And congressman adam schiff. A pivotal week as the Trump Presidency opens a new chapter. From abc news, this week. Here now, chief anchor george stephanopoulos. Good morning. All through last years campaign, candidate trump promised to stay out of syria. Not our fight, he said. Its time to put america first. This week, that all changed. The spark . These images. Syrian children suffocating, gassed by the assad regime. And with that, the man who pounded president obama for his red line in syria reversed course in the rose garden, drawing lines of his own. When you kill innocent children, innocent babies. Babies, little babies, with a chemical gas that is so lethal that crosses many, many lines. Beyond a red line. The big difference . After prolonged deliberation, president obama refused to retaliate. President trumps response was lightning fast. A targeted Cruise Missile strike and an expansive call to arms. Tonight, i call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in syria. The question now is how. This morning, assad is defiant, his airfield hit by the tomahawks is up and running. The region he gassed on tuesday is getting bombed again. So what will President Trump do now . Will thursdays strike be followed by a new strategy to remove assad from power . That was my first question for secretary of state Rex Tillerson in his first interview on this week. Well, george, i think our strategy in syria. As you know, our priority is first, the defeat of isis. Remove them from access to the caliphate. Thats where the threat to the homeland and the threat to the homeland of so many of our Coalition Partners is emanating from. Once we can eliminate the battle against isis, conclude it, its going quite well. Then we hope to turn our attention to ceasefire agreements between the regime and Opposition Forces. In that regard, were hopeful to work with russia and use their influence to achieve areas of stabilization throughout syria and create the conditions for a political process, through geneva, in which we can engage all of the parties on a way forward. It is through that political process that we believe the Syrian People will ultimately be able to decide the fate of Bashar Al Assad. But is that political process, is that diplomatic process going now require dpraert force receive the lernlg . Leverage . You have seen senators mccain and others calling for taking out the safe zone. The situation in syria, relative to the battlefield is quite complex. Because this because there are multiplegageengagements und way. We have the war to defeat isis in which many of those battle plans are being coordinated between u. S. , its coalition agreements, turkey, some of the Syrian Opposition and others. And it is being coordinated somewhat with the Syrian Regime and the Russian Forces to put pressure on isis to eliminate them. Having said that, there are other battle a have the presence of a number of al qaeda forces inside of syria. So the country is in a very chaotic situation relative to the battlefield. Having said that, that just demands greater effort on the part of a large array of coalition parties, both regionally, as well as those that are directly engaged in the fight itself inside of syria. Im not suggesting this is going to be a simple way forward. But we do have, i think, a fairly good consensus building among a number of those parties who would be part of the process that this is the this is the best way forward. Russia doesnt seem to be part of that consensus. President putin is calling wha surprised that rush that might make that statement. I will tell you im disappointed. I think the real failure here has been russias failure to live up to its commitments under the chemical weapons agreements entered into in 2013, both by the Syrian Government and by russia as the guarantor. To play the role in syria of securing chemical weapons, destroying the chemical weapons, and continuing to monitor that situation. So the failure related to the recent strike, and the recent terrible chemical weapons attack in large measure is a failure on russias part to achieve its commitment to the International Community. I want to get into russia a little bit more in a second. A couple more questions first. Directly on syria. You mentioned that the outcome of the political process is that the Syrian People can then determine the face of assad. You said that last week. Are you worried at all that that was taken as a green light by assad to launch that chemical attack . I dont see how that could be the case. This is not the first chemical attack launched by assad. There were two others the week of march 25th and 30th. And there have been chemical weapons attacks made by the Bashar Al Assad regime in the past. This was just the latest in a series of violations. You accept that right now, the Syrian People have no way to remove assad . Thats going to take greater pressure from the United States, from the coalition, perhaps military pressure. Ultimately, it could. But, george, we have seen what that looks like when you undertake a violent regime change in libya. And the situation in libya continues to be very chaotic. I would argue that the life of the libyan people is not all that well off today. I think we have to learn the lessons of the past and learn the lessons of what went wrong in libya when you choose that pathway of regime claim. We know this is going to be hard work. We believe it will lead to a durable and lasting stability inside syria. Any time you go in and have a violent change at the top, its very difficult to create the conditions for stability longer term. Sounds like from what youre saying, there is no real change in the United States military stance towards syria from what it was last week. Thats correct, george. This strike, i think the president was very clear in his message to the American People, that this strike was related solely to the most recent horrific use of chemical weapons against women, children, as the president said, small babies. The strike was a message to Bashar Al Assad that your multiple violations of your agreements at the u. N. , your agreements under the chemical weapons charter in 2013, that those would not go without a response in the future. Were asking russia to fulfill its commitment. Were calling