[ sirens ] if anybody here believes that the u. S. Homeland is hermetically sealed i would guard against that. A warning from the cia chief in the wake of the massacres in turkey and bangladesh. Well discuss the latest fronts in the war on terror with the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, congressman devin nunes. Plus, well ask the sunday panel about the 2016 veepstakes, as the current vp weighs in on a potential trump running mate. Are you going to do it . Its a hell of a job. Get a big pay raise. Its all worth it. All right now on fox news sunday. Hello again from fox news in washington, this week from the democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton sat down with officials at fbi headquarters here in washington. For 3 1 2 hours this holiday weekend, about the private email system she used while secretary of state. In a telephone interview with nbc news yesterday clinton said this. I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified, and there is a process for the review of material before it is released to the public, and there were decisions made that material should be classified. I do call that retro actively classifying. That meeting comes a day after attorney general Loretta Lynch pledged to accept whatever course of action is recommended by the bureau. Lynch sum komd to intensifying pressure over a 30minute talk with former president bill clinton at the Phoenix Airport on monday. Thats where criticism from both parties for creating an apparent conflict of interest. Joining me now here in washington, congressman xavier becerra, a clinton supporter and possible vp pick. Welcome back to fox news sunday. Great to be with you. Mrs. Clintons meeting with the fbi comes just after a few days earlier a meeting between former president bill clinton, the attorney general Loretta Lynch. Heres what she said about the appearances from that meeting. The issue is how does it impact the work that i do and the work of the department of justice does. And i certainly wouldnt do it again. And you know because i think it has cast a shadow over what it should not. Over what it will not touch. The fbi is conducting multiple probes involving the clintons. You and i are both lawyers. This could go beyond pr. Is this an ethical issue potentially . The fact that the attorney general whose integrity is not even in question has said that shes going to rely on the recommendations of the fbi investigators, and the career prosecutors at justice is a clear sign that it wont be an issue here. Because, those who are doing the investigation, those who know the facts, are going to make the final call. But do you think that the fact that the reporter who broke this story locally there in arizona said that mr. Clinton got word that her plane was coming in, he delayed, he was running late, he stopped and waited for her to come onto the tarmac, then privately met with her for 30 minutes. You understand how that raises questions. I think the attorney general recognizes how that raises questions and she said she wouldnt do it again. And, that quickly followed was followed by her statement where she said, lets be clear, the investigators at the fbi, the career prosecutors at justice, are the ones that are going to make a recommendation and im going to accept that recommendation. So this way that chance encounter doesnt seem to influence whats going on with this investigation. Yeah, lets play a little bit of what she said. She was speaking in aspen on friday. Here are some of her remarks. The recommendations will be reviewed by career supervisors in the department of justice, and in the fbi. And by the fbi director. And then as is the common process, they present it to me, and i fully expect to accept their recommendations. Later that day, a senior doj official told us that she is reserving the right to make an ultimate decision about this. It was confusing to us. Weve been back and forth with them several times. With all this confusion, with all the potential cloud of conflict of interest, why not just let a special prosecutor, why not get an independent person looking at this . Because if youre going to let those who are doing the investigation, the fbi, and those who understand the law, and can take the facts of the investigation to make a good decision and recommendation, why stop that process . This has been going on for awhile. The secretary herself was prepared and volunteered to provide testimony to the fbi. She just did that this week. And so, this has gone a long way. And just because there was a chance encounter with president bill clinton, who has no part in this investigation, doesnt mean that you have to throw the investigation away. I think the attorney general did the right thing, though. She recognized that people were beginning to question how it is that she met with the spouse of the secretary whos the subject of the investigation, and she said lets make it very clear, at the end of the day im accepting the recommendation of those who are doing the investigation at the fbi. The professionals. And those who are career prosecutors at justice. Okay, but its not just about her. Because we know that the fbi is looking into potential conflicts involving the clinton foundation. I mean thats something that the president would be directly involved with. He could be a witness. He could be somebody who was under investigation. And to the degree that theres any sense of the conversation that the president , bill clinton, had with the attorney general, i think shes made it very clear, if you dont believe what im telling you that it was just a chance encounter, it was a social conversation, then let me make it clear. The folks who are doing the investigation, the professionals at the fbi, the prosecutors who understand the law and how these facts will interrelate to the law, theyre the ones that are going to make that recommendation and i am prepared to accept that recommendation. Lets talk about what we do know. We know that there are more than 2,000 emails in question that do contain some classified information. 