where the gaps are in their own space surveillance. >> sandra: so the president saying a few moments ago, finally breaking what had been quite a long time of silence on all this, saying i make no apologies for taking down that balloon and he further said, mr. secretary, i expect to be speaking with china's xi. so, what do you expect from that conversation and what direction should the president take it? >> look, i think we should send a very strong message to stop it, and not just the surveillance, it's the espionage in our country, it's -- it is how they are conducting, stealing our intellectual property, military and commercial, all the nefarious things they are doing out there to undermine, and they want to dominate the global order by 2049, and i would deliver a strong message to xi jinping about this and push back what they are doing. the chinese have been all over the map with regard to the response to us shooting down the balloon, began with denial, and then expressed regret, and then played victim, and then threatened us back, but look, we fly surveillance flights in international air space around china and they constantly come up and interfere with our flights, they threaten the safety of our air crews, and that should not be tolerated either. i think we need to address those issues and everything else in relationship that right now seems to be a problem. >> john: mr. secretary, thank you for your thoughts. thanks for hanging with us through the president's remarks as well. >> sandra: thank you, from secretary. >> john: back to peter doocy at the white house, what did you make of that awkward ending, the president seemed to want to answer a question but too many people shouting at him. >> it's something we have not really seen before. if he commits to answering a question, then he's going to answer at least part of it, even if it's a really short response. but in that room, the way it's laid out, it's two rows of theater style seats, like movie theater style seats, ten seats in each row on either side of where the president is speaking and while he, looked like he was -- that one reporter to his right had his attention, was asking a question about political pressure and shooting down the balloon, and before the president could really start answering somebody over to his left shouted out a question, is our relationship with china compromised by your family's business relationships, to which the president said give me a break, man. and then he paused and said he was going to come back when there were some more polite people in the room. that is not something that we have seen before, we see the shouting all the time, and we see tough questions all the time, but that's the first time the president has decided to start and then stop. the broader issue here, whether or not this is something that is going to satisfy critics of this president who don't think he's been transparent throughout this process, remains to be seen. he's saying the parameters, the new rules they are coming up with for shooting down unmanned aerial objects over the u.s. will remain classified. doesn't want to give the enemies or bad actors the road map how the u.s. is going to respond. one of the big complaints on capitol hill a lot of stuff that is classified regarding this doesn't need to be, it could be out there. so as for whether or not people are going to pipe down on capitol hill and move on to some other issue, that seems unlikely. >> sandra: peter, that was an interesting moment, the question and answer portion. to mark esper's point, he said this is a moment he should have taken questions. >> and that -- i think again, based on what he left out where he is saying that we essentially don't have rules or we didn't have rules until a couple days ago for shooting down unmanned aerial objects over the u.s., but now we have rules and they are going to remain classified, that opens up a whole new set of questions and it would have been nice for him to explain a little bit more of his thinking, but at the same time, this story is not going anywhere, since it sounds like there has not been an uptick in the balloons, he's saying we see more of them now because they upgraded or enhanced the radar capabilities. there is going to be a lot more people from the pentagon or from norad calling the red phone in the oval office saying sir, we have an unmanned aerial object, what do you want us to do, the story is not going anywhere. >> sandra: peter, thank you. general keane is back with us. you were able to listen to the president's speech a moment ago. what was your take away. >> i was glad he came before the american people but disappointed with it. the priority point of discussion in my mind should not be chronologically the last three shootdowns of what everybody described as something that's not threatening the united states. the priority discussion for the president should have been around china's spy balloon, which was threatening the united states and it's unfortunate that he didn't enlighten us to the degree of the success of that mission and what they have learned from it. and certainly -- looking at this thing, based on what actions they took following that with the three other aerial objects, it seems pretty obvious to anybody that if china sent a balloon across the united states again, that we would shoot it down before it transversed the united states. and i think the president owed that to us to say that was one of the things they learned from this. there's nothing wrong with having learned something and then telling the american people in so many words if i had to do it over again i would have done it differently based on what we learned and here is what we would do, and make certain china understands that completely. it was disappointing. i