on Bashar Al Assad to cease the use of the weapons. Other than that, there is though change to our military posture. You mentioned russian complicity perhaps with the Chemical Program in syria. We now know, according to u. S. Military officials there were anywhere from 12 to 100 russians on that base when the chemical attack was launched. Does that suggest to you that the russians knew or should have known what was going on . That they were complicit . Im not seeing hard evidence. That connects the russians directly to the planning or execution of this particular chemical weapons attack. We have been very clear that the russians were never a target of the strike. This strike was to target the air base from which these chemical weapons attacks were launched. And to render that air base, certainly its infrastructure no longer usable. I think the strik was the strike was wellplanned, proportional, directly related to the chemical weapons attack. And no other parties were targeted. At a minimum, russia hasnt done enough to get rid of the chemical stock pile because its still there and the russians are still on the base. Congressman adam schiff says you should give an ultimatum. To foreign minister lavrov when you meet with him next week on this issue. Will you do that . We have already issued very strong statements. Yes, that will be part of the discussions when i visit moscow next week is to call upon foreign minister lavrov and the russian government to fulfill the obligation it made to the International Community when it agreed to be the guarantor of the elimination of the chemical weapons. And why russia has not been able to achieve that is unclear to me. I dont draw conclusions of complicity at all. But clearly they have been incompetent. And perhaps, they have been outmaneuvered by the syrians. Do you think is an opportunity, are you hoping this is an opportunity perhaps to drive a wedge between assad and putin . To drive putin into a a commitment right now to do more to remove assad . Well, george, im hopeful that we can have constructive talks with the russian government. With foreign minister lavrov and have russia be supportive of a process that will lead to a stable syria. Clearly, they are Bashar Al Assads current ally. They should have the greatest influence on Bashar Al Assad. They should have the influence on him to cause him to no longer use chemical weapon. I hope russia is thinking seriously about its continued alliance with Bashar Al Assad. Because every time one of these attacks occurs, it draws russia closer to some form of responsibility. If we determine they are responsible . What will happen . That will be clearly damaging to u. S. Russian relations. I do not believe that the russians want worsening relationships with the u. S. But its going to take a lot of discussion and dialogue to better understand what is the relationship that russia wishes to have with the u. S. One of the big issues is russian interference in last years election. Thats the consensus view of all of our intelligence agencies. Is that on your agenda for the meeting with foreign minister lavrov . What can you say to them . What will be the consequences if russia tries Something Like that again . We have had previous conversations about it when i met with foreign minister lavrov in bonn, germany, on the g20. Well continue to talk with them about how this undermines any hope of improving relations not just with the United States but its pretty evident that theyre taking similar tactics into electoral processes throughout europe. And so theyre really undermining any hope of improved relations with many European Countries as well. Russia needs to confront this themselves. And i think examine carefully as to how is this helping them achieve their longer term objectives. And u. S. Sanctions will remain in place . There is no reason to be lifting sanctions. The reason the sanctions were put in place continue to exist. Theres been no change of the status of the situation in ukraine or crimea. And those sanctions will remain in place until those issues are addressed. What message do you think north korea should take from President Trumps decision to strike syria last week . Well, i think the message that any nation can take is if you violate international norms, if you violate international agreements, if you fail to live up to commitments, if you become a threat to others, at some point, a response is likely to be undertaken. And i think in terms of north korea, we have been very clear that our objective is a denuclearized korean peninsula. We have no objective to change the regime in north korea. That is not our objective. The whole reasons underlying the development of a Nuclear Program in north korea are simply not credible. Theres one report that the United States has drawn up plans perhaps to assassinate kim jongun. Thats not true . Im aware of no such plans. In the president s meeting with the president of china, the president often complained that china is not doing enough to take on the north korean Nuclear Program. Did he convince president xi to take more aggressive action . What was the response to the chinese of the president s determination to go it alone, if he must . I can tell you President Trump and president xi had very extensive discussions regarding the serious situations in north korea. They met for quite some time, one on one, to discuss north korea. There was a full range of options discussed between the two leaders. President xi expressed agreement that the situation has reached a new level of seriousness and threat. He expressed a view that he wanted to be supportive in terms of causing the regime in pyongyang to change its view. Around the future need for those weapons. China has expressed on multiple occasions and they reaffirmed it in our discussions with us here in maralago that their policy is unchanged. That is for a denuclearized korean peninsula. Are you seeing the actions you need to see . Well, well wait and see, george. Its only be a couple of weeks since we announced our policy changes and have called on the government of china to take additional steps. We expect that they will. They have indicated that they will. And i think we need to allow them time to take actions and well continue to be in very close