Irans leaders questioning a nuclear deal. I think its somewhat ironic to see some members of congress wanting to make common cause with the hard liners in iran. Well discuss the tug of war between the white house and congress with two members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Barrasso and ben cardin. Plus two ferguson, missouri, Police Officers are ambushed. Reigniting racial tensions. This was not someone trying to bring healing to ferguson. This was a dam punk. Punk. Our sunday group weighs in. And our power player of the week, afghanistans first lady, rula rula ghani on taking a stand for womens rights. Its true, its unchartered water. I can try a lot of things because of this. All right now on Fox News Sunday. And hello again from fox news in washington. It began as an investigation into benghazi but now Hillary Clinton is being forced to answer for her handling of emails while she was secretary of state. The House Benghazi Committee has issued a subpoena for clintons emails and called for an independent review of her private server. Joining us now, the chairman of that committee, trey gowdy. Chairman, the state department turned over 300 of clintons emails on benghazi some 900 pages last month to the Benghazi Committee that youre the chair of. Based on what youve seen, did she do anything wrong . And how can you be sure that those arent all of her emails on this subject . Well im not sure what you mean by doing anything wrong. I mean we havent seen obviously any evidence of a crime and if we do get some level of assurance that we have all of the emails and we dont have any level of assurance because of the arrangement she had with herself, ill let your viewers decide whether or not there were any mistakes made but i have no guarantee that we have everything that were entitled to to be able to do our jobs. Why do you have doubts about that sir . Well there are huge gaps. Chris, if you think back to that iconic photograph of her on the c17 with her blackberry in her hand, shes on her way to libya and there are know mails for weeks and weeks on either side of that trip including the trip itself. Now, it may be that theres a plausible explanation for that but were going to have to ask her before we will know that. In her conference, secretary clinton said that she basically turned over 30000 emails to the state department after a routine request to her and to all of the secretaries of state. Here she is. After i left office, the state department asked former secretaries of state for our assistance in providing copies of workrelated emails from our personal accounts. I responded right away. In fact, chairman, what role did your committee play in bringing about the state department, asking her to turn over emails that she hadnt turned over for the two years since she left office . Well chris, i wont be able to answer that question definitively. Only the state department knows the impetus behind that letter. I find the timing incredibly curious and i think the state department had to correct its testimony so to speak on multiple occasions. We asked for those emails as early as august of 2014 and we got eight of them. So we ratcheted up the conversations and then we got 300 in february. Why they decided to write four former secretaries of state under a routine records Maintenance Program it just doesnt pass the smile test but youre going to have to ask the state department that question. All right. The only way to see she said in her News Conference she turned over 30000 emails, she deleted 30000 emails. The only way to see those 30,000 that she says were personal, would be to look at her private server, but clinton made it very clear in her News Conference the answer to that is no. Take a look. The server contains personal communications from my husband and me and i believe i have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private. Now you say your committee cant subpoena personal property. They can documents, papers but not personal Properties Like a server. On the other hand the house of representatives the full house can. Should they . Well, we shouldnt have to. I hope it doesnt get to that point. Its an open legal question and any time you litigate something youre talking about years and years. I think an imminently reasonable alternative is for her to turn over that server to an independent, neutral third party. She says she deleted personal emails. Chris, i have zero interest in looking at her personal emails. I dont care about her yoga practice. Pi dont care about bridesmaids dresses. I dont want to see that. But who gets to decide whats personal and whats public . And if its a mixeduse email and lots of emails we get in life are both personal and some work, i just cant trust her lawyers to make the determination that the public is getting everything theyre entitled to. But she said in that News Conference, because she was specifically asked about this idea, have an independent person somebody nuchly agreeable come in and look at the server, and thats when she said it will remain private. Well, there are lots of ways to motivate people in life, chris. One is public pressure. If it becomes an issue for her if the public believes it is reasonable for her to turn over that server which contains Public Information to a neutral detached orbitor, retired judge or archivist or inspector general, then shell be forced to do so. Otherwise, the house as an institution, may be forced to go to court to try to get access to that. But again, the house has no business looking at purely personal emails, but by the same token, she doesnt get to decide what is purely personal and what is public. Now in her News Conference, clinton said she has complied with every rule, every law during the