22 of them so top secret they wont release any of them to us, not a single portion. Inspectors general from both the Intelligence Community and state department have criticized mrs. Clinton, said she likely violated the federal records act, she failed to comply with department policies. Also in january of 2011 there was a technical adviser to the clintons email system who said he had to shut it down twice because he thought it was being hacked. The romanian hacker said he did hack the system multiple times and it wasnt that hard. Mrs. Clinton is asking the American People to trust her, that she can lead us, and it looks as if shes put together a situation with her email that was very complicated. It could have exposed classified information. So why should we trust here . So lets break that down, shannon. First, there were no classified emails released by the secretary. The fact that they those investigators may have gone back and after time, months, years, gone back and said oh, maybe we should classify some of these emails is nothing that she was aware of, so she never did herself disclose any through her emails any classified information. But 22 of them so classified that we cant even see a single word of them. As i said at the time that she was having those email conversations, none of those emails were classified. Something may have happened in between. Lets say in the last two intervening years, somebody we didnt know too much about has become a real terror suspect. Now you may want to classify any email that dealt with that particular individual. But two or three years ago there was no sense that that was it was necessary to classify that as top secret. And so, the secretary herself has said, look, ive done what other secretaries of state have done, what others in the administration and in government have done,communicated through email. Subsequently, classification comes out at top secret for some of those communications. But not at the time. And then you go to the issue of whether folks can trust. I think the secretary made it very clear, she understands that shes got to earn peoples trust. Shes going to work very, very hard to do that and i give her credit for saying that shes made some mistakes and shes going to try to show the American People that shes going to work hard especially for working families in america to earn their trust. Okay. You know that there are also private lawsuits regarding some of these emails, and they are the state department is turning them over under court order and according to some of these not only mrs. Clinton but some of her key staffers, they had a deadline in july for the next batch. They went to court this week the state department did through the Justice Department and said we need to delay until october 20th, 2018. So how do you answer critics who say that sounds like the mother of all stall tactics. Well lets get put everything in perspective. People from the outside are making requests for information, which, as we just learned, sometimes its classified or reclassified as top secret. And so therefore i think that each agency is saying wait a minute we have to be very careful what we disclose to you. Even though right now it doesnt have a classification as being top secret what were finding is that subsequently it might. So i think theyre being very cautious. They want to make sure that they give out this information for the right reasons and there are a whole bunch of folks trying to sue to get information. What we have to make sure is that we dont release information that should be kept classified, because it may ultimately divulge information that could harm the u. S. And so, i dont know the inner workings of the agency but i certainly would want to make sure that were not releasing to some private entity information that really doesnt deserve to be out in the public. And of course all of the email information, the server, the private server, came to light because of the benghazi investigation. This week we got the report from the Benghazi Committee, out of the house. We did learn some new things we didnt know before. There is a story about an account of military assets that we are waiting in spain, they were on a plane for three hours there, they were told four times to change in and out of their uniforms because the state department was worried about the optics of having americans in uniform on the streets of libya. In the meantime no military assets were ever sent directly to benghazi while the attack was unfolding. Four americans died in the process. Whos to blame . Actually, shannon, thats not new information. That was disclosed back in 2013. It was about the uniform changes . Yes. Thats not something ive heard before this week. That was out there four times. 2013. We knew that information. The military testified to that. And talked about the fact that while there was some sense of disagreement about how to make sure you send out the assets, those assets were going to be sent to tripoli. Not to benghazi. Right. And the military subsequently made clear that even if they had been sent out, they wouldnt have made it in time, because they were being directed to tripoli not to benghazi. And so, the conclusions of the report that first discovered that particular fact were that there was no way that our military assets could have made it in time. And so the conclusions can of our military were that there was no way to change what happened on the ground because it happened so quickly, was confusing information and there werent enough assets close enough to make a difference. What do you say to those within the military or the Intelligence Community who take not committee, community, who take umbrage with that. They say thats not the fact. That they were sent to staging locations in spain and other places and they waited for hours. Yeah, weve had nine investigations now of this. And not a one, including this last one which