discussions with them. The conversations have been very open, george, and very candid. How much time do we have with north korea . How close is kim jongun to developing a weapon that could actually reach the United States . Well, the assessments are, obviously, somewhat difficult. But clearly, hes made significant advancement in delivery systems. Thats what concerns us the most. The sophistication around their rocket launch programs, their sophistication around the type of fueling that they use, and theyre working their way towards the test of an intercontinental ballistic missile. These are the kinds of progress that give us the greatest concerns. We have been quite clear with the regime in pyongyang that thats what we want them to cease. So what we would hope was that with no further testing, their program doesnt progress. Thats what we have asked for. Them to cease the testing before we can begin to think about having further talks with them. And that development of the intercontinental missile, that is a red line for President Trump, isnt it . If we judge they have perfected that type of delivery system, that becomes very serious. A very much serious stage of their further development. Finally, sir, on the issue of mexico. You met with the Mexican Foreign minister at the state department this week. In that meet, did you make it clear that the United States expects mexico to pay for the border wall President Trump has proposed . We had no conversation about that issue, george. We were we have had an i think very productive talks around actions that can be taken to slow and stem and discourage transmigration of people coming from Central America through mexico and entering the United States. And, in fact, i know you have im sure you have seen the data that is coming out and the level of immigration illegal crossings from mexico, whether its a mexican nationals or in Central American nationals, has dropped dramatically. I think mexico is quite pleased. And we have had a number of discussions with them on how we Work Together to continue to make further progress. Thats surprising to me. No discussion of the border wall. President trump spoke about the border wall so often during the campaign. Is it the policy of the United States that mexico must pay for that wall . Its not part of the discussions between the foreign minister and myself. Were talking about how to organize a greater effort around transnational crime. And counternarcotics to stem the flow of narcotics that flow into the United States. And the flow of weapons from the United States into mexico that supports the cartel. Were really focused on working at very high levels to address some of these problems and challenges that are really in the interest of both of our countries to make progress on. Mr. Secretary, thanks for your time. My pleasure. Lets get analysis from tom friedman, the pulitzer prizewinning columnist for the New York Times. Tom, thanks for joining us this morning. You just heart secretary of state tillerson there. No change in the United States military strategy towards syria. I guess the big question is, somewhat the strategy right now . What i heard are three messages. One, that the trump people feel that in launching this Cruise Missile attack in retaliation for assads use of chemical weapons, they have reduced the chances that assad will use such chemical weapons again or that somebody else will. Thats not an unimportant thing. I think they also feel they have increased the uncertainty in places like north korea as to whether the u. S. Will use force if the North Koreans cross the red line on intercontinental ballistic missiles. But what i also think he made clear is that right now this administration is not interested in going any further than the obama team did in terms of actually changing the balance of power on the ground between the Opposition Forces, the proamerican Opposition Forces there, the assad regime, and the russians and iranians backing them. Without that, its hard to see any longterm change right now. But its still early in the process. The question is, what kind of leverage you can use with russia to get them to pull away from assad. That doesnt appear to be happening. I was struck by something King Abdullah said to the Washington Post this morning. He suggested the United States should consider concessions on crimea to cleave putin away from assad. Good idea . I would really think twice about that. You know, i think these two theaters are very different. It would depend on what putin was ready to do in syria. Whether he was really ready to break the alliance with the iranians, and create a process by which youre easing assad out of power and really partner with the World Community and create a different political structure in syria. If hes ready to go that far, you could think about it. But i would be very careful about that. How do you make sense of the president s dramatic turnaround. Your colleague, peter baker, called it a highly improvisational situational approach towards foreign policy. Just last week, we saw secretary tillerson talking about the Syrian People making decision on assad. We saw President Trump all throughout the campaign saying we cant get involved in this fight. Real change this week. Well, you know, george, in fairness, syria is the problem from hell. Its a fragmented situation on the ground. What i saw in secretary tillerson there talking about it is, why didnt i raise my hand to be secretary of agriculture . Not secretary of state. Because its a difficult, difficult situation. The real question is i think, two things. One is can we increase our leverage there without putting american troops on the ground . By maybe giving more aid to the Opposition Forces. Considering a nofly zone. Thats a big natowide question. You know, one thing im asking myself today, where is trumps twitter feed when we need it. If i was trump right now, i would be hammering him. Putin is feckless and didnt know the ally was doing this or hes complicit. I dont think they like to be called protecters of someone using poison gas. I would be doing everything i could on every front to increase our leverage. Because in the middle east, if youre trying to do diplomacy without leverage, youre playing baseball without a bat. Well see