time that she was secretary of state. As a former federal prosecutor, do you believe that to be true, sir . Chris i was a very mediocre prosecutor and i did no federal records cases. Im going to have to let smart lawyers decide whether or not she complied with the law or not. I know this, i have been asked to find out what happened before, during and after benghazi and i need her records to do that. And i cannot take her lawyers word that he went through and used all the right search terms. Thats one question she didnt answer is how did you search for Public Records . How did you reconcile personal versus public . So there are a lot more questions and we have to go to her to get the answers to them. I dont want to have a second conversation with her. And two weeks ago we werent planning on having a second conversation with her, but she had an arrangement with herself as it relates to Public Records and thats why you and i are having this conversation. I want to ask you about this document. This is the separation statement that every member of the state Department Must sign. Its called of form 109. Every as i say, every employee of the state Department Must sign it before they leave. I have surrendered all unclassified documents and papers to responsible officials, relating to the official business of the government acquired by me while in the employ of the department. Two questions chairman, do you know if secretary clinton signed that form before she left the state department. And secondly, whether she met that pledge, which is to be enforced as a felony by either prison time or a disqualification from Public Office . No, i do not know if she signed that. And it would be irresponsible to for me to guess. The responsible thing to do is to ask her and ask the state department to produce a copy of it. And if she did not sign it, ask her why she did not sign it. And if she did sign it well go over the document with her. But when you dont have evidence one way or another, im not in the business of speculating. I would have to ask her and the state department that. Finally, were about to talk to congressman adam schiff, a democrat on your committee. He says that you are turning this investigation and this committee into an arm of the Republican National committee aimed at hurting Hillary Clinton. Your reaction. Well first of all chris, i like adam very much and hes a very good attorney. If you look back at the three hearings we have had so far, i have mentioned Hillary Clintons name a whopping zero times. We would never be having this conversation and adam would not be on your set right now had she not had an arrangement with herself to decide what is Public Record and what is personal. So if he is frustrated with the last two weeks, he needs to talk to secretary clinton. We were interviewing witnesses that have nothing to do with secretary clinton when this story broke. To the extent democrats are frustrated they should talk to secretary clinton not me. I didnt tell her to hire her attorney to go through these 60000 records and, lord knows i didnt tell her to delete 30,000 of them. So he should probably direct that frustration towards her and not to the house. Chairman gowdy, thank you. Thanks for joining us today. Now lets bring in that member of the Benghazi Committee, democrat congressman adam schiff of california. What do you think about his response whatever happened here is all on Hillary Clinton . Chris we would be exactly where we are regardless of what secretary clinton did with her emails. The reality is that we havent been talking about secretary clinton in the committee because they wanted to put off her testimony as far into the president ial cycle as possible. And this is only the most recent justification for that. We have been asking for her to come in. She has volunteered to come in and testify. So i think this is really unfortunately just an effort to push this far into that campaign as possible. But wait a minute here. I mean doesnt it bother you that clinton and her lawyer by themselves decided which of those 60,000 emails were public and government and turned over and which were private which she deleted. Is that your idea of transparency transparency . Chris, lets say she did it the way we like. She had a separate email account for her private and public. We would be in the same place. People would be saying well how can we trust that she only used the official email account forgive me it wouldnt be exactly the same. She would have been sending these, you know, theres a different Vantage Point in 2015 than there might have been in 2009, 10 and 11 as she was sending these on a government account which she didnt have. We would be exactly where we are. The whole purpose of this committee is really secretary clinton. It has long since been about anything else. So we would be in the same place. My chairman, who i respect a great deal would be saying the same thing. We cant let secretary clinton grade her own papers, whatever that means. We cant let her decide which to use for her private email and public email. We need that server any way. You think this was adequate transparency on her part . I think we need to handle the situation exactly as we did in the last administration in the similar situation. When we learned that the president s chief of staff under george w. Bush and 80 other senior officials were using the email server for official business, we didnt go and say we demand to have that server. We need to get the republican server to an independent arbiter. We need to have people certify that theyve given us the documents. Well talk with them about how they did the searches. I was going to ask you about that. Thats what we should be doing here. That isnt quite what happened. I