agree with secretary esper. if there was ever a time to take questions, because this issue of the four incidents are all very confusing to anybody looking at that and the questions really help provide some clarity to it, and i understand the uncomfortableness of his ability to handle questions but he is the president, commander in chief, he has to put his big boy pants on and take the questions as uncomfortable they are and do some straight talking to the american people about it. >> sandra: a lot of folks were looking for just that, but perhaps we have more questions after he broke his silence. general keane, thanks for sticking with us. appreciate it. >> john: thanks, general. more on all of this, mike pence is in the studio. mr. vice president, great to see you. let's start with this first of all. the president seems to suggest we shot down objects that may have been benign, but not the same action against the chinese balloon that posed an equal or greater threat to the united states and something the intelligence community watched at least a week. >> i would characterize the press conference today as too little too late. to have the president address this issue two weeks after this captured the nation's attention with the first balloon, just unacceptable. and the fact, as general keane just said and mark esper, the fact he did not take questions doesn't work. i've been in touch with the office of national intelligence, they are going to brief me on what they know, i'm very interested in that and this was also a moment to explain to the american people what the chinese are up to with a massive balloon program. this was not -- john, this is not a one-off, this is a program that they have developed for a broad range of capabilities, not just surveillance, but offensive capabilities and the american people deserve to know that. but explaining that may have exposed them to the question why in the world did you let this thing travel all the way across the continental united states before you shot it down. it should have been shot down as soon as it entered our air space in alaska and i think the american people are owed a whole lot more answers than they got today. >> sandra: mr. vice president, sandra here in new york. thanks so much for joining us. good to see you. what was protocol in the trump administration for an unidentified object in u.s. air space? how would you have handled it? >> well, number one, i think there were rumors about this happening during our administration, sandra, of course never did, but i think if you had an incursion into the air space of the united states of america during our administration, we would have been in the situation room. on more than one occasion i had the national security adviser come in my office in the west wing and say we need you downstairs and the president is either there or on his way, this is -- this is the sovereignty of american air space, and the fact that this balloon, again, and this was part of a large program in china. this was -- this was not just, you know, a singular vehicle that they sent our way. and the united states had every right to shoot that thing down as soon as it was in the cross hairs and i'm proud of our military for moving as quickly and effectively on it. i say that with the pride of having a son and a son-in-law that are fighter pilots in this country. we can defend america's air space but in this situation the administration failed. i expect during our years we would have been downstairs in the situation room getting the facts and decisions would have been made. >> john: mr. vice president, just to be clear, reports from the intelligence, pentagon, whoever, flights over hawaii, texas and i believe florida during the trump administration, trump-pence administration, that never happened? >> to my knowledge, not a word, and remember, john, i received the presidential daily brief every day. i often received it first at the vice president's residence and then on the days he had them, i joined the president for his briefing, and so that alone, let alone the realtime reaction that our administration was able to -- brought to our attention. >> john: if they had been detected, would you have been told? >> i don't think there is any question. i have no doubt that our administration would have taken swift and decisive action to defend the sovereignty of the air space of the united states of america. i think that's what's mistyfying to the american people today we saw this thing come in over alaska, we knew what it was, we knew it was a chinese surveillance balloon, still don't know what the smaller aircraft at lower altitudes were but the fact it was allowed to traverse the united states and correct its course to literally go over key strategic areas of our country is utterly unacceptable and frankly for my part, i really believe this administration ought to be sitting down with the chinese very soon and looking them right in the eye and making it clear this is never gonna happen again. >> sandra: the president did say a moment ago i expect to be speaking with china's xi. mr. vice president, as far as any experience you had with this under the last administration, where you aware of this chinese spy balloon program? this white house is seemingly confirming that is the case, warning it could only get bigger and pose a bigger threat to us. was it on your radar in the trump administration? >> i don't want to speak about classified briefings during our time, but i will tell you that in the last several weeks i've been informed this is a program that our country has known about for some time, at least over the last several years, and that the chinese are using balloons for surveillance purpose, and offensive capabilities, and it's a very serious program, and