if secretary tillerson brings that message to labrov this week in moscow. I wopd for you looked at all the events this week. Steve bannon, off the National Security council. Mcmaster asserting himself. Secretary tillerson, fairly tough talk on russia. Completely dismissed the idea of mexico paying for the wall. General mattis at the heart of these discussions on syria. Are we seeing outsiders assert themselves . Were seeing a reversion to the mean. A reversion to sort of a closer to the natural interests of American Foreign policy. And to the limits of what the American People are really ready to do and tolerate right now. My friend, michael, said to me the biggest restraint on American Intervention in syria is democracy in america. The fact that theres a lot of americans, and we see this in the congress, that are wary of getting involved. All that crazy rhetoric from the campaign, you saw it on the paying for the wall in mexico. That will gradually be muffled out and faded away from. Tom friedman, thank you for joining us. Thank you, george. Nor analysis from our roundtable coming up. Up next, two leaders in congress on whats next. After this weeks air strikes, a signal on the strategy in syria and our tense relationship with russia. Marco rubio and adam schiff join us live. Fifty years ago, humpback whales were nearly extinct. They rebounded because a decision was made to protect them. Making the right decisions today for your longterm financial future can protect you and your family, and preserve your legacy. Ask a Financial Advisor how retirement and Life Insurance solutions from pacific life can help you plan for your future. Hi, im frank. I take movantik for oic, opioidinduced constipation. Had a bad back injury, my doctor prescribed opioids which helped with the chronic pain, but backed me up bigtime. Tried prunes, laxatives, still constipated. Had to talk to my doctor. She said, how long you been holding this in . laughs that was my movantik moment. My doctor told me that movantik is specifically designed for oic and can help you go more often. Dont take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. Movantik may cause serious side effects, including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. Tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. Movantik may interact with them causing side effects. Why hold it in . Have your movantik moment. Talk to your doctor about opioidinduced constipation. If you cant afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. Happiness is powerful flea and tick protection from nexgard. A delicious chew that protects for an entire month. Ask your vet for more information. Reported side effects include vomiting and itching. Nexgard. The vets 1 choice. Wheres jack . Hes on holiday. What do you need . I need the temperature for pipe five. Ask the new guy. The new guy . Jack trained him. Jacks guidance would be to maintain the temperature at negative 160 degrees celsius. That doesnt sound like jack. Actually, jack would say, hey mate, just cool it to minus 160 and were set. Good on ya. Oh yeah. Thats jack. Congress set to weigh in on whats next for syria. Senator marco rubio standing by. And were back in just two minutes. Standing by. And were back in just two minutes. Flonase allergy relief delivers more complete relief. Flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances that cause all your symptoms, including nasal congestion and itchy, watery eyes. Flonase is an allergy nasal spray that works even beyond the nose. So you can enjoy every beautiful moment to the fullest. Flonase. 61 changes everything. What we do every night is like something out of a strange dream. Except that the next morning. It all makes sense. Fedex powers global ecommerce. With networks built over 40 years. That are massive. Farreaching. And, yes. Maybe a bit magical. Visit fedex. Com slash dream i have never supported the use of military force of u. S. Military force in this conflict and i still dont. I believe that u. S. Military action of the type contemplated here may prove to be counterproductive. After a few days of missile strikes, it will allow assad to say that he took on the United States and survived. I tink this action could unleash a series of events that could further destabilize the region. Marco rubio back in 2013, warning against what he called pinprick military strikes against Bashar Al Assad in syria. Hes joining us now this morning. Senator rubio, thank you for joining us. Thanks, george. That was back in 2013. You praised President Trumps strike this week as a first step in a longer strategy. Are you worried based on what were seeing from assad this morning, the airfield up and running again, his defiance, that the consequences that you feared in 2013 are coming through now . The consequences actually happened. I would say that 3 1 2 years is a long time. Theres a lot things that have changed. Heres the first thing thats changed from 2013 until now. The russians are there now. Assad was losing back in 2013. If we had armed nonjihadist elements on the ground, they could have overthrown him. The second was the administration had no clear objective. They wanted to blow up some things to send a message. I dont think you use the u. S. Military to send a message. This strike was limited. It had a clear strategic objective. The destruction or degrading of a key air base installation that is used in these chemical attacks. That said, look, i listened to the interview earlier today that secretary tillerson is going to have on your program. Im concerned about the outlines of the strategy as i understand it. Its based on assumptions i thing are not the right ones. This idea that well get rid of isis and then use assad and others to come up with a solution. Its not going to work. As long as assad is there, youll have a radical element. Even if you destroy isis, it will be al nusra and that new coalition. These people that have been killed and gassed and Human Rights Violations against them will never accept assad as the rightful ruler. Theyll join or become radicalized in order to fight him. So what should they be doing instead . The first thing, i would say, there has to be a strategy outline based on reality. I heard he kind of analogized it to libya. Libya, gadhafi