actually looked back. This was during the whole question of the firing of u. S. Attorneys during the george w. Bush administration and you were one of the people leading the charge, saying this was outrageous that they were using you know, one set of accounts, government accounts and then doing other business on rnc accounts. You were objecting to that. I was objecting to politicizing the hires and firing of u. S. Attorneys, absolutely. But i was never saying we need the Republican National committee server. I never made that claim. You were upset they had two separate accounts. Why are we handling this different . Is this because secretary clinton is running for president . Absolutely thats why were handling this different. The reason were so reluctant to talk about jeb bushs server has everything to do with the president ial race. Why isnt that fair topic of conversation . He used a private email server for official business . Are we letting jeb bush grade his own homework . First of all, he turned over hundreds of thousands of emails in addition to which i think you agree the security implications of the government of florida and secretary of state are different. But this too, chris in fairness, its taken him 7 1 2 years. People are criticizing secretary clinton for doing this last year, two years out. Its taken him 7 1 2 years and were still getting documents from governor bush. I want to ask you about this form, 109, the separation statement. Its awfully clear and basically every employee of the state department has to sign and swear that they have turned over all of their papers classified and unclassified that they had when they were in the office in the state department. And if they dont, if they sign it and they have broken that pledge its a felony they could go to prison, be disqualified from Public Office. One do you know if she signed it and, two did she live up to this pledge . I dont know if she signed it. I assume well find out. I hope well find out about whether all prior secretaries have signed it. But lets also talk about benghazi, chris. Forgive me im asking about this. Yeah. She clearly didnt live up to this pledge, you would agree . I dont know what the terms of that require. I havent had ill hand it to you. It says what i said. I have turned everything over. That i acquired. Now, i dont know what that means exactly and we would have to study it. But lets be fair about this, we are talking about investigation on benghazi, right . What does this have to do with benghazi . And the answer is absolutely nothing. This committee has long since departed from being a committee about benghazi. Its now a special investigation of secretary state Hillary Clinton. Otherwise what possible relevance does that have on benghazi . Trey gowdy is acting as an arm of the rnc to go after clinton. Arent you in effect acting as a dnc to protect her . No im acting as a steward of the house to keep a taxpayer funded investigation on track doing what its supposed to be doing. Look, i have Great Respect for trey. I like him very much and i think he has resisted the pressure to turn this into an arm of the rnc, but we knew about this private email server private emails last august. Its only when this became public the New York Times that i think the pressure became too great on the chairman and the committee to politicize this and reluctantly i think thats where weve gone. I have 30 seconds left. I know you want to talk about this letter that 47 republicans stoent the leaders of the iran over the talks of a nuclear deal. I think its apaling to interfere that the commander in chief has engaged in a conversation. I think democrats and republicans, house of Senate Members ought to keep their powder dry. Lets see if there is a deal and what the terms of that deal are but i am shocked and i think its a terrible thing for the institution. Were going to have more on that later. Congressman schiff, thank you for coming in. Well follow where your Committee Goes next. So did hillarys explanation of how she handled her emails help her or raise more questions . Our sunday group joins the conversation. Plus what would you like to ask the panel about the email controversy. Just go to facebook or twitter fox dlznewssunday and we may use your question on the air. Daughter do you and mom still have money with that broker . Dad yeah, 20 something years now. Thinking about what you want to do with your money . Daughter looking at options. What do you guys pay in fees . Dad i dont know exactly. Daughter if youre not happy do they have to pay you back . Dad it doesnt really work that way. Daughter you sure . Vo are you asking enough questions about the way your wealth is managed . Wealth management at charles schwab. I would be happy to have somebody talk to you about the rules. I fully complied with every rule that i was governed by. Hillary clinton saying she did nothing wrong in the way she handled her emails as secretary of state, but how persuasive was she . Time to bring in our sunday group. The weekly standards steve hayes. Usa today columnist, kirsten powers. Karl rove and juan williams. Karl we were talking with congressman schiff. You took heat. You had one white house account and separate political account. You had to because you couldnt do government business or political business on the government account. How big a deal do you think this Hillary Clinton thing is . And how big a role will it play in her campaign . It will be big in that it reaffirms a vision, a narrative that people have about the clinton that they are governed by a different set of rules. Well have throughout the entire course of the campaign, whether its foreign contributions to their foundation. Selling intelligence to foreign entities on american