was a partisan investigation, found that what the military told us was not true. I think its unfair to blame our military, our troops, and our officers, who did the best they could to say now that we could have done more. I think its really unfair and doesnt recognize what our military has to confront. There are any number of theaters of action. And they have to be ready to go wherever necessary. But we dont have so many troops that we can be everywhere at one time. And i think its unfair to those men and women in uniform who work very hard, sometimes give their lives, to say that its their fault they didnt get there on time. Believe me from nine investigations we know that our men and women in uniform tried. Yes. And apparently some of them are saying that they werent allowed to proceed because of the state department, thats who they were waiting on. Okay, thats asked and answered, as well. Two, three years ago all that information came forward. It was clear that state department did not get in the way of the military. As general hand said at the time, there is no way that our men, our troops, our assets, could have gotten to benghazi on time. And so, again, as i said, we could try to continue to make conspiracy theories out of all of this. But the reality is, what we know after nine investigations, that our assets on the ground were not sufficient and close enough given the short time frame, and the confusion that existed at that time in benghazi. All right. Lets talk about after the fact which obviously is a big part of what the Benghazi Committee investigated, as well. Publicly the administration was saying that the youtube that was offensive to the muslim faith was to blame. We know within 24 hours there was a different story going on privately. I want to read what mrs. Clinton said to the egyptian Prime Minister. Quote, we know the attack in libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack, not a protest. Two days later she was speaking as the bodies of the four americans were brought back here to the u. S. She mentioned the video. The family said it was about the video. We know the run up to the sunday shows where we know ambassador susan rice spoke there was email traffic and guidance that said make sure this isnt about a broader failure of policy in libya. So was the story crafted in order to deceive americans and preserve mrs. Clintons legacy . Again, shannon, nothing new here. Nine investigations, including this last one which is very partisan, cost us, 7 million, took two years. By the way this last partisan investigation took longer than the watergate investigation. It took longer than the 9 11 investigation. It took longer than the kennedy assassination investigation to complete. Republicans say its because they were stonewalled by the administration, the pentagon, the cia i would say after eight investigations there wasnt that much more to uncover and i think the those partisans were part of that investigation hunted as deep as they could to find something because they were finding nothing after eight other investigations. But to the point, again, that was those claims were investigated about the picture that was set forth by the administration at the time of the events unfolding in benghazi. And what were finding is that the intelligence, the military intelligence we were receiving at the time was telling us, it this attack could have been inspired, these activities could have been inspired by that video. Subsequently, we learned differently. But at the time, and because of all the confusion, what was being said on the ground by our assets on the ground, not by state department, not by the white house, was it looks like these attacks may have been inspired by this video. Weve learned since more of what transpired. But again to blame our military for providing this information as best they could given the facts on the ground, i think its just unfair to the men and women in uniform to do that to them. What do we do with these phone call, to the egyptian Prime Minister within 24 hours . Again, were learning facts as we go. I think what youre finding is that were trying to give our allies as much information as we can. But we want to make sure that what we say to the public is based on the information we know on the ground. It could change and often does. But you want to make sure that youre giving the public as best a read as possible given that youre not yet sure of what exactly went down as well. Its a tough situation. You or i probably would be hardpressed to make better decisions than our men and women in uniform that were there on the ground. But again, its monday morning quarterbacking to say we could have done better than the men and women who are serving in the uniform. Are you being vetted for vp . Do you want to be . Thats a question that has to be asked of secretary clinton. And i have full faith that total confidence that shes going to make a great decision. Shes got great core of people to choose from. And well see. And well see. Keep us updated. I will. Thank you for you time. Thank you. Up next our sunday group will discuss Hillary Clintons meeting with fbi officials. Plus what would you like to ask the panel about that criticism over bill clintons private meeting with the attorney general . Just go to facebook or twitter foxnewssunday. We could use your questions on the air. Stick around. I dont think it sends the right signal. I think she should have steered clear even of a brief, casual social meeting with the former president. You know when i first heard the story i said no, no, youre kidding. I dont believe it. I thought somebody was joking. Senator chris coons a democrat from delaware, and donald trump criticizing bill clintons meeting with attorney general Loretta Lynch just days after Hillary Clinton spoke with the fbi. Time now for our sunday group. Fox news senior political analyst brit hume. Heidi przybyla from usa today, charles lane from the washington post, and former republican senator scott