Well be back next sunday morning 11 00 and 5 00 eastern. The latest buzz. Im chris wallace. President obama sets off a furor, sidestepping congress to shield millions of illegals from deportation. The president has taken actions he said are those of a king or empore report. Ted cruz is leading the charge against president s actions. Will the executive order fix a broken system . We will talk with a top advocate, how democratic caucus
chair. Did president obama break the law . The president has no Legal Authority to grant legal status to people here in the United States illegally. We will ask Texas Attorney general and governor elect abbott who says that he will sue the president on behalf of his state. Nuclear talks with iran stall ahead of the deadline tomorrow. We will ask our panel about chances for a deal. Our power player of the week telling the intimate stories of people on the street through photographs. Why do they open up . I think because im genuinely interested and i am a stranger. Right now. On fox news sunday. Hello again from fox news in washington, dc. We begin with breaking news. Mayor marion barry, mayor for
life in washington, dc, died. He was taped smoking crack cocaine in a Washington Hotel roof after serving prison he made a remarkable comeback winning election to a final term as mayor in 1994. He was 678 years old. The town of ferguson, missouri, is bracing for the grand jury decision on whether to charge Police Officer wilson in the shooting death of michael brown. The sources close to the investigation tell fox that announcement will not come until tomorrow at the earliest. Now an update from fox news correspondent in ferguson. Mike . Yes, the command center has not kicked into action and police are operating in 12 hour shifts already despite the likelihood the announce in the will not come. Barricades have gone up with the grand jury meeting and that is where the county police are headquarters and downtown ferguson, stores are boarded up
and many of the owners have never rebuilt since the places of business were ransacked this summer. It is important the people out of towners or whoever comes in, or people that are here, people that are not wanting to protest peacefully or want to cause confusion need to know this is an aftermath to the confusion. And area gun stores are cashing in with sales up 300 percent because of the insecurity. Every Single Person coming into the room including this morning, have said they are buying firearms simply because they are afraid of what will happen after the grand jury makes their decision. The demonstrators are still out just about every night. Last knife, 75 of them blocked traffic and confronted police. In major clashes. One person was led away bound in zip strips. The grand jury has the opportunity to charge wilson with a range of four different charges starting with firstdegree murder, down to involuntary manslaughter. However, four on the jury agree the shooting was justified, if that happens, he will not then be charged. Mike, thanks. With the stroke of a pen president obama moved to shield some four million Illegal Immigrants fromeningpart from being deported. Republicans are planning their response. Texas senator cruz is one of the sharpest critics of the action. Welcome back to fox news, senator cruz. Good morning, always good to be with you. I want to separate what the president did from how he did it. The president says that high is using his discretion to go after the bad guys and not parents of
people who are in the country legally. Fell loans fell ons, name family. Criminals, not children. Grand member grand members not a mom working hard to provide for her kids. We will prioritize like Law Enforcement every day. That is wrong with that policy . The notion that this is just discretion of the prosecution is nonsense. The constitution gives congress the authority to establish our Immigration Law. What the president announced is a wholesale refusal to follow our Immigration Laws and enforce our Immigration Law. For four to five Million People illegally here he is in the job of counterfeiting immigration papers really is no local authority to do what he is doing
but he is giving Work Authorizations and claiming unilateral authority. Second, the memo he put out, not the speech, but the memo he put out to the department of Homeland Security says they are not to enforce Immigration Laws other than for violent criminals and a few discreet categories but most of the twelve Million People here illegally the president is instructing the executive branch no longer enforce the Immigration Law. It is a stunning and sad display of a president declining to honor his constitutional obligation to take care the laws be faithfully executed. I will pick up on that because we talk about policy and i want to talk about the process and the fact the president is doing this by executive action. He says that there is a long precedent for chief executives to do that. Take a listen. The actions i am taking are
not only lawful but the kind of actions taken by every single republican president and every single democratic president for the past half century. Senator, president reagan and president bush 41 granted legal status to a 1. 5 Million People in this country illegally. What is the difference . As a matter of constitutional law the claim the president just made is frivolous. I would note he acknowledged 22 times over the last five years, over and over again, he had no Constitutional Authority to do this until suddenly he decided it woulden politically beneficial. The difference with reagan and bush they were working with congress in implementing congressional statutes. Congress can change the Immigration Law. The president , in the course of executing the Immigration Law, can put congressional will interest affect. The difference is this is not a president who wants to work with congress but, rather, a president openly daying congress and i cannot put it any better than saturday night live put it last night where they reprised the old schoolhouse rock, you remember, how a bill become as law and they had the president bushing the bill down the steps of the capitol because we no longer need the steps and the constitution for how we pass laws because the president new is claim unilateral authority that the constitution does not give him. The danger of that, chris, it is not just on the substance which is very damaging to working men and women across the country. It is a far broader danger for anyone concerned about liberty. If this president can goes his own Immigration Laws the next president can impose his own laws whether it is immigration, tax, labor, environmental, we stop having a constitutional