politics. Well have a whole series of these things that are the clintons operating in a sense of entitlement. I was amused at congressman schiff. Youre right. Rnc accounts were there for political activity at the republican at the white house house. We had to have a separate account. We were told these are president ial records. They were periodically swept and added into the white house archives. In fact, there was a cur flufl when they were thought to be missing and congressman schiff was one of the loudest and strongest with secretary clinton who was running for president at that point, also accusing the white house of secret email accounts. She said it shredded the institution. They found those emails in the white house archive. They went before the committee. It was a complete circus. One big charge had to do with the governor of lets not relitigate 2007. Bottom line is i was laughing listening to him trying to defend something after listening to him so pie yasly scream and shout about secret email accounts in 2011 and 2008. We ask you for questions for the panel and we got this on facebook from paul who writes how will this affect her, hillarys bigtime donors . Do they continue to invest in her or do they start shopping for another candidate to support . How do you answer paul from your soundings, how upset are democrats . How worried are they and are they beginning to look around . Well i think they are worried about it. But i also think theres nobody else that is even in her league so the idea that theres anyone to shop around for, the feeling is shes the best candidate. Theres nobody who has come close to her, so i think that one of the concerns is what karl raised is that it feeds into a narrative. You know, that the clintons are secretive, that she seemed very defensive. The way she handled that press conference was concerning to people that this doesnt seem like somebody who is ready for primetime which is strange to say for somebody who has been in primetime for such a long time. The flip side of it is shes very good at turning things around into where shes the victim and so i can see as you start to see republicans piling on i think shes going to probably be able to turn this around and say, oh see, here they come again. Theyre coming after me and it will make people rally around her a little bit. Steve, our colleague charles had a column on friday and the lead line was clinton burn the tapes. In effect, what he was saying was if Richard Nixon had handled watergate the way Hillary Clinton handled this, that he would have survived in his presidency, not to compare the crimes of watergate and Nixon White House to what we know so far here. But doesnt he have a point that she has, you know, she deleted 30,000 emails, we dont know if she destroyed her hard drive, but to a certain degree, she rendered a lot of this discussion mute . Its a huge problem for her for the reasons that both kirsten and carl suggest. Look even if you believe the clinton and the way they described their process, they did these keyword searches, went through and deleted emails that were not from. Gov email addresses. That doesnt solve the problem. To go to your point, the questions that you were asking adam schiff, theres not just form 109 another form 1904 where a state Department Official has to certify that the person who removed this material has gotten permission to remove the material. Where is that form . Was that ever signed . Was it requested . Theres all this documentation that she hasnt provided in addition to her server, in addition to these missing emails. Until she does these are questions that are going to follow her around. I think we can agree, juan, there were a lot of good things about the clinton years. We had relative peace and prosperity. We had balanced budgets, welfare reforms. On the other hand, there were a lot of things that we all didnt like scandals the parsing of words, the playing by different set of rules. Does this this is something i think karl and kirsten were talking about does this feed into that in a sense remind people of the bad parts of the clinton years . Well, i think it does. Just to pick up by the way on something my friends here are talking about which i think is from a historical point of view, you want the historical record from a journalist point of view, thats why ap is suing. You should have some transparency. Now on to the Political Part chris, i dont think that you know, when people look back on file gate, what did james used to say, you look back on it it all amounts to a bunch of nothing. Thats largely the response from the democratic community. Initially concerned that, you know what, were setting a precedent here through Hillary Clintons behavior that others can subsequently follow. Republicans can say, im going to keep my emails secret now, too. There has been such a feeding frenzy on the right over this issue that people think its way out of line and its to the point where its almost like a poker player turn over the table and say, were out of here with a big bluff because they got nothing when it comes to actually winning the 2016 campaign. Hillary clinton is 7 to 8 points ahead of any republican candidate at this point and you see these republicans. Oh, yeah email email, email. When karl was in trouble back in 07 no press conference. Just about zero press coverage of this. Thats not the right line. No hold on. Youre saying that basically the press is protecting george w. Bush and not hillary, is that your point . [ all speaking at once ] let karl. I went back and looked. There was one Washington Post editorial and said you didnt get good guidance. There may have been one editorial. I remember a lot more opedingss than one. They were not tough on rove but being