was overthrown by his people. What happened afterwards, after his removal, led to the chaos that we see in libya today. On the case of syria, today, its much more complicated than it was three, four, fiver years ago. But there are still things that can be done. We should be increasing sanctions significantly on iranian and russian interests helping assad. This boeing deal should be canceled. The second thing that we need to examine is how can we suppress the air defenses of the assad regime . It may include coalition use of force to make sure that the operations from the air are not happening and by the way keep our troops safe. You cant do that if russia is not on board, can you . Whats that . You cant do that if russia is not on board, can you . If those air strikes are being used not just to attack civilians and innocents on the ground, but threatening the over 500 American Service men and women on the ground in syria, we have a National Security interest in protecting them. That should have been in play in this particular attack. The presence of saran gas and its use in a country where there are americans embedded alongside their forces. Its a clear and present danger to the men and women who serve and protect us in uniform. I think we need to rebuild and reinvigorate the nonjihadist elements on the ground. I still think its possible to identify elements on the ground that are not jihadists who we can help to become players both on the negotiating table and in southeastern and southern syria, to be Major Players in the future of syria, as an alternative to assad. When we talked on friday, you thought the administration was moving in the direction youre outlining. After listening to secretary of state tillerson do you still believe that . Im concerned. There seems to be a difference in what Ambassador Haley is saying, as he said last night, that assad really has no future. And what i heard this morning. I dont mean to pick a fight. What im telling you is i think the strategy he seems to be outlining is based on assumptions that are not going to work. There is no such thing as assad yes, but isis, no. The focus that you can defeat isis as long as assad is there is not true. Theyre two sides of the same coin. As long as Bashar Al Assad is in power in syria, you will have a reason for people to be radicalized in syria. All this talk of isis. Theres an Al Qaeda Group growing in strength that are prepared to step into the vacuum left behind by a defeated isis. You cannot have a stable syria without jihadist elements on the ground as long as Bashar Al Assad is in power. The quicker they realize that, the better our strategy is going to be. This idea that we can defeat isis and then figure it out, it wont work. On the subject of mexico, secretary tillerson said he didnt bring up the idea of mexico paying for the wall. It seems that idea is dying a slow death. We met with the foreign minister. It did come up in our meeting. Let me just say, mexico is not going to pay for the wall. By the way, america should, if we believe its in our National Interests to do so. But i do think there is a lot we can work on with mexico. I think the Mexican Government is open, for example, to renegotiating key points of nafta, on intellectual property. I think they have a rel interest in their Border Security in their southern border. I think mexico is willing to be a partner in el salvador, the northern triangle countries a source of a lot of the migration coming in through mexico. Mexico is as much a transit point as it is a source of origin for people coming into the United States. Theres a lot of military to military engagement with mexico. Theres a lot we can work on together. I left the meeting feeling pretty positive what about we can do with our relationship. I hope that direction continues. Youre a member of the Senate Intelligence committee. President trump told the New York Times that he thinks susan rice, president obamas National Security adviser, may have committed a crime. He offered no evidence for this at all. She may have committed a crime reviewing the intelligence files that dealt with the trump transition. Youre a member of the Intelligence Committee. Have you seen evidence to back up a claim like that . Well, i usually try not to opine on those issues. Suffice it to say, i have not seen anything like it. We have learned over the last couple of weeks how bad it is to talk and debate these things in front of the media. If youre serious about a factfinding mission, you wait for the facts to come in, you write a report, make them public, then everybody can look at them and decide where we should go from there. Thats what were in the process of doing. Im very proud of the work of the Intelligence Committee in the senate. Its bipartisan. Everyone is working hard. No one is trying to turn this into a way to become famous. And i think, im more confident than ever that were going to prepare a package, were going to prepare a report that will lay out the facts and allow you and others to look at it and from there, draw conclusions of what should happen next. I ask everyone for a little bit of patience. Its not going to be as fast as you want. It will be done right. Im more confident today than i have ever been about that. Senator rubio, thank you for joining us this morning. Thanks, george. Were joined by congressman adam schiff. The top democrat on the house committee. Thank you for coming in. Lets pick up where we left off with senator rubio. A lot of changes this week on your committee. The chairman, devin nunes stepped aside. From the russian investigation. I know you think that is is appropriate. Hes facing an Ethics Committee investigation about revealing intelligence while he was chairman. Do you believe those claims are justified . I dont know, george. I dont want to opine on the ethics investigation. I can say i think he made the right decision to step aside, let someone else lead from the gop point of view. I think it does get our investigation back on track, our committee back on track. That is very positive. I think also we saw the events over the last 48 hours why it is so important on the broader issues that the president have a responsible, respectful relationship with the intelligence community. This is the first lifeordeath