one that we ought to take very seriously. >> john: mr. vice president, i want to switch to a different topic here because we heard the president finally talk about these balloons and objects in the sky but have not heard a peep out of him about the train derailment in east palestine, ohio, i assume because left for madison, illinois, east of st. louis, the train went through indiana on the way to ohio. people there are frustrated, they are frightened, don't know what's in the water or what's in the air, and don't get a lot of information from the white house. >> my question is, where is the secretary of transportation? supply chain crisis and apparently he was awol on that. faa grounded airplanes, i was at the airport that day, the first time since 9/11, and the secretary of transportation was missing in action. and now we have this ohio rail incident. and this is a moment where we ought to be hearing from the president but at minimum we ought to be hearing from members of the cabinet that have responsibility over this area. my heart goes out to all the people in that community who are asking questions, not knowing whether to be home or not to be home, and they deserve answers and secretary of transportation and the president need to step up. >> sandra: these people are being told, mr. vice president, that it's safe to breathe the air, that it's safe to drink the water. we just had on a mom who has a baby and a young child at home. these people are absolutely terrified. what is the responsibility at the federal level to get on the ground there and make sure these people can safely return to their way of life. i mean, you have ohio residents reporting rashes, this mother who joined us said she developed a rash, doesn't know if it's related but major medical questions are happening right now. she said her children are sick. >> look, i'm a big believer in lead from the front. go where what is happening is happening. and the fact that the secretary of transportation is awol once again on this. and is not on the scene, asking the questions for the american people is totally unacceptable. and my heart goes out to the families. i have great, great admiration for governor mike dewine, i know he's been trying to do his best part, but this is a federal responsibility and the federal government is coming up short. >> john: you were in the news last week, because jack smith, special counsel, wants testimony from you. you are fighting this, said all the way to the system because you claim as the president said it, you are covered by the speech and debate clause of the constitution, shields lawmakers from the executive branch. washington post said they think you should testify, and saying politics is at play here, saying the political rationale for defying the subpoena is clearer than the legal one. mr. pence who stumped in iowa and minnesota, ahead of the gop presidential, they fear it could permanently alienate trump supporters. >> i am going to fight the subpoena from biden's doj. it's unprecedented and it's unconstitutional. look, no vice president in american history has ever been summoned into court to testify about the president with whom they served and i think to do so by subpoena would undermine the relationship between the president and the vice president for generations to come. that aside, it's clearly unconstitutional. on january 6th -- on january 6th i was acting as president of the senate presiding over a joint session of congress. thanks to law enforcement we quelled the riot, we reconvened the very same day and i have spoken about those events over the last two years, very openly. i've written about them very openly. i'm -- on that by god's grace i believe we did our duty under the constitution of the united states of america and i've also made it clear that president trump was wrong. i had no right to overturn the election. and i've said the president and his words that day were reckless and endangered my family and others at the capitol building. all that being said does not change the fact that we have in the constitution of the united states in this moment very clear immunity from being compelled into court for any official that's involved in the legislative process, which i was overseeing a duty of the congress that was described in the constitution of the united states. it's a principle that i think is important to defend because it goes to the heart of the separation of powers in our constitution. i mean, you don't want the executive branch to be able to haul members of congress into court every time there is a dispute over legislation, and that's why this was included in the constitution and dates all the way back to english common law, so we are going to take a strong stand on this, it's unprecedented, would undermine the working relationship between the presidents and vice presidents, and unconstitutional and as i did on january 6th, i upheld the constitution with the criticism of some in my own party, i'm going to stand firm and take this issue to court and fight biden's doj on this. >> john: you are considering a run for 2024. do you believe complying with the subpoena and testifying could hurt your 2024 run should you choose to throw your hat in the ring? >> we are continuing to consider that and give prayerful consideration to it, john. i want to say, this is totally separate. for me, this is do the right thing and trust god. and it's also important to point out the position that i'm taking on this is a position that the department of justice took in cases against me serving as president of the senate twice in the last two years. and why things have changed i think is a mystery, unless it's one more example of this two-tiered system of justice with they've seen in biden's doj, whether it's parent