too tough on clinton. Maybe thats because she was the secretary of state and i was a white house aide and she has violated the rules that were laid down by they fired an ambassador clinton on her watch she fired an ambassador for having a private email account while she has a private email account. Karl let me affirm, youre a powerful man. You were firing u. S. Attorneys. No, no no. I hate to have to continue to correct you. 95 of your emails were rnc. Im sorry to have to continue to correct you. No you like correcting him. Come on, admit. Even the Obama Justice department did two investigations and found there were no improper white house interference. Fine. But get your facts straight. All right. No, no, no. Wait, wait. Jeb bush has a private email. You had private email. I had no private email. I was told rnc email . I was told right from the beginning that it was treated as a president ial record and periodically swept and dumped into the white house archives which is exactly what happened. Private emails, one thing about private emails, one thing we learned this week is that both cheryl mills and abdean were using private emails to communicate. And somebody who is instrumentally involved in putting down which also puts it contradicts that if she was sending emails to them that they were saved courtesy of somebody inside bill clintons office she requested that the private email be established for Hillary Clinton. Thats interesting. There you go. We have to take a break and well see you all later. Boy, i dont know stay off the coffee. Up next, the deadline guys up next the deadline is now just two weeks away from the Irans Nuclear program and the white house just warned congress to stop interfering after 47 republican senators sent a letter to irans leader. Well talk with two key members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And what do you think . Did that letter cross the line . Let me know on facebook or twitter foxnewssunday and use the fns. Secretary of state, kerry is set to resume talks tonight on Irans Nuclear program ahead of this months deadline to strike a deal. But those talks were complicated when 47 republican senators sent this letter to irans leaders. They wrote the next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen. And future congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time. The white house responded last night Warning Congress to stop interfering in the negotiation. Joining us now, two members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee republican John Barrasso of wyoming who signed that iran letter. And democrat ben cardin of maryland who says it was a partisan effort to weaken the president at a critical time. Senators, welcome to Fox News Sunday. Thanks for having us. Good to be here. Senator barrasso, these how secretary kerry described your ledders to irans leaders this weekend. Here he is. All right. Any way he was very unhappy. He has never been better. Said this was a terrible negotiation and interfering with the effort to make a peace deal. And white house chief of staff and lets put this up, i hope we have this. Dennis mcdonough sent a warning last night that legislation that is being proposed suggesting that Congress Must approve a deal would likely have a profoundly negative impact on the on going negotiation. Senator barrasso is it unreasonable for the white house to say, wait until we see what the deal is, if theres a deal, before you start weighing in. The president has said only after they signed the deal will congress get a chance to weigh in. And this letter last night from the white house was to both parties because this is bipartisan legislation. The letter last night said that the president wants to go first to the Security Council of the United Nations before going to the congress of the United States. And you have to ask, why is that . Why is he saying both to republicans and democrats, sit down and be quiet. I think its because its a bad deal that the president is so eager and desperate because of his legacy to get any deal that hes going to sign a bad one. Senator cardin, as senator barrasso points out, theres a Bipartisan Group of senators that had been proposing legislation to say look once you get a deal, we want to be able to weigh in on it. It was very close to a vetoapproved majority. What do you think of the demand and you can see it in this letter that Congress Must not interfere with the white house and that you have to stay out of it . Well, look, our objective is to get an agreement with iran where they give up their Nuclear Weapon of breakout capacity. Thats our objective. We want this foth have the strength of the United States behind his negotiation. The letters signed by the 47 senators weakened the president s negotiating ability. That was wrong. Theres no agreement yet. We have to give the president the opportunity to negotiate an agreement because that is the best option for the United States. But you were in favor of the corker legislation, correct . Congress is going to have to be engaged here. What do you think of the president saying stay out of it . She doesnt want to see any action before the march 24th deadline. I agree. I think he was saying until theres any deal signed period. During these negotiation there will be plenty of time afterwards. He said that congress will have to take action in regards to the sanctions. I do think congress has a role to play. And theres a bipartisan effort for how congress should review any agreement reached by the president in regards to the iran sanctions because we impose the sanctions the congress of the United States. Wait a minute on that. Because if theres a deal the white house says it wont be a treaty. It will be something called an executive