system of checks and balances that has protected our liberty and we move to unilateral executive authority using the president s own word, the power of a monarch or an emporor. Then the question is how to respond and there is a split in your party. As i understood you are saying the republicans should vote to fund the government in all departments but one, attaching an amendment to funding for the department of Homeland Security which handles immigration taking back or rescinding his executive action. The thought is if he vetoes that, he is responsible for shutting down the department. The problem is that is almost expect what you did with the government shut down cross the entire government in october of 2013 in obamacare and it backfired badly on your party. Chris, look, i would suggest
a simple proposition across this country, republicans campaigned saying if you elect a Republican Senate we will stop president obamas illegal amnesty and a suggestion to my colleagues and friends in the Republican Party, we need to honor what we said and we need to do what we said two weeks ago on the campaign trail. Would you is that what you would do sir we have limited time; that what you are saying you would do . You would attach a rider to funding for just the one department of Homeland Security . I have laid out a detailed systematic plan for what congress should do. Use the constitutional checks and balances we have to rein in the abuse of power. Step one is the incoming majority leader should announce if the president implements this lawless amnesty, the senate will not confirm any executive or
judicial nominee other than Vital National security positions for the next two years unless and until the president ends the lawless amnesty. Sir, let me, if i may, pick up on that because are you saying the senate should refuse to confirm the president s new none knee for nominee for attorney general and leave eric holder who do you not like, in that position longer . Chris, what i am saying is use the constitutional checks and balances we have to rein in the executive. If you read the federalist papers, our framers talked about a president that would behave like a monarch that would rule by decree. I understand that i am asking a direct question. Would you block the confirmation of the new attorney general and leak holder in the job . In my view the majority leader should decline to bring to the floor of senate any
nomination other than Vital National security position. That is a serious and major step. It is a power the majority leader has and no one else has any ability to change it. If the majority leader announced it, it would impose real cons on the president and the administration. The second check we have, the second constitutional power is the power of the purse. We should fund one at a time the critical priorities of the federal government but, also, use the power of the purse to attach riders. We have to demonstrate the campaign words that republicans used on the trail were more than talk and we are willing to away our commitments. You are willing to shut down departments and willing to take the back lack . It did not work well with obamacare, sir . Let me point out, at the time you and a lot of folks in the press said, what a disaster it was to stand up and fight on obamacare and it was going to cost republicans the majority
and it would cost seats. Let me point out we just had a historic election we won and it will be nine seats in the senate and we retired harry reid and we have the biggest majority in the house of representatives since the unanimous the unanimous 20s and the number one issue campaigned on was obamacare and, listen, it was a mistake for president obama and harry reid to force the government shut down but it was not a mistake for republicans to stand up and fight on obamacare and not original did the disaster that a lot of folks predicted not happen it was the biggest victory we have had in a long time. Republicans need to do what we say we will do and not just have a lot of empty smoke. Senator cruz we will have to lobby it leave it there. Always a pleasure to talk with you. Now, for the other side, we will bring in the chair of the house d caucus congressman
becerra. Welcome back. Good to be here. You and senator cruz agree on that thank you is about all we agree on. The president wants to focus on felons, not families, but look at the record. In 2011 and 2012, the last years which there are numbers available, the government processed 100,000 parents of United States citizens for deporting. That is 15 percent of total deportation. Are you saying, is the president saying, the government, yes, we could have caught criminals and more gang members but we decided to go after parents. No. What the president is saying, because the law is broken we dont have a priority in what we should do with the broken laws. We should try to focus on going after the criminals because we