decision that the president made based on intelligence that was provided to him. He didnt apparently seek the support of our allies. But had he done that, he would have gone to them and said, this is what our intelligence shows. This is why we think the russians are lying. They need to be able to believe our intelligence, as the American People do. I hope this underscored why the destructive relationship that the president has had has to come to an end. I want to pick up on syria in a moment. One more question on your investigation. Your former colleague on the house, mike rogers, suggested you should recuse yourself now from the Intelligence Committee investigation. He wrote representative adam schiff could consider recusing himself from the probe. For his part, schiff suggested to the media that he had seen information on the russian trump ties that was the kind of evidence that would be sent to a grand jury. Further saying that you revealed intelligence that you shouldnt have. A lot of us have characterized how we have seen the intelligence. Some said it looked more like smoke than fire. Some say small fire. Some said they have seen no evidence. Mr. Rogers and others dont quarrel with those who say they have seen no evidence. I dont think that is an accurate assessment. I dont think it can let it stand. But i dont think mr. Rogers suggestion is a serious one. Is your investigation back on track . It is back on track. We have exchanged witness lists. I think were largely in agreement with the lists. Were also discussing moving forward in terms of our committee hearings. I can happily report that i think were back to where we were before the whole white house excursion. I think that is enormously important for the investigation. I wonder what you make of secretary tillerson. I posed the question. You said he should deliver an ultimatum to the foreign minister of russia when they meet on tuesday. Is that what you heard this morning . Well, it does sound like its what i heard. I was suggesting that frankly, before the strike, not after it. Nonetheless, i think there is a strong moral case to make for what the president did. Stronger now, in fact, than when president obama faced the same situation. Because, when president obama did, and i think the use of military force has to be the last response, not the first, he was presented with a diplomatic alternative that the russians put on the table. And i think you exhaust all those dip on diplomatic alternatives. That didnt work. The russians didnt enforce it. Assad violated the agreement. That makes the moral justification the answer to that syrian fathers question, how can the world allow this to go on . That much stronger today than in 2013. I dont think it should have been done without congressional approval. I dont think frankly obama should have put troops back in iraq or syria without congressional approval. I dont think this president should have taken the strike without congressional approval. Doesnt he have the inherent right under the constitution to do that . I dont think so. You can argue. President obama did. He said he has the article two power to do that. I also think, frankly, that congress has itself to blame here. We sat on our hands for years. I have introduced an authorization to use force. I couldnt get a single vote. No one could. We have weakened our own role in the checks and balances. I think Congress Needs to step forward immediately. Do you think congress could come close to agreeing on a use of force resolution at this point . You know, i do. I always have. I have for years. Its not easy. And what i propose that we do, because there are certain republican red lines and democratic red lines, were not going to allow a resolution that doesnt have a sunset. We have seen the problem with one that has gone on indefinitely. The republicans dont want to see one that limits the president s hands geographically. I think we can agree on one saying the president has the authority to go after al qaeda, isis, the taliban. But, if he should use this authorization, it will trigger an opportunity for any member of congress to force a vote. To either repeal the authorization or revise it in some way. That kind of formula, i think, might make sense to both democrats and republicans, liberals and conservatives because it forces accountability. You also heard secretary tillerson issue some sort of warning to russia about interfering in elections heres and oversaws. Is it going to be possible to reset our involvement with russia as long as your investigations are outstanding . I dont think our investigation is the obstacle to a different relationship with russia. I think russia is the obstacle. Their interests are not aligned with ours except in very limited areas. Theyre not aligned with ukraine. Theyre not aligned in syria, where their primary objective has not been going after isis. Its been going after the moderate opposition to the assad regime. Theyre not aligned in respect to nato. Theyre not aligned in europe. Was russia complicit in the chemical weapons strike . Absolutely theyre complicit. Russian intelligence may not be as good as ours. But its good enough to know thatd they had weapons, they could use the weapons. The russians are smart enough to know exactly what is going on there. Theyre better positioned in the sense that they have people on the ground in close proximity, working in close concert with the regime. I think absolutely they know what the syrians are doing. Thank you for your time this morning. Thank you. The roundtable is up next. They taken to political fallout of this weeks strike on syria. Plus the talk of a big staff shakeup in the white house. Rays always been different. Last year, he said he was going to dig a hole to china. At t is working with farmers to improve irrigation techniques. Remote moisture sensors use a Reliable Network to tell them when and where to water. So that farmers like ray can compete in big ways. China. Oh. He got there. Thats the power of and. Hi, im frank. I take movantik for oic, opioidinduced constipation. Had a bad back injury, my doctor prescribed opioids which helped with the chronic pain, but backed me up bigtime. Tried prunes, laxatives, still constipated. Had to talk to my doctor. She said, how long you been holding this in . laughs that was my movantik moment. My doctor told me that movantik is specifically designed for oic and can help you go more often. Dont take movantik if you have a bowel blockage or a history of them. Movantik may cause serious side effects, including symptoms of opioid withdrawal, severe stomach pain and or diarrhea, and tears in the stomach or intestine. Tell your doctor about any side effects and about medicines you take. Movantik may interact with them causing side effects. Why hold it in . Have your movantik moment. Talk to your doctor about opioidinduced constipation. If you cant afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. We cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. And at 4. 