brown. We know that Hillary Clinton had her meeting with the fbi yesterday, three and a half hours. The rnc said that the fbi wanted her for questioning reinforces her central role in deliberately creating a culture which put her own political ambitions above state department rules and jeopardized our national security. We should ask ourselves whether this is the kind of leadership we want in the white house. Brit, will it move the polls at all for or against her . I doubt that that statement will. And im not sure the meeting with the fbi will. But it does confirm that something serious is going on here and this is not as she keeps repeating some kind of security review. The fbi director himself said not long ago they dont do security reviews, they do criminal investigations, and that unmistakably is what this is. But the ultimate question is whether anything will come of it and formal charges against her, and if that were to happen, that would be that would be that would be a big deal. It would be a game changer. Would throw the president ial contest into a hat and who knows what would become of that. But this year, with all thats happened so far, you certainly cant rule it out. Anything can happen. Okay we asked folks at home on facebook and twitter to reach out to us. What questions they have about this meeting between the former president bill clinton and Loretta Lynch on a tarmac in phoenix. Barb writes is this a manufactured scheme so the entire investigation will be delayed until after the election . Shes thinking the long game. And chuck on twitter says why didnt she appoint a special prosecutor versus a fake recusal. Theres this sliver of daylight there from her saying shes going to accept the recommendation but then a senior doj official telling us shes still going to make the ultimate decision as if shes still possibly going to exercise some discretion. That is what i think went out the door with this. Is that before bill clinton had this impromptu meeting there was some potentially small, minute chance that Loretta Lynch could use her powers to overrule comey said its a close call but i recommend indict, theres a small chance she could have overruled him. Now thats pretty much out the door. And i also think that put this in the shoes of the investigators who are working on this. They must be really angry, too, that they feel like the hard work that theyre doing is tainted regardless of what they come up with. So in some ways i think theyre going to feel pressured as well to show no leniency. So if bill clinton was even in any sense trying to subtly influence this investigation, it has backfired spectacularly. And of course theres a lot of speculation now that, close sources say, including on Donald Trumps twitter feed, for what that sourcing is worth, in the conventional wisdom has been that she probably wont be charged with anything. Well, its now become, for many of the same reasons that heidi has said, its become a perfect loselose situation for hillary. Because theres two alternatives. She could be indicted which is a catastrophe and probably would lead to her withdrawal from the race. Or she could not be indicted, and everybodys going to look at this process now as somehow tainted by the meeting between her husband and the attorney general. You know, everybody keeps talking about what an asset bill clinton is to her campaign. But boy, this is not the behavior of somebody who is an asset. It has absolutely undermined the whole process. And again, it, you know, it puts the attorney general in this box where she really cant, you know, even appear to have any discretion over this process. Especially now that shes had this meeting. But to do that removes any, you know, essentially neuters herself, and wont be enough to satisfy the critics, its a complete mess. A totally selfinflicted wound by the candidates husband himself. Wait on the timing of, you know, the final conclusion to that. In the meantime we did have a final conclusion to the benghazi panel, the House Select Committee this week and basically the clinton camp and supporters are celebrating a victory saying theres nothing new here. Lets get a little bit of her reaction. This is her in denver on tuesday. It had to today report it had found nothing, nothing to contradict the conclusions of the independent accountability board, or the conclusions of the prior multiple earlier investigations carried out on a bipartisan basis in the congress. Ill leave it to others to characterize this report. But i think its pretty clear its time to move on. Well, and there was criticism, actually, from the far right on this as well. The president of the Media Research center said im stunned by the gops unwillingness to accomplish anything in congress, which now extends to resolving investigations. It was up to trey gowdy to get to the truth and he punted. Everyone involved in this charade disgraced himself. Senator . Well, first of all, two things Loretta Lynch, rookie mistake, she should be ashamed of herself. I agree with Chuck Schumer and she should recuse herself as he requested back in 2006. With regard to this. He did learn a lot and with respect to the congressman and to the statements by the secretary, we learned and we confirmed that she lied, and as a result of that lying and failure to act, knowing that there were problems, knowing there were Security Breaches and people died. As a result of that she came back and she lied saying it was a video, it was terrorism and Everybody Knows its terrorism. Had she come back and said we listen, we made mistakes, this is what we need to do in the future so its never done before, again, maybe it would be different. We see over and over her lack of accomplishments when it comes to our national and foreign security. Isis, its grown and developed during her watch. Libya, the reset. Syria, the reset with russia, syria, where assads and we could go on and on and on. If its going to be a debate about Foreign Policy shes going to have some very, very real