we know there are will whys here without documents. Rather than go after the families go after the felons. It is clear what he is trying to say. It is breathtaking to listen senator cruz talk bout all these things that are incorrect and wrong it is legal if the president to take executive action, it is common. As the president said every president since eisenhower, every single president , has taken executive action not just executive action but on immigration. I will pick up on that in a moment. In his speech, part of the question is the president is saying i will go after the bad guys not the family and he talked about tougher enforcement on the border and offered no details in his speech or did he in the memo that accompanied that speech. He did. Let me ask a couple of questions. He did. Let me ask a couple of questions. Is he sending more agents to the border . Is he building more friendses . He is creating more virtual
technology to patrol the border . What specifically is he doing to crackdown on illegal border crossings . President specifically said he will take resources if he cannot get more resources from congress, he will take the resources he has and rather than use them in the interior to go after families, he will use them to go after felons and put them on the border. You say he put people there when this was the influx, the summer of the accompanied children not about putting more. It was not a matter of apprehending the chip, they were coming. How many more agents will he put on the border . He has not specified. We will build more resources . If the Congress Gives him the resources. He will take executive action and ignore congress and ask for money. If congress is unwilling to act and it has been 17 months
since congress would take action to fix the system on immigration and he said in january in the state of the union if congress will not action, i will. For the long of the time we have known he is going to act. It is no different than what any budget has done. What president s reagan and president bush senior did. Here is the difference. I think senator cruz is right about this, reagan and bush 41 acted after a major Immigration Reform bill was passed in 1986 and he was cleaning up after what they d this president is going around congress and ignoring that. Show me where in the constitution says you can have executive action if you do in
three daze or three years but not three years and one day. Come on. How long has it been since the comprehensive immigration. That is what happens, you have a situation where congress has been unwilling to act. The Senate Passed the bipartisan bill. The house of representatives has been sitting on it for 514 days. The president is saying, if you will not act i will do what i k. Here is the point more than downtown times cruz says 22 times, the president said he didnt have the authority to do exactly. That is not true. Would you let me. It work better if i ask the question. The president said that he didnt have the authority to do exactly what he did this week. No. Take a look. Im the president of the United States not the emporor of the United States and my job is
to execute laws that are passed. Right. He cannot change a law. He can only execute them. The Supreme Court has recently, two years ago, said that president has brad broad discretion to ask. He was specifically asked, cant you do something to small split up the families when you have a child and he was asked exactly this case, you have a child here legally, dont deport the parent and he said, i am not a monarch or a king, i can only do what Congress Allowed me and he was saying he could not do it, and said it 22 times. He said he could not change the law and Hopes Congress would act and when he took action you mischaracterized it. He did not grant legal status to a single soul but is referring the deportation. All of these folks are deportable. Why department he do it in
2013 . He was hoping congress would pass the Senate Bipartisan bill. When he said i cant do this. He said he cant change the law and that is true. He has the discretion to try and make a law work better and smarter. The solution is simple it is not to impeach the president. That abusive. No one is talking about that but the democrats. Newt have one branch of government to so another and it is certainly not to shut down the government as senator cruz is implying but to pass a law. Here we are, 17 months since the Senate Passed the bipartisan. Let me say in this case executive action is trumping congressional inaction. This is game changer that will help us get this done. Always good to talk with you, too, sir. What do you think does the president have the power to take
this executive action . How should republicans respond . Let me know on facebook or twitter. Next, legal experts say it is the states that have the best chance of beating the president in court. The if youly elected governor of texas says he will sue president obama. Es companies in the country . Hey. Yours . Not anymore. Come on in. [ male announcer ] by meeting you more than halfway. Its how edward jones makes sense of investing. Come on in. [ male announcer ] by meeting you more than halfway. Mheres our new trainer ensure active heart health. Heart im going to focus on the heart. I minimize my sodium and fat. Gotta keep it lean and mean. Pear uhoh. Heart i maximize good stuff like my potassium. And phytosterols, which may help lower cholesterol. Major im feeling energized already. Avo new delicious ensure active heart Health Supports your heart and body, so you stay active and strong. Ensure. Take life in. From San Francisco to silicon valley, Boston Private Bank works with all kinds of people who are innovating, building, contributing individuals, business owners, private partnerships, nonprofits, families planning their financial futures. People like you. If you want the individual attention and expertise your financial needs deserve, this is your time. This is your private bank. The battle over president obamas idea to ignore congress. Attorney general and new lly elected Governor Greg Abbott announced what hes going to do. Governor abbott joins us now and welcome for the first time to fox news