95, you can trade with a clear advantage. Fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. The scene on friday as the senate voted to confirm judge neil gorsuch to the supreme court. One day after Mitch Mcconnell unleashed the nuclear option. The roundtable weighs in when we come back. Gorsuch. The roundtable weighs in when we come back. Thats life. You diet. You exercise. And if you still need help lowering your blood sugar. This is jardiance. Along with diet and exercise. Jardiance lowers blood sugar and a1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. Jardiance is also the only type 2 diabetes treatment with heart proven to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death in adults with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Jardiance can cause serious side effects, including dehydration. This may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. Ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. Symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. Stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. Symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. Do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. Other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. Taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. Tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. So talk to your doctor about jardiance the one and only type 2 diabetes treatment with heart. Visit jardiance. Com for a free consultation with a certified diabetes educator if you qualify. Turns out things arent always take guinea pigs. Ey are. Theyre not pigs at all, nor are they from guinea. Or take this haircut. I may look all business, but look out. But theres a party going on back here. Kinda misleading, isnt it . Well, at carmax, you dont have to worry about being misled. The price online is the same price in the store, which is the same for everyone. Even guinea pigs. Its only fair mr. Biscuits. Only fair. Carmax music sting i am flexible. And im proud of that flexibility. Ill tell you that attack on children yesterday, had a big impact on me. Big impact. It was a horrible, horrible thing. And, its very, very possible and i will tell you, its already happened, that my attitude toward syria and assad has changed very much. That is President Trump in the rose garden on wednesday. Lets talk about it on our roundtable. Joined by our chief political strategist, matthew dowd, author of a new book, a new way. And abc news contributor Kristen Soltis anderson. And cornell belcher. The real question now is what is going to cob next . What the real white house strategy is. Everybody most theres unanimity that assad is a despicable character. And that what he did is a crime against humanity. There doesnt seem to be a strategy. Theres agreement. They have to come up with a strategy. Usually, we like to do that before you take action. That would be a great thing. Is it regime change . I dont know. Is it that well enter into places where bad things are happening around the world to human beings . That would be great. But theres a lot of places around the world where that is going on. A president isnt made. This is the discussion in the media after the strikes. A president is not made by the oneoff decisions. Not by decisive actions. President s are made by what is the longterm strategy and the longterm result. The president facing backlash already by some of his most lyle, most fervent supporters through the campaign. He talked about staying out of ukraine, avoiding world war iii. You had especially online, a lot of folks are the altright movement, a piece of Donald Trumps coalition, a small one, who were vocally upset about it. Its raised this question about in policy, do politicians lead voters or does it go is a different direction . Do politicians take positions and people follow or do people decide which leaders they like based on the policy positions . Here, if donald trump is shifting policy, do Republican Voters go along with him or does he lose some of his own party . One of the things driving President Trump is hes going to do the opposite of what president obama did. President obama drew the red line, didnt act. President trump is going to act. You see unusual praise coming from some of obamas past security advisers who also thought he should have struck then. Look, when you listen to the secretarys interview, until you got to mexico, i thought you might have been talking to john kerry. There doesnt seem to be a great deal of change here. President obama asked congress for the authority to strike. Congress decided not to. Back then in 2013, you had majority of voters who said, the president should ask for the authorization and then the majority of voters said, we shouldnt get involved. I think whats really interesting beyond sort of this weeks back and forth is, whats going on with rand paul and senator mccain. I think this is a very important debate. Whether or not a president can see something on television, change his mind, then send missiles because he changed his mind. Its a very important question. Fur for for our democracy. Rand paul isolationist, john mccain, interventionist. You have the same thing playing out inside the white house. The infighting. Steve bannon, off the National Security council. He represents the altright popux list wing of the donald trump white house. In a feud with Jared Kushner, who was a democrat before this campaign. Perhaps the president s most influential adviser. Reince priebus in the middle representing establishment