problems. Brit, she basically comes out relatively unscathed in this benghazi report. Yeah, i would agree with that especially because the one thing missing in this whole case from the jump is the kind of relentless pursuit of the story that used to characterize these scandals. Im talking about by the media. That has never been present here. Theres been a couple of news organizations, this one being one of them, that has pursued this story with some vigor. It is an enormous force multiplier in these kinds of cases when the media are on the loose and after the story. They never have been. They arent now. There was in this case, in my opinion, unmistakably a coverup from the jump. And that became pretty evident early on and its even more clear today, theres an old axiom, used to be in washington, that it isnt the misdeed that will cause you trouble, it the coverup. That seems no longer to be true at least as it relates to this case. That coverup should have been a big deal from the start. It never really has been. The result is what you see. She participated in it, as senator brown has suggested. Others did, as well. Susan rice, most conspicuously. And it all seemed rather hohum to many of our colleagues in the media and the amplification that these things might normally get simply hasnt been present. Were waiting on veep stakes and picks by the fall, but an interesting comment by the current Vice President yesterday on a potential gop nominee. Heres what he said. Newt and i disagreed, hes one of the brightest guys i know. He knows he knows the government. He knows the issues. And i would feel better, even though we disagree philosophically, im not being facetious, i feel better knowing that there was somebody there with the depth and gravitas on the issues that newt possesses. Newt gingrich. He did go on to say hes not endorsing him. And they do disagree, but heidi, of course, gingrich is one of the top names were hearing about, governor pence, governor christie among the others. These are all the names that weve confirmed, that are now submitting materials and are definitely in the top tier. The calendars really kind of caught up on us here. Were a couple weeks from the convention. We may get an announcement within the next week. In terms of Newt Gingrich, chris christie, Newt Gingrich is now kind of at the top of the speculation charts, just because he brings that deep knowledge of washington and the connections to the establishment, that the Trump Campaign is looking for. At the same time, some of the democrats im talking to, and im not suggesting anything nefarious about what the Vice President just said, said that theyd look forward to it because they have a long history with Newt Gingrich as well and a pretty deep opposition file that theyd be able to immediately dust off. We will wait, as he could theres been a lot of speculation, could potentially get a pick on the gop side ahead of the convention. We have to take a break, but stick around, well see you a little bit later. Security is tight across the u. S. As travelers head to the fourth of july festivities all across the country after this weeks attacks in turkey and bangladesh. Well discuss the safety concerns and whats being done to combat the threat with the chairman of the intelligence house committee. Hes next. Theyre going to be defeated in syria. Theyre going to be defeated in iraq. They are going to be on the run wherever they hide. I think we still have a ways to go before were able to say that we have made some significant progress against them. Cia director john brennan with a more sobering assessment on the war on isis than his boss, president obama. Joining me now from california to discuss the throwing threat from the terror group and the aftermath of this weeks terror attacks in turkey and bangladesh and last months massacre in orlando is the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee congressman devin nunes. Mr. Chairman, welcome back to fox news sunday. Its great to be here with you, shannon. Thank you. I want to get your reaction, what you can tell us, about the intelligence thats being gathered both on bangladesh and on istanbul and this morning were getting reports as well as two bombings in baghdad. Isis claiming responsibility there. 90 or more believed dead at this point. What can you tell us . Well, this is really the plan of radical jihad. Isis and al qaeda continue to grow. Youre going to continue to see these attacks around the globe. Its what the Intelligence Communitys been warning about very clearly. As it relates to bangladesh, this has long been on our radar for actually several years. In fact, just this past week we had one of the subcommittee chairmen from the House Intelligence Committee from new jersey was there actually the day before the attack. Trying to work with the Bangladesh Government to increase our counterterrorism cooperation with the Bangladesh Government because we knew that isis and al qaeda were growing there. The Bangladesh Government has a long way to go. Very populous country, 170 million people, kind of put into an area the size of iowa. I think most americans would understand how many people that would be. Iowa i think is around 4 million people. Bangladesh 170 million in the same area. So thats an area thats just going to continue to, i think, grow with people who are willing to blow themselves up, to kill others. This attack specifically targeted westerners. And i think we see the 20 or so westerners that were killed, including unfortunately one american. Istanbul we can go into istanbul but that investigation is ongoing. Clearly, looks like its tied to isis but well know more as we continue to work with the turkish authorities and turkish intelligence members. Baghdad the bombings this morning, i think this is going to be what well continue to see in iraq, especially as you put, if you consider that iran continues to put its influence over baghdad. You saw with this recent take of fallujah, heavy iranian involvement. I