sunday. Thank you, chris. You said youre going to sue president obama for taking this action. On what grounds . Several grounds. One on what the president has done violates the take care clause under article 2, section 3 of the constitution, requiring that the president take care to faithfully execute the laws. Now, understand, this is no trinket in the constitution. At the Constitutional Convention themselves, they considered whether or not the president should have authority to disspend within enforcing certain laws and they said, no, they didnt to want give the president that authority. They wanted to ensure the president would be limited in his authority and ensure that the president would take care to execute the laws passed by congress. In this case, the president is violating the take care clause. Let me pick up on that and you can give other reasons in a moment. Because a number of legal scholars say the president can make the argument hes
faithfully executing the law. They point out in the last fiscal year, the Border Patrol arrested half a Million People for crossing the border. So, therefore, hes faithfully executing the law, they would argue and this is simply a matter of prosecutorial discretion. Two points about that. One is what the president is doing by this, doesnt have anything to do with the arrest hes making on the border. It has to do with the fact that he is dispensing with the Immigration Law as it currently exist and is rewriting that law. That was the purpose behind the take care to faithfully execute the law thats in the constitution. Seconds, this is not prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutorial discretion is when a president or the attorney general, whoever, decides they are not going to prosecute someone because of lack of resources or Something Like that. What the president is doing here is giving affirmative benefit to people who are here illegally. That is not prosecutorial discretion. That is rewriting the Immigration Laws to help those the president wants to help. Okay. Experts say that states may have a better chance than congress in being granted stamping. They are an Interested Party and the case is legitimate being granted standings in the court because they can demonstrate actual harm, they have suffered damages taken by the president , harder for congress to do that. As the attorney general of texas, about to be the new governor of texas, what harm will texas suffer as a result of the president s actions . Texas suffered direct consequences from the 2012 daca. That is what led that was the deferred action that allowed a lot of the dreamers to stay in the country. Exactly. And in the aftermath of the 2012 daca is when we begin to see 1,000 people a day coming across
the border. Often telling Border Patrol agents the reason why they were coming across the border, and not hiding when they got here, but actually turns themselves in to Border Patrol agents is because they believe the 2012 daca allowed them to come here. We believe also that in the aftermath of this president ial order, were going to face the same challenges in texas that we did after the 2012 daca. Even though the president said, if you just come over the border now, youre not covered . The president also said the same thing after the 2012 daca. Understand this, the people coming from Central America are typically not legal scholars who look into the depth of what the president s saying. Remember this also, chris, and that is, if was the cartels in mexico selling to this to people in Central America, using them, extorting from them the passageway to america. Right now were spending more than 15 million a month just for Law Enforcement alone. We have thousands of children who come here as unaccompanied minors in our schools that texans have to foot the bill for. I sent a letter to jeh johnson but hes the secretary of Homeland Security. Asking the federal government to reimburse the state of texas for the millions of dollars we are incurring in costs because of the daca. We will be amending that now to ask for reimbursement for what we are facing in the aftermath of this president ial order. Youre saying these president ial actions encourage more immigration, illegal immigration, and that that is costing the state money in terms of Government Services . Its an absolute fact in the aftermath of daca. We believe that that proves the same thing is going to happen in the aftermath of this president ial order. As a result one of the things real quick, chris and that is, this goes all to
what we saw with the Supreme Court said were jurisdictional procedures in massachusetts versus epa. When massachusetts wasnt harmed nearly as much in massachusetts versus epa as texas has been in this case. So, we think we have standing better than any other state to be able to assert this claim against the president. I was surprised to learn, as i studied the outline on you in taking this action, when you take the president to court on this executive action he has announced this week, this will be the 31st lawsuit you have filed against this president. How come . Because this president , more than any other president , has abdicated his responsibility to uphold and enforce the constitution. Remember this also, of those cases that have been finally decided, i have won a majority of those cases. Look what happened recently this past summer. When the United StatesSupreme Court said the president
violated the constitution with the appointment to the National Labor relations board. Look at what is going on now that the United StatesSupreme Court has taken another case involving obamacare because of executive action. We have a president who feels completely unconstrained by the constitution. Attorneys general across the United States of america are the leaders in stepping up holding this president accountable to the United States constitution if we dont have the constitution enforced, it will lead to dire consequences in our future. You have called this president a lawless president , a lawless chief executive. Really . Whenever the president of the United States doesnt just follow the law, but adamantly refuses to follow the law, the way he has with regard to this particular executive order, the way the president has unilaterally altered the terms of the obamacare, that is the