republicans. And when you have a flexible president like that, these fights mean so much more. The three faces of donald trump. Right . This is not Reince Priebus problem, Jared Kushners problem, Steve Bannons problem. This is Donald Trumps problem. Because donald trump hasnt come up to what is the fiber of his policy . Somewhat the fiber of his principles . What does he stand for . And then everyone else in the administration succumbs to it. Like ronald reagan. Some people liked ronald reagan. Everybody had to buy into his vision. I dont think donald trump has though reagan had a lot of flexibility on tactics. He did. But thats a totally different deal. Everybody knew the vision, the strategy, the policies. Everybody was for them. Donald trump, i think, all of this is a reflection of who donald trump is and the fact that theres tons of conflict in it. How does it play out . I imagine it must have a lot of republicans worried. This is a concern for conservative republicans back in the primary. Back a year or longer ago. Was donald trump actually going to be a conservative president . Or do things that Republican Voters on the right really liked . You saw this play out during the Health Care Debate now, about where does donald trump fall ideologically . I can imagine donald trump saying, look, i tried that. We lost. I think donald trump is not confined to a doctrine or ideology. If youre a republican very conservative, you have to be feeling nervous about this white house right now. Is he moored in the same principles that you are . Its beginning to become clearer and clearer. Hes not moored in particular principles. Hes more pragmatic and going with whatever the moment calls for. This is the political problem for donald trump. He got 46 of the vote. A lot of it was blue collar. Voters who are struggling who bought into the america first. America first is not intervention. We spent more on that missile strike than it would take to fix the flint water problem, right . So you have a whole group of blue collar struggling americans who rejected this from typical republicans and the moment he starts sounding like george bush and dick cheney, he has a problem. But what i heard from secretary of state tillerson that maybe donald trump is not that eager to get in there that deeply. You can tell that. Theres been pullback since the evening or the of the strike. Its all been pullback, no, no, no. Were not interesting in removing assad. No, no, no. Were not interested in military action. Where does steve bannon fit in all of this . What is his policies on all of this . I disagree with the premise that somehow removing steve bannon will make the white house better. Were on a day, the masters sunday. Its as if somebody says, somebody is playing on the golf course and they say, that club is bent, that club is crooked. Therefore, i lost the tournament because of the club. No. You lost the tournament, not because of the club, which is steve bannon, you lost the club because of your own playing. Donald trump is not going to solve any problem by removing one part of this white house. And i wonder go ahead. A bannon or whichever person is the first person out, there is polling data on what people think about certain of trumps advisers. Only 23 of republicans have a positive view of steve bannon. The rest dont know who he is or they have an unfavorable view. So for a lot of republicans i think right now, the idea that removing an adviser will cause a mszive drop in his support what is certainly true is that every member of the staff, with the possible exception of ivanka trump and Jared Kushner are dispensable. Thats just a fact in all white houses. Coming out of this, the whole issue with the nuclear option. The confirmation of judge gorsuch. Going to be justice gorsuch. I wonder if the whole idea that some held out for, that there could be some kind of grand compromise on big issues. Like infrastructure. That seems dead now. I think its really hard. When you look at whats happened in the senate. Im sorry. I think you have to put Mitch Mcconnell front and center of a lot of the dysfunction you have seen happening and the partisanship over the last couple of years. Its been building for an awful long time. On both sides. This is someone who said, my top priority is to make sure that president obama is one term. This is someone who blocked more of president obamas nominees than have been blocked in history. This is someone who said, you know what . Im the guardian of gridlock. When you look at what this man has done, its a long way to say hes front and center. Harry reid is also responsible. Theres a lot of people responsible. Thats going to have to be the last word right now. Well be right back. Right back after this from vanessa i got hurt and was given painkillers. By the time the drugs ran out, i was addicted. It happened so fast. I ended up on the streets, where the drugs are cheaper and easier to get. I was a full blown heroin addict, selling my soul to get high. When i realized i needed help i didnt know where to go. But i got help and you can too. Youre not alone. Help is within reach. Call 844 reach nj or visit reachnj. Gov. The road to recovery starts now. That is all for us today. Thanks for sharing part of your sunday with us. Check out world news tonight. And ill see you tomorrow on gma. Im monica malpass. On inside story, a new, unprecedented legal maneuver is adding to the turmoil in the Philadelphia District attorneys office. Lets get the inside story. Good morning. Im monica malpass. Welcome to inside story. And lets meet our insiders this week. They are george burrell, attorney and nonprofit executive. Good morning to you, sir. Glad to have you. Brian tierney, marketing executive. Good morning. Welcome back. Always good to see you. Terry madonna, Franklin Marshall pollster. Its so good to have you again, terry. And ajay raju, attorney. Good morning, sir. Thank you all for your time and your opinions. So, a former District Attorney is suing the current District Attorney, along with powerhouse attorney dick sprague is joining in the lawsuit because of the federal bribery and corruption charges against seth williams. He did relinquish his law license voluntarily, but he has said he is not gonna resign in the wake of the charges