agreement. And this weekend, secretary kerry and, boy i hope we see this one was very clear about what that will mean. As far as we are concerned, the congress has no ability to change an executive agreement. So hes saying you know once thats signed, you guys are out of it. And i want to get back to senator barrassos point. At the same time the white house is saying and Dennis Mcdonough does in the letter were going to take this to the un and ask them if we get a deal to lift sanctions. So what do you think about this idea, yeah, were going to put it to a vote at the un but congress, per secretary kerry will have to stay out . The president has certain powers as president of the United States, the congress has powers as the legislative branch. We respect both branchs. The president has every right to enter into agreements. Every president has done that and major policy agreements with other countries and multinational agreements. He has every right to do that. Ultimately the congress is the policy arm of government. We have the right to pass legislation. We can counter what the president has done. We can support what the president has done. In regards to iran we have a common objective. That objective is to prevent iran from having the capacity for a Nuclear Weapon. When john kerry says, congress has no ability to change an executive agreement, you say i dont think thats exactly what the secretary said. It is. I have the quote right here. In the in context. The president has the right to do that. The congress can pass laws. If those laws become effective, those laws control. Senator barrasso for all the gop outrage and executive agreement it isnt so unusual. Lets put up history on the screen. The 2012 Strategic Partnership was an executive agreement and so was the 2009 status o of forces agreement that president bush negotiated with iraq. So whats the difference . Well when barak obama was in the senator and joe biden was in the senate, they sponsored cosponsored legislation that said the bush arrangements with iraq had to come to congress. This is my concern, a world where iran has a Nuclear Weapon is less safe less secure and the concern is that this is going to be a bad agreement. We were supposed to actually dismantle irans capacity for a Nuclear Weapon and now the president has gotten to a point where, no, its just about delaying. Its not about stopping. Its about managing. So, those are the concerns that i see a bad agreement coming. I think that we are seeing iran taking more and more power and across the whole middle east they have this arc of dominance that is including not just iran but iraq as well as syria, all the way to the mediterranean. Let me if i can talking about iran, here is the letter. The letter that you and 46 other republicans signed, sent to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of iran and, in fact you got an answer from the Supreme Leader washington is disintegrating and is a, quote sign of a decline in political ethics in the u. S. Senator barrasso, if theres no deal havent you effect given iran a weapon that they can say if these talks break down, hey, look, you have half of the senate saying, you know whatever the deal is, were not going to abide by it. Havent you given them a weapon to blame it on the u. S. And isnt it going to make it harder for an International Coalition of us with our allies to maintain sanctions against sflaern. I think its very important with regard to iran to make sure that no deal is better than a bad deal. And im very concerned about a bad deal. Thats not my point, sir. By sending this letter, you could have sent it to the president or the american people, by sending it to the leader of iran havent you given them an excuse and the hard liners an excuse to drop out saying hey 47 senator republicans say this is worthless. By sending that letter, we focussed the attention where it should be on the debate about the deal. The president hasnt wanted to talk about it for six years. Iran with a Nuclear Weapon. Now the focus is on what it means if iran gets a Nuclear Weapon to use themselves to give to terrorists who can use its against us. And this is all about iran and sanctions. They want the money. Iran wants the money so they can then spend it in other ways for terrorism. I got a minute left and i want to ask senator cardin about something else. Doesnt president obama bare some responsibility for this . He has taken executive action, he has ignored congress whether it comes to immigration or Climate Change or cuba and isnt this a response to the fact that the president has ignored the separation of powers under the institution . No. I think the president s actions is where congress didnt act. Congress would have passed immigration before i understand, but under the constitution the president has to act. But it hasnt. Congress has not acted. The president has inherent powers and can use those powers. If Congress Takes action, congress will speak. We can always have the last word but we have to pass action. Senator barrasso, to what degree did the president s action play into this . It played into a lot. The American Public is very concerned about this president. The sad truth is he does a very bad job on foreign relations. Hes done it with the syria and the red line. Hes done it with isis in terms of underestimating calling them a jv team. Yemen he called a Success Story right until the iranians took over yemen. The president needs input from congress. Thank you both so much for coming in today. Well stay on top of these talks. Wyoming is going to the 64 of the ncaa. Up next were very happy here. Up next, racial tensions reignited in ferguson missouri, this week after two Police Officers are shot during a protest. But who is to blame . Well