think probably going to make the problem worse in the long run. All right. Cia director john brennan also this week talked about the fact that the u. S. Is leading the coalition against isis in both iraq and syria. He added this, as well. It would be surprising to me that isil is not trying to hit us, both in the region, as well as in our homeland. If anybody here believes that, you know, the u. S. Homeland is hermetically sealed, and that the daesh or isil would not consider that, i think, i would guard against that. Mr. Chairman, whats your best assessment about the current threat to the u. S. Homeland. Well, i believe the cia has taken a sober look at this. Weve long been saying from the Intelligence Committee that it appears to us that isis and al qaeda are both growing. And so when you look at the potential for an attack in the United States, what im afraid of, is that these attacks like you saw in orlando, like you saw in san bernardino, are going to become the norm. And about i guess it was about two years ago the fbi came before us at the committee, and said very clearly that they were concerned about the radicalization of jihadists over the internet. They talked about the inability of our Intelligence Services to be able to track people because they were going in to these chat rooms that are encrypted. And so, i think its no secret that everybody americans know now that theres investigations going on in 50 states. Fourth of july clearly brings up concerns because you have a high number of americans that are going to get together, enjoy fireworks, enjoy friends and family. But i think also the American People are resilient. They know now, its more important than ever, that if you see something, to call the local authorities, and report it so it can be investigated. To the point of whether were defeating isis, president obama this week said theyre going to be on the run, theyre going to have to hide, they will be defeated. And he added this, as well. We will not rest until we have dismantled these networks that have an impact on the entire civilized world. And of course that comes at the same time as we played a little bit earlier from director brennan saying we still have a ways to go before were able to say weve actually made significant progress against isis. Are you confident in the administrations current plans for handling or defeating isis . Well, i just wish that the rhetoric that the president used actually matched the actions. So, there continues to be no strategy to deal with iraq and syria, and north africa, bangladesh, if you look at the spread of jihadism from morocco to the philippines, it continues to grow. Its the president of the United States who said that al qaeda was on the run. Al qaeda then morphed into isis. And its important for people to understand those connections. So, to only have a plan in iraq and syria to try to deal with isis, thats not going to solve the problems. I look at this, and ill just kind of outline just a very brief solution, but, theres kind of three pillars that have to be dealt with. Youve got a north africa problem and i think youve got to bring nato into that, Southern Europe into that, because thats an area where you have a lot of refugees that are crossing over from north africa into europe. Not to mention that a lot of fighter flow and weapons flows are going from north africa into iraq and syria. And remember, this was primarily because of the destabilization of libya. The second pillar i would say is iraq and syria. Got to be dealt with, currently right now, having iranianbacked militias go in to sunni areas to clear out cities like fallujah, i think is a strategic mistake. And third, youve got the situation in afghanistan where the president continues to say that hes going to hes going to take troops out, which is giving credibility to the taliban, and other bad actors within that region, to go out and do recruitment saying that look americans are leaving, you better join us now or were going to come and get you. Those are just three simple pillars that need to be dealt with clearly, and strategically, all working together, that ultimately would begin to get us on a path toward some type of plan to actually defeat radical jihadism which is growing, spreading and going to be a generational war. The pentagon is touting the fact that it has taken away the coalition has a lot of territory from isis. It points to the fact that its taken about 45 of the territory it controlled at its peak in iraq. Taken about 20 of what it occupied in syria. This week special envoy mcguirk said before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that morale is low for isis fighters, theyre running away from things, theyre running away from other iraqi forces. But at the same time he acknowledged that there are people who are able to be inspired, you know, whether directed or not, but inspired as you mentioned. Heres a bit about what he said about those who dont even need direct contact to get the motivation they need. Any deranged individual that wants to commit a crime can suddenly fly the banner of isil and get international headlines. And they recognize this and theyre trying to inspire it. The risk of that is something that is very much with us, will be with us for a long time. How do we get at that, chairman . How do we get at that issue of inspiration from somebody alone in a chat room, as you said, miles away . Id also be careful of doing victory laps. Theres a lot of victory laps being done because people are talking about the percentage of land in iraq and syria that somehow now is not part of under isis control. Look, at this point its a lot of thats not under anyones control except for probably the kurdish area. Like i said, this is not when you look at isis as a problem, if youre only looking at iraq and syria, like this administration is trying to do, you havent even identified the problem. Or the problem set. I mean isis just conducted a massive attack in bangladesh. They just conducted an