going to school board meetings, whether it's pro lifers being targeted, colluding with big tech, all of a sudden a different set of rules when republicans are involved. the stand that i'm taking is the exact same stand the department of justice took in two different cases against me about january 6th in the last two years, we are going to stand firm on the constitution, we are going to uphold the unique elements of the office in which i serve. so help me god. >> john: see if you prevail. >> sandra: mr. vice president, you and i have talked a lot about the economy and folks are struggling through a lot of things, including 64% of the country living paycheck to paycheck, inflation sky high, it's a tough time for a lot of folks and the congressional budget office just came out and said that things could get even tougher as soon as this summer. they are saying the u.s. treasury could run out of money to pay our government bills, including social media, mi military -- including social security and military. what do you want to see happen with this? >> constitution is becoming a theme here. constitution requires that we maintain the full faith and credit of the united states and i commend speaker kevin mccarthy and said we have to have budget cuts, have to have reforms, but it's important we pay the nation's bills and i'm confident that they will do that. all that being said, sandra, i will tell you that to have a national debt the size of our nation's economy is unsustainable. the last time this happened was after world war ii and the only way we got over it was through sound economic policies and a post war booming economy. now literally a paralysis in washington, d.c. that says we are never even going to talk about reforming 70% of the federal budget. that's what entitlement, social security, medicare, medicaid, are all in that, and we simply are not going to restore the fiscal health of this nation by simply nibbling at the edges of the federal budget. i submit to you that we have to have a conversation about reforming entitlements in the days ahead. i think we can replace the new deal programs with a better deal. i think in social security, you can keep all the promises that you made to seniors, you can -- people that will retire within the next 20 years, no changes, but to give options to younger americans, to invest a portion of their social security in a private savings account and get a better deal i think is an idea whose time has come. >> sandra: you think there's an appetite for that? >> it's all about leadership, and no major legislative changes in the last century that were not bipartisan and i think we have to produce leadership in this country that will square up with the american people and say we have a massive debt facing our children and those two new grandchildren that i just got last week. >> sandra: congratulations, by the way. >> thank you. there's a way we can do it, and still keep all the promises we made to seniors. it's going to take leadership, vision, replace the new deal with a better deal, i'm going to be a part of that conversation one way or the other. >> john: congratulations on the new grand baby. i hope you have a thick pair of electrician's gloves, you are about to touch the third rail of politics. it's an open secret on capitol hill that you can't do anything about the deficit and the debt until you reform entitlements like social security, medicare, medicaid, but nobody is willing to go out on a limb and do it and now with you saying we have to have a conversation about reforming social security, president biden is going to put you side-by-side with rick scott who said all federal legislation should sunset in five years, even though he says i don't want to get rid of social security. this is a dangerous topic to deal with, particularly if you are a republican. if you can't get buy-in from the democrats, which you never will, why even talk about it? >> well, i will tell you that -- >> john: good question. >> my two new granddaughters are a big reason why. literally, my daughter-in-law and daughter had children two days apart, and both families are in the military and could not be more excited to be with them. if you could look down in the eyes of the little babies by thinking we are doing them right by piling a mountain range of debt on them and telling them no, you make the hard choices, i think you have another thing coming. >> john: biden is not going to say he's right, look into the eyes of babies and say how do you saddle them with this debt, he says republicans want to get rid of social security, don't vote for them. >> i think the politics of this have been tough over the years. i was there, i supported president george w. bush when he tried to bring some common sense reforms to social security in 2005, but the national debt back then, john, was about $7 trillion. it downed under the biden administration, we were faced with the worst pandemic in 100 years, and had to spend $5 trillion, we are now 31.5 trillion in debt, larger than our economy, and i think it's going to call forth a moment of leadership, i think americans of every age understand we cannot stay on the path that we are on. but the falsehood is the idea that you've got to ask seniors or people that are going to retire in the next 20 years to make any changes. you don't -- you can offer alternatives to younger americans who won't think about retirement for decades, give them a better deal and still keep all the promises we made to seniors. i just think -- i think you have to play it straight with the american people and with a mountain range of debt facing those little granddaughters of mine, i'm going to be a part of that conversation. >> sandra: you mentioned age, seems to be a big question and conversation about those