bring back the panel. Do you want to know how hard it can be to breathe with copd . It can feel like this. Copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. Spiriva is a oncedaily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that helps open my airways for a full 24 hours. Spiriva helps me breathe easier. Spiriva respimat does not replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms. Tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. These may worsen with Spiriva Respimat. Discuss all medicines you take even eye drops. If your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain or problems passing urine stop taking Spiriva Respimat and call your doctor right away. Side effects include sore throat cough, dry mouth and sinus infection. Nothing can reverse copd. Spiriva helps me breathe better. To learn about Spiriva Respimat slowmoving mist ask your doctor or visit spirivarespimat. Com now you can connect with Fox News Sunday on facebook and twitter. Be sure to check out exclusive material online at facebook and share it with other fox fans. And tweet us foxnewssunday using fns. Be part of the discussion and weigh in on the action every Fox News Sunday. It was my biggest fear when president obama and eric holder along with bill de blasio, trashed the repetition of an entire profession. The wrong impression was created by the president making such a big deal out of this. County sheriff david clark and former new york city mayor, rudy julian know part of a group of critics who say president obama and attorney eric holder bare some responsibility for the shooting of two policemen in ferguson, missouri this week. Were back now with the panel. Karl, you heard this from a lot of conservatives this week the president and attorney general piled on the white Police Officer who has now been cleared in the shooting of Michael Brown. Then they went after the Ferguson Police department. Do you think that they played any role in the climate that led to the shooting of these two Police Officers . I want to divorce these things. They led to the climate, but im not certain the climate created the act. The act was created by an individual who took those shots and tried to kill Police Officers. I am worried about the president s language. When the president goes on jimmy kimmel and says, quote, whoever fired those shots shouldnt detract from the issue. Thats sort of weird. Its like, his condemnation of the shooter is that he was detracting from the bigger, more important issue which was the conduct of the Police Department. Its interesting because i was going to bring that up. Lets play that tape. I think that what had been happening in ferguson was oppressive and object nabl and was worthy of protest, but there was no excuse for criminal acts. And whoever fired those shots shouldnt detract from the issue. Go ahead, karl. Well, attorney general holder, in his 24minute long News Conference said act of constitutional practices. The Police Department routinely violated the fourth amendment. The use of tazers was not constitutional but dangerous. I bet theres not a specific indictment over any of these practices. I think they hyped this. Yeah there were bad things going on. But if there were unconstitutional practice, they have to hold them accountable and put them before the bar of justice. They went back before and raised the expectations i think, that there was going to be an indictment of the officer and there wasnt. That there was going to be an indictment of the department, there wasnt. You know, if there is action able grounds do something about it dont go out and say these things particularly the president s comment. I want to ask you about that because it seemed that it was very off kilter. These are two policemen who had been shot and suddenly were saying i hope that wont detract from the issue as if thats somehow a distraction from what was going on in ferguson. Look, i think the shooting of the Police Officer is a horrific act, a tragedy should be prosecuted. I hope they find these guys as soon as possible and convict them and in missouri they may get the death penalty. Its more than just a distraction which is how the president played it. Let me speak to this. Theres a long history of racial resentment. Theres a long history of high levels with criminal behavior and i think that in urban america you have to deal with youre talking about ferguson . Im talking about urban america poor, black people concentrated and dealing with the police and the police dealing with them and this is an on going issue that we as an American Family need to deal with. And its not to say that we should stop dealing with it because you had this horrific act this shooting of the two officers. To describe it as something that is separate, picking up on karls use of that term, separate, is exactly right. You should separate this out and say, this is a terrible act, a criminal act. But that is not to say that in any way fostered the shooting by the president or the attorney generals language and certainly that it shouldnt stop us from dealing with the real issue on the table. Steve, i think this is where we get to the balance here. I mean, clearly if you believe the Justice Department report, there were some bad things going on very bad things. Going on in ferguson f youre an africanamerican, you were more likely to get arrested. You were more likely to be the victim of excessive force. On the other hand as the milwaukee shf said you dont want to trash a profession you dont want to trash policemen and you dont want to help incite, if not the shooting, the sense of grievement. Look, i read the entire report from the the Justice Department. I found it deeply troubling. Everybody should be troubled blacks, whites, republicans