attack in orlando. So, you know, to try to say that somehow were winning this right now, i think its just farfetched. And thats why i tried to outline just kind of the basis of a plan that i hope the president ial candidates will begin to talk about how ultimately do we go out and build a Strategic Plan that identifies the enemy and begins to take the fight to this enemy, because i am afraid that these attacks are going to become the norm globally. I mean if you look at the now there are just up in a year and a half, isis has gone from 20, 30 attacks in a month, up to about 100 attacks in a month, with suicide bombers and other improvised explosive devices. This is very destabilizing globally, and its got to be its got to be the United States, working with our nato allies, our arab allies, and anyone else who wants to come to the fight. If not were going to just continue to see this happen, and i dont think any of us globally want to see that. You talk about identifying the enemy. So i want to touch on a conversation thats been ongoing about the administration, whether they understand this motivation to build a caliphate, using very specific terminology the president sort of mocked a couple weeks ago that if you do or dont call it radical islam it doesnt make it go away, it doesnt solve it. This week there was a dhs employee, former employee, who said he was told by the administration, he was ordered by supervisors, to scrub the records of words like jihad or muslim brotherhood. Following that there was an exchange between senator cruz a republican and dhs secretary jeh johnson. I want to play that for you. Is it accurate . That the records were changed same answer i gave you before. I have no idea, sir. Would it concern you if it was accurate . Senator, i find this whole debate to be very interesting. But i have to tell you, when i was at the department of defense, giving the legal signoff on a lot of drone strikes i didnt particularly care whether the Baseball Card said islamic extremist. The employee said scrubbing these records made it much more difficult, he said, to connect the dots and prevent some of these domestic attacks that weve seen. Are you worried about the pc police and how it affects the ability to keep americans safe . Yeah. I just dont understand this whole infatuation with not calling a spade a spade. Radical jihad is radical jihad. And why this administration and other intellectuals around the globe dont want to call it radical jihad because somehow were going to this is going to make the problem worse. I mean good god weve been fighting this war for 15 years, and the last thing we should be running around doing is babbling about what this is or is not or what we should call it or not. I mean, look, we know what this is. This is there is a war within islam. There are people being radicalized every day, and look lets just let the facts speak for themselves. Al qaeda, and isis, are larger than theyve ever been. We have attacks being conducted by people who are being radicalized over the internet in the United States of america, and nearly every country around the globe, europe being overrun with this problem. So, i just dont think its helpful. To not call it what it is. And look, theres just this old saying that, you know, lets at least we admit we have a problem before we can solve the problem. Chairman nunes, thank you so much for joining us today. We hope you have a safe and happy fourth. Thank you. Coming up were going to bring back the panel to discuss the Supreme Courts decision not to hear a politically charged case on contraceptives. Why the courts conservative justices are calling it an ominous sign for religious freedoms, next. They brought this on themselves. Now its war, and i want them dead the fleas and ticks . Their whole gang. We can do that. Only bravecto kills fleas ticks for up to 12 weeks with one tasty chew. Starts killing fleas in two hours and kills nearly 100 in under twelve. And its fda approved. Bravecto is for dogs 6 months of age or older. Dont worry, princess, well settle the score. Tonight we ride, with bravecto ask your vet about 12week protection with bravecto. Look outside the beltway at the statue of liberty in new york harbor. We are back now with our panel. So this week the Supreme Court term ended. Well talk about some of the key cases, but making news this week is a big case they did not take. A pharmacist out of Washington State who are not allowed to say that they will not give out the plan b pill or emergency contraception because it violates their religious faith. They say they had a religious freedom claim against that. The Supreme Court voted not to hear it. It takes four. The three dissenting judges said Justice Alito wrote, this is a ominous sign. If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern. Chuck . You know, its becoming increasingly clear that one of the most important or maybe in Historic Events of the last year was the death of Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. Because everything would have been different if he were still there. On this particular case what i hear alito doing is just as you say, kind of issuing a warning to his fellow conservatives of the longterm leftward potential drift of the Supreme Court. Because in truth on this particular case, there wasnt really a whole lot conservatives could have accomplished. If theyd actually taken the case, it would likely have ity think there was more just trying to protect and it was lift for adrift of the court over longterm. And we saw him on critical decisions this term. And with the left wing of the court on the back end and confirm that they were worried about ever counting on that and. I think that we see that increasingly he is willing to abandon some of the Core Principles of the constitutional system when it comes to achieving mostly liberal policy goals. And thats discouraging to see. The senator, i mean, he certainly is not someone to count on, on the big issues any more. True. And you