running for president, nikki haley made her announcement official this week. your reaction to that and also her call for anyone running for the white house over the age of 75 to submit to a cognitive test. you agree with that? >> i live in indiana, they think every politician should submit to a cognitive test. i wish nikki haley well, she did a great job as governor of south carolina, and i can't say enough good things about her. but look, i expect she'll have some company in the presidential field before too long, and i might be one of them. >> sandra: you have a lot of people watching right now. >> john: go ahead, you are not going to get a bigger audience than right now, no way. >> i'll tell you, we are always humbled to be asked the question. karen and i are spending time talking to friends. i was in iowa and minnesota yesterday battling against radical left agenda in the local schools and taking them to court and we are going to continue to listen and we'll be sure you know our decision, sandra. >> john: isn't the time for talk over? come on. when are you going to pull the trigger. >> it's time to listen. ronald reagan said the american people have a funny way of letting you know if they want you to run for president, and for me it's all about -- it's all about being called, and so karen and i will continue to listen, continue to try and discern the call, and -- but i promise, i'll keep you both posted. >> sandra: we appreciate that. and congratulations on the grandbabies. >> john: thanks mr. vice president. >> sandra: the epa did just hold the news conference in palestine, ohio, on the train derailment disaster, the latest test shows no signs of toxins even as the people living there are reporting being sick, dead fish in the water, garrett is live. people are getting reports it's safe to breathe the air and drink the water but they are skeptical, rightly so. >> yeah, and they have been wanting to see folks from washington actually come out here and see and experience for themselves what the town has been seeing and experiencing for the last 13 days, and today they are getting that with the visit of the head of the epa, as well as a congressional delegation. as you mentioned, it's not clear the visit is going to do much to ease these concerns and fears, but just a short time ago the head of the epa tried to reassure folks the test results from today again showed that they should not be concerned. >> epa air monitoring has not detected any levels of health concern in the community attributed to the train derailment. epa has assisted with the screening of more than 480 homes under the voluntary screening program offered to residents. and no detections of vinyl chloride or hydrogen chloride were identified. >> last night there was a town hall meeting that was supposed to help answer a lot of questions as well, and hundreds of people packed into the gym to get questions answered, those we spoke to afterwards did not feel better about the situation. >> i want answers for the future, you know. i played football right there, is it gonna be another ghost town or what, what do we have to look forward to. we didn't get those from -- it's just the same stuff we have been hearing. >> as we have been reporting, the frustrating thing for folks here is being told everything is safe while they and their family members are getting sick and experiencing all of these symptoms. we asked the mayor of east palestine about that last night and he said he does not have and hasn't gotten any good answers either. >> we have to find some answers, has to be answers somewhere, i have started working with our congressional representatives and some senators to hopefully get answers for these people. i'm at a loss for words, you don't have the answers and i'm trying to get them. >> state officials are asking experts from the cdc to come here to help with the testing to try and get those answers. sandra and john. >> sandra: ok, garrett tenney, keep us posted, john. >> john: the epa sounds familiar for people in the aftermath after 9/11, they said the air was safe to ground near ground 0. more than two decades later, thousands have died from diseases related to the toxins at ground 0. john is a 9/11 health advocate, founder of the feel good foundation, do you see any parallels with what's going on in ohio and the assurances from epa. >> yeah, hi, thank you for having me back, good to see you, sir. a lot of correlations and my heart bleeds for the people of east palestine. this place is loaded with vinyl chloride. vinyl chloride is not republican or democrat, and vinyl chloride will kill and i pray the people of east palestine, if you can leave, leave, and that's hard to tell somebody who has been there their whole life. but it's going to get worse. if the wildlife is dying, human beings will get sick. i don't trust anything that starts with e and ends with a and p in the middle. i think they are liar, and to offer somebody $500 to leave or give them $1,500 because they were displaced is an insult. you are already admitting guilt, and this is going to get worse before it gets better. >> sandra: i want to play this mother who joined us last hour, john. >> does need to be getting national and international attention. it would be great just from a local perspective to know that this is being taken seriously and not just something that's just going to be a sound bite in the short-term. >> sandra: john, you and i -- i know you've known john, we have known each other a long time. it's -- it hurts to see somebody going through that level of uncertainty, she's got babies at home, they are terrified. we are running out of time, a few seconds left. >> so this is going to be a generational thing. they are going to get sick, the children will get sick and when