democrats. What was in that report was a picture of an aggressive Police Department that made decisions in many cases based on race, not just because of impact but there was sort of context to back that up. Having said that, i think the comments from the president were reprehensible. This isnt a side issue. This is the issue. The way the white house and eric holder treated the original shooting of Michael Brown which was to hype it to give it a ton of attention when in fact the other Justice Department report completely exonerates darren wilson. Then there is sort of a shrug of the shoulders about the shooting of these two cops. I think its disgusting. First of all, they didnt hype anything. The reason the president responded he was responding to the fact that you had demonstrations going on. It wasnt like the president came out and was informed us about this. It turned out the demonstrations were wrong. The demonstrations werent wrong. They were there to protest exactly what steve was talking about. No. Hold on. I listen to you guys talk this whole time. Let me say they were there about Police Department that is completely out of control. Youre wrong karl there are specific instances. There was a man who was wrongly arrested and beaten and then charged for the his own blood on the Police Officers uniform. There has been a ton of abuse that has been chronicled not just by the hands of the justice report. But thats not the only reason they were there. They were there about this Police Department that has been treating these black president s badly. Last word, karl. You have 15 seconds. I never saw in those protests we object to these other things. I read the report, too. It is disgusting. But my point is if there are bad things go after the bad actors. Dont use the kind of language that use a sense of this is all bad but were not going to do anything. Thats not what he said. Thank you, panel. See you next sunday. To be continued. Up next, our power player of the week. How the first lady of afghanistan is working to improve the situation of women in her country. She says she was tired of waiting for her husband to come back from his big job each night. And so quietly, carefully she carved out an important and sensitive role for herself. Here is our power player of the week. Its no longer a place you can say, oh what a pity this girl was born in afghanistan. Afghanistan is starting to be a good place for a woman to be. If thats true, rula ghani is part of the reason. Shes the wife of afghan president , ash raf rula ghani. There are lot of very strong women. And the countrys first very visible first lady. Yes, its true. Its uncharted waters. I can try a lot of things because of this. We went rula ghani last month when she visited the u. S. On her own. At one stop she introduced laura bush, a champion of womens rights in afghanistan. She could have been describing herself. Shes resourceful. She gets things done. Rula ghani has her own office and staff of six in the president ial palace. She meets delegations, mostly of women, and says shes a facilitator, working within what she calls existing structures to help women carve out better lives. I dress properly. I talk properly. I dont make she met her husband in the early 07s at the American University in beirut. They moved to new york, but between the soviet invasion and then the taliban they couldnt return to afghanistan for more than 20 years. You take whats thrown at you and you make a life out of it. During last years bitter president ial campaign, she became an issue. Attacked for being a Lebanese Christian with u. S. Citizenship. Is that painful for you when critics of your husband use you to try to hurt him . It was sad that i didnt know the language. I spoke it in front of them for an hour. It was sad that i didnt know anything about afghanistan. And i spoke about afghanistan [ speaking in Foreign Language ] in his inaugural address, her husband made news singling out his partner for helping afghan women. It was very moving. He almost choked when he said it. And i felt like choking, too. Life for women in afghanistan is improving. They can travel without a man from their family. There are more opportunities for education and work. They make up 28 of the parliament. But, there is a threat. What will happen to women in afghanistan if the taliban were to regain power . I dont think its in the cards. I dont think the taliban are coming back. And so she will do what she can as first lady. I dont think i have magical powers. But i will be very power if at the end of the fiveyear mandate women are better appreciated and more respected for what they are. Rula ghani says when she first a came to afghanistan in the 70s, women there had a good deal of freedom and opportunity. Shes just trying to help them get it back. Thats it for today. Have a great week and well see you next Fox News Sunday. Discover the champion in you . Ive been going through a lot right now with my mom. Shes been battling colon cancer. This is a tough time and a tough city. He just gives me more strength. Hes always positive. Greater things to come in this city i believe that god is always working for you and on your side. Life changing. I can be closer to god without feeling like im too young for this. And it was really moving. And everybody together under one roof. What more could i ask for . Im a College Student and he really spoke to me. What god has in your future will supersede what youve seen in your past. Hes inspired me to go through the right path. Really energizing and rejuvenating my soul after a tough day. All you have to do is say, god im an open vessel and im ready to receive and he will change your perspective
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.