look at Justice Scalias death and obviously a major blow not only to conservatives em but to the balance of the Supreme Court. And it is a message i think for republicans out there who are on the fence and reagan democrats and all others, if they want the court to go far, far left, then if you wanted to go to the right or be more moderate in decisions then you vote for donald trump. He has put out his list of justices he once considered conservatives approve of that list and theres going to be some major decisions affecting the very fabric of this great country and you have the choice and so thats going to come down to the nuts and bolts of where you want to be on the side of the left of the right. And thats kind of what is happening politically right now. No doubt the court will have major impact. As they always do for generations to come on the important issues. But do you think people will really go to the polls based on that . I think it is probably is helping donald trump and conservatives on this question and for much of his life. And the trade being the most conspicuous of the moment. And a series of new justices that will tilt the court left for, you know, as far as the eye can see. And so i think in that sense, it is a factor in the extent to which trump can count on conservative support and helps him a lot in that regard. Yeah and senator brown mentioned the list put out by donald trump and there were a lot of suggestions with conservative groups but he did say not definitely stick together list but these are the kind of people i would appoint and some people feel that even if they are on the fence about this issue, they are not a hundred percent sure they could trust him on the eye pointments. If you remember when you put that list out is when he felt like he was back on his heels with religious conservatives and i think brit is absolutely right. If you look at the history of the court, does not want to be political but there are losses and affect can be that it does help the base. So one of the most critical constituencies donald trump is struggling with are the political conservatives. If they have a shot across the bow on liberty cases as you know covering the course are coming through again as early as the fall. That could really play to his benefit. But one thing i did do in the Supreme Court research to point out, is that part of this decision might also be related to the fact there were recent contraceptive cases like hobby lobby and that we also might have to just kind of take into consideration the court might have thought how many contraceptive cases can we hear and we might hold our conclusions at this point about what that means for the additional cases. And when we had the tie out of texas a few weeks back, thats a situation in which the administration was a loser in that case. The president came out and spoke i think that day when he was talking about the fact that obviously in high court, not the ideal situation. Here is a bit about what he said. I nominated goreland more than three months adw but most republicans refused to meet with him. They are allowing partisan politics to jeopardize Something Like our Justice System and america should not let it stand. His nominee to fill that seat is confirmed and thats a big if, though there are scenarios in which that could happen. And that could call chuck, for garland. I wouldnt be surprised if Hillary Clinton won the white house they would deal with it in the lame duck. Although, i wouldnt be surprised if the republicans refused any democratic nominee to the Supreme Court over the next four years if there were any. And the only thing even close to the victory that right got out of this Supreme Court term, and that is not much of a victory because it doesnt establish a precedent. That was a bad term for the right. And keeping control of the senate that complicates the game even further. Another result to vote republican and making sure Chuck Schumer isnt majority and you go back to ways the senate isnt doing anything. At least they are communicating doing ordinary business and the peoples business. Thats the choice. Progress or back to deadlock. The court is a key critical issue this fall. Whether you like Merrick Garland or you want to see someone else. Thank you, panel. See you next sunday. Up next, Hillary Clinton and donald trump. Well take a look at week ahead, next. You wont see these folks at the post office. They have businesses to run. They have passions to pursue. How do they avoid trips to the post office . Stamps. Com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. Get a 4 week trial, plus 100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. Go to stamps. Com tv and never go to the post office again. The nations flags for this fourth of july. We look at the week ahead. Hillary clinton fresh off the interview with her fbi returns to the campaign trail. President obama will join her tuesday. The Trump Campaign says it will release its Convention Speaker list on wednesday and vp announcement could come soon as well. Paul ryan says the house will vote on gop proposal aimed at keep suspected terrorists from buying guns. Thats after the democrats dramatic 25hour sitin last month. It is shaping up to be a big week. Into in the meantime, have a happy independence day. See you next sunday. Lllllllllll mornings with maria. Media buzz is next. This sunday before the fbi interviews Hillary Clinton, many Media Outlets down play or ignore bill clintons troubling meeting with Loretta Lynch. Why the Investigation Department is investigating his wife. It explodes like fireworks. It is unbelievable how tone deaf they are. Bill clinton did something exceedingly inappropriate. This leads to conspiracy theories before Hillary Clinton is interviewed by the fbi, somehow this is bill clinton talking to Loretta Lynch of clearing Hillary Clinton of the email investigation. Did the press fumble the story that led to the attorney
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.