epitome of lawlessness. Once the chief executive of the United States of america refuses to abide by the law and the constitution of this country, that leads to dire consequences for our future if we dont have attorneys general making sure the president abides by the law. Governorelect abbott, thank you for flying in from texas. We will follow your lawsuit in the courts, sir. Thank you. Congratulations as well. My pleasure. Good to have you here. Coming up, what does the president s executive action mean for our immigration system and for getting anything done in washington the next two years . Our sunday group joins the conversation. Plus, what would you like to ask the panel . Just go to facebook or twitter foxnewssunday and we may use your question on the paper. Heartburn. Did someone say burn . Try alka seltzer reliefchews. They work just as fast and are proven to taste better than tums smoothies assorted fruit. Mmm. Amazing. Yeah, i get that a lot. Alka seltzer heartburn reliefchews. Enjoy the relief. Dad,thank you mom for said this oftprotecting my future. You. Thank you for being my hero and my dad. Military families are uniquely thankful for many things, the legacy of usaa Auto Insurance could be one of them. If youre a current or former military member or their family, get an Auto Insurance quote and see why 92 of our members plan to stay for life. Dont let. Dont let a disagreement over one issue be a dealbreaker over every issue. You cant ask the people to trust to you enforce the law if youre constantly demonstrating you cant be trusted to enforce the law. President obama and House Speaker john boehner after battle lines are drawn follow the president s executive order to shield millions of Illegal Immigrants from deportation. Its time for our sunday group. Syndicated columnist george will. Julie pace who covers the white house for the associated press. Kimberly strassel from the wall street journal and ron fournier from the national journal. Julie, as our person inside the white house, how are white house officials reacting to the response so far from republicans . Are they surprised that the republicans have been fairly measured so far and are they a little disappointed by that . They may be a little disappointed. I think one thing they would
point out to folks who ask about this is republicans havent been able to come up with a cohesive strategy. Theres a discussion on whether they try to do something legislatively, focus on lawsuits. Other options are under discussion as well but i think the white house certainly wouldnt be too sad if republicans tried to overreach and do something incredibly bold right now. They feel like the president has legal standing on. Pe they feel hes taking action, while the public may not agree on how he did it but they may agree with what he did and the practical results of it. We asked the questions for the panel and on facebook bill writes, we have repeatedly heard gop leadership, in quotes, talk big and then cut a backroom deal or cave all together. If they wont take a stand against this, when will they ever . Is there any purpose of having a congress anymore . This is not what i voted for. George, we keep hearing about the danger of overreaction from
republicans. Is there also a danger of underreaction . How do you answer this . I tell bill that worrying about a republican underreaction on the subject of immigration is a refreshing novelty. In fact, there are several republican factions here. The republican base, including talk radio and all the rest, is inflamed by immigration. The Republican Party as a whole, however, judging by exit polls is approximately where the president is on policy. A majority of republicans favor a clear path not just to legalization but to citizenship. So, the party itself is not a cohesive whole. And theyre refusing to be provoked, i think, indicates that the republican politicians know there are both sections to be dealt with. They can do many things. They can have funding fights and confirmation fights and all the rest but the big fight is 2016. The question is, will a republican run for president , reversing the u. S. Armys motto. The u. S. Army says, be all that you can be. The next president has to run saying, actually, im going to restore constitutional ee qua lib yum and be less than i can be in the force in this town. Ron, same question. Youve been around here for a while, as some of us, except for these kids here on the panel youre saying im old. Thank you very much. Me, too. What do you think of this . What do you think of the president s policy . What do you think about the way he went about it . What do you think about not much specificity . All too quick. The facts are, as george mentioned, majority of americans support Immigration Reform for good reason. Only 38 of americans, though, support unilateral action. Even hispanics are ambiguous on the action. 44 think he should take executive action. One, bad process will be forgiven much quicker than bad
policy. If republicans follow senator cruz over the cliff to irrelevancy, it will be their own fault. They need to realize this is an issue that needs to be tackled and they cant just be against the president. If you look at these numbers, its very possible well have the same type of lower than expected turnout among hispanics next election like this election because they may see this as pandering and short term and ineffective and theyre not going to vote for a republican, but they might not come out in the numbers democrats need to. I think republicans have a bigger incentive but i dont see republicans rising above their hatred for this issue and the president. And i think thats very bad for the party long term. That brings me to kim. As a columnist for the wall street journal, you have been known to offer advice to congressional republicans. How do you think they should handle this . What do you think do . And what do you think they should not do . Well, theres a couple of things. First, they have to talk about the lawlessness, which does
really resonate out there when you see the polls. People wanted action on this. They did not the plurality of americans do not think the president should have taken unilateral actions on this. They have to take about that. But the other thing they have to do is remind everyone, in particular the hispanic community. This was not to their benefit. This is not progress. This is not reform. This executive order, it is not durable. The people who it applies to are going to be back in the same situation with no real knowledge of their status in just a few years. It was arbitrary in terms of the people that it affected. It also doesnt address some of the biggest issues you need for Immigration Reform like this. Worker program, question of visas. He was using them as a political pawn to have an issue out there. And the republicans need to point that out day after day. And then they need to outflank him by sending him what is, in fact, real Immigration Reform. They may need to do that in piecemeal fashion. Send him a Border Security bill,
link it, and say, you sign this, well get to the next piece. But dont you know, if you veto this, then youre the one standing in the way. But you wouldnt defund Government Departments . I mean, Homeland Security, my gosh, its the department that protects the homeland. One reason you havent seen republicans come out with the strategy is because the lesson theyve learned is you cannot overpromise on these things. As you know, this is a very complicated question, can you make the president do anything . This is a very technical funding question as well, piece of the Immigration Service that does this is selffunded. They dont really rely its defunding how do you actually make that happen . Right. They have to be careful on what they promise because you dont want a repeat of the shutdown where you say, we can make this happen and you cant. We have to take a break. When we come back, Nuclear Talks with iran come down to a monday deadline. Will there be an agreement or another extension . The conference call. The ultimate arena for business. Hour after hour of diving deep, touching base, and putting ducks in rows. The only problem with Conference Calls eventually they have to end. Unless you have the comcast business voiceedge mobile app. It lets you switch seamlessly from your desk phone to your mobile with no interruptions. Ive never felt so alive. Get the future of phone
and the phones are free. Comcast business. Built for business. Were working hard. We hope were making careful og. Secretary of state john kerry with the latest on where talks stand to curtail Irans Nuclear program ahead of the deadline tomorrow. We are back with the panel. Julie, i have to note, you are a newlywed, a who and a couple of days. Doing okay . So far, so good. Want to show us the rock . Oh, god. You blinded us. Lets tack about iran. As a recorder who broke the story that United States and iran were engaged in secret talks for months before anyone else, where does this stand right now . What are the chan for a deal by the deadline for tomorrow . If they dont get a deal, do they kick it down the can into next spring . There is a flurry of activity in vienna including multilateral meetings going on, saturday lacked dismal and today it looks like there is more on the nix. Not that there will be a deal, but you are talking about hearing of an extension. If they extend, not just a timeline but does there have to be a framework . You hear from john kerry and other officials, they talk about the big gap, so the question; will time allow them to get the big gaps overcome. Is there a chance the talks could fall apart . I think there is a chance. Neither side wants that to happen. If they feel like six more weeks, three more months could allow them to overcome the gap they will do what they can to
extend it. Kim, your paper reports the west is willing to offer more concessions to try to get a deal. It is pent for people to remember, when this negotiation began a year ago, the west was demanding iran basically dismantle its Nuclear Program. Now, the threshold is they have to be kept at least a year away from a nuclear breakup and they can continue toen rich uranium. There have been a lot of concessions. The terrifying question, is there anything that would cause the administration to walk away . They are so vested in having an accomplishment we are giving away the entire store. They were supposed to curtail their Ballistic Missile program, shut down their heavy water reactor in iraq. All of that, now, is east tail of the the only discussion we are having is how much sanction
relief we give and how quickly that happens. That is a problem. There is no one there who is happy with this other than iran and john kerry. Strange bedfellows. George, you have been saying for months, i believe, we are not going to be able to stop Irans Nuclear program and the best we can hope is to contain it. Do you still feel that way . I do. We are saying, trying to limit your Nuclear Program and they are saying, what Nuclear Program . We have a choice. A nuclear iran is a nightmare because it will set off a Nuclear Weapons scramble from saudi arabia and making the egyptians, who knows . On the other hand, another war with a serious country, three times a populated as iraq, is its own nightmare. The senate has voted 901 to reject the idea of containment
although we contain a nuclear soviet union under stall listen and brezhnev for 45 years. They said it was possible because of a religious regime and could not be deterred beyond the realm of deterrence. I dont think so. The fact is, as long as they have the capacity toen rich and the right toen rich which we have conceded and long as they n capacity to enrich. Seede they are going to have a breakout capacity, which is to say theis capacity to the acqui a Nuclear Weapon quickly. With and we can live with that . You can live with that or you can go to the war. The i refer to live with the idea of containing them as they containered the soviet union. The president had said that were going to have all of our combat troops out by the end off this year. So just a few weeks, and that ik 2015, we would keep about 10,00o
troops there, but they would bet there just for training and to go after al qaeda but not be involved in combat against the a taliban. Now he says hes going to expan, that mission to include combat against the taliban. S rob, what do you think of that and is it in some way because we pulled out of after stachb . Our president thinks we can o work with it. Nges t but that changes the dynamic. This is a president who is his president because he promised h could change the culture of washington, he promised that he could break gridlock, and he promised he could end the two wars. Ecan can i go back to iran real quickly . I have a problem with who says cant deal with republicans ando
a president who says i can dealt in good faith with the iranians. I dont know how you square that politically. How do you explain the fact t that the president who was iden really resolute about theyre e going to have a very limited mission, their combat role is over, it seems to be a pretty big reversal, quiet but big. It appears that the president its counter terrorism, its Training AfghanSecurity Forces and when it comes to training, there simply isl morte taliban than there ar al qaeda. You. Some of this is force protection, they want to give yg troops the authority to go after the talibataliban. So yes it is a broadening of thi mission, but it is very much in line with what the pentagon has. Been asking for. How much of it do you think is a reaction to iraq and it now
looks like theyre pulling all u of ourr troops out. Were not going to pull them out all, but theyre going to go into a major some battle role. We left iraq and it was a popular decision in a lot of circles. But it left that country in a really difficult Security State. And i think that they are looking at, you know, a timeline for the presidency right now an saying what kind of country are we going to leave afghanistan, what is the Security State goin . To be there when we ollie. In 20 seconds, how eager is this president going to deal with iran as a legacy and an o y accomplishment. Very eager. Ou why do you say that . Any president would look at s this situation and say if i can be the guys, i can get a nuclear do with iran. Pa thank you panel, see you nexr sunday, up next our power player
of the week, how a blogger introduces strangers to millions of people. The average text takes your eyes off the road for nearly five seconds. [screaming] stop the texts. Stop the wrecks. Visit us at stoptextsstopwrecks. Org. Whether you live in a big city or a small whether you live in a big city or a small town, we all try to find ways to connect to the people around us. One man has come up with an inventive method to meet strangers and hes acquired millions of followers. Heres our power player of the week. Its very hard to convince that taking pictures of people on the street and putting them on facebook is going to be a winning formula because theres
nothing but pictures of people on facebook. But brent in stanton as turned that formula into a big winner. He started this blog called humans of new york in 2010. I said in three years this things going to have 10,000 facebook fans. 10,000 people are going to be looking at my work. And now you have . Almost 11 million. Some of these people find not just photos but remarkably interesting stories. She said ill tell you what my husband told me when he was dying, i said, no, how am i going to live without you . And he said take the love you have for me, and spread it around. Stanton had been taking photographs of his fellow new yorkers until he met this woman. She said i used to be a different color every single day, and one day i wore green and it was a really big day, so
ive been green for 15 years. And i put that little quote next to her photoon the website and its the most popular picture i have ever posted. Why do you think that the photograph plus a little story made the difference . So many of us are carrying around these things that we dont talk about. And to see another person talking about it in such an open way, i think kind of helps people feel less alone, i guess. Stanton let us tag along as he walked through a neighborhood, taking peoples pictures and asking about their lives. Hes photographed more than 10,000 people and heard some fascinating stories. And why do they open up to you . Because i think because im genuinely interested and im a stranger. And theyre more willing to tell a stranger . Because i know nothing about them. The questions i tend to ask,
happiest moments, saddest moment, what do you feel most guilty about . What do you feel most angry abo . This summer the u. S. Commissioned stanton to travel to war zones in the middle east. People there opened his eyes to a whole different kind of struggle. Just the refugee camp in jordan and the stories that were coming out of there were, i saw my father get killed in front of my face or i was tortured in a prison, or my brother was kid p kidnapp kidnapped. But whether its a refugee camp or the streets of new york, its all about sharing our common humanity. The kick that i still get is when i walk away and i just think i cant believe that person just felt comfortable enough to tell me that. And its been a series of that over four years happening