about the continued pressure from the court and capitol hill. plus, new details on the cash payment between the u.s. and iran. >> it would have been foolish and prudent, irresponsible for us to not try to maintain maximum leverage. if you're asking me was there a connection in that regard, i'm not going to deny that. >> we'll ask our sunday panel whether leverage amounts to ransom. then she was blind. >> she wrote in great big red letters no more driving. >> but now he can see and he's working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to help others gain access to the kind of clinical trials that helped him all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. it has been a dramatic week for the trump campaign, one that included a complete management overhaul. campaign chairman paul manafort resigned over controversy of consulting work in the ukraine. earlier trump made steve bannon his chief executive and kelly ann his chief pollster. he expressed regrets over comments he's made. joining me now is former new york city mayor rudy giuliani and advisor to the campaign. mr. mayor, welcome back. >> great pleasure to be here. >> let's talk about the week you had. it was mixed. there's praise for scripted disciplined speech. there's been talk of the campaign shakeup. let's take a look at the polls. this is the reality of what you're dealing with in several key battleground states from ohio to virginia you have mrs. clinton leading from 2.8 up to 11.2 percentage points. how do you turn that around at this point? >> well, you know, it's really early in that sense. i mean, at this stage of the campaign george bush xli was behind michael dukakis by 16%, by 16%. at this point in the campaign ronald regan was behind jimmy carter by numbers fairly similar to what you just showed right there. in fact, some of those are within the margin of error. so i'm not concerned at all. i think donald trump this week had an excellent week, much, much better than hillary clinton. in fact, she kind of disappeared for the week except for her one appearance that i remember where she sat with a couple of democratic appointed police chiefs trying to claim that she has police support, and i know -- i don't know a single cop in the united states that supports her. and i know a lot of cops. and -- >> let's talk about -- >> he -- he -- he -- what he did this week was he outlined in great detail what he wants to do for this country, about islamic terrorism, about the economy, about bringing jobs back. he then made an audible, meaning he changed his schedule to go down to louisiana to bria tension to the people of louisiana while the president is still up there wherever he is playing golf. >> the president says of course he's going down on tuesday. that was part of a very busy week for mr. trump. let's talk through some of these speeches that he's had. the first one, he's outlined the plan to stop the spread of radical islam. he talked about, quote, extreme vetting. we also have a little bit of his general election ad now airing in several key battleground states. let's play a bit of that. >> in hillary clinton's america the system stays rigged against americans. syrian refugees flood in. illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay collecting social security benefits skipping the line. our border open, it's more of the same but worse. >> the point of the imagery is it paints immigrants in a discriminatory fashion or uses scare tactics. they want to know what the words extreme vetting means? can you tell us? >> extreme vetting means from countries that house terrorists, countries from which attacks on the united states have been launched there is going to be a very, very strict test in order to get into the united states. you don't have a right to come to the united states. there's no such right to come to the united states so we should be taking in people who believe in us, who believe in what we believe in and who are dedicated to the principle of a nation of laws, not sharia law but american law, and from certain countries where we've had problems it's going to be pretty hard to get in. and it should be. for example, taking in syrian refugees, which hillary clinton wants to increase by 550%, that's 5.5 times more than obama has brought in. she wants to be the angela merkel of the u.s. isis has told us they are going to putter or list operatives in with those syrian refugees. they've actually told us. now we would have to be stupid to allow them to come into the united states. we would have to be out of our minds. what we should do is set up a no fly zone in syria and put them there. keep them in their country so they're not flooding germany. look at how crime has gone up in germany since they've allowed syrian refugees in. all of a sudden you had terror attacks in three or four different places in germany. we don't want that to happen in the united states. we have enough home grown problems than to bring in a bunch of syrian refugees, i'm sure many of whom are legitimate people, but we are told they are going to hide terrorists with them. and hillary clinton -- hillary clinton wants to increase that by five times. so she wants to make the risks five times worse than it already is, and we already have 1,000 investigations, according to the director of the fbi, of terrorists here in the united states. she wants to add to the 1,000 investigations. >> let's talk about another speech that mr. trump gave this week. he did something that we have not seen before, at least publicly. he talked about having regrets. let's play a bit of that speech and also mrs. clinton's response. >> sometimes in the heat of debates and speaking on a multitude of issues you don't choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. i have done that. believe it or not, i regret it. >> he is still the same man who insults gold star families, demeans women, mocks people with disabilities and thinks he knows more about isis than our generals. there is no new donald trump. this is it. >> mayor, do you think he can win over his critics, convince them he's truly sorry? >> first of all, i'd like to see her apologize to lying to gold star mothers when she gave them a false narrative of how their sons were killed at benghazi and said it was about a muhammad video when she darn well knew it was a terrorist attack because she had told her daughter that the night before or the night before that. i'd like to see her apologize for all the money that the clinton foundation has been taking, let's say from saudi arabia where women are not allowed to drive. you tell me she's a feminist and she takes money from a country where women are not allowed to drive? you tell me she's a feminist when she spent a great deal of time covering up a lot of the misdeeds of her husband and engaged in a lot of the attacks on the women who were telling the truth? she's a feminist except where it comes to her husband where she attacks the women who are telling the truth about him. so she deserves to give the american people an apology. she certainly should give us an apology for having been found completely careless in handling national security information. jim comey said that. she should apologize for lying on this show about what jim comey said. >> we're going to talk more about that, but with the specific focus on him, do you think that it's possible for him at this point, for people who have written him off because of some of his comments, do you think they're going to accept that, expression of regret, not an apology but expression of regret. do you think it is? >> i think it is. i think you're going to see that throughout the rest of the campaign. donald trump is extremely focused now. if you look at this entire week you can see it was focused on issues, hard issues, tough issues, issues on which the american people agree with him and with us maybe 60, 65%. 65 to 75% of the american people believe the country is going in the wrong direction. if he can convince them that he is the person who will lead us, then certainly he's the only one that will give us change. what they're trying to do -- the clinton campaign has no campaign. she hardly appeared this week. i don't know where she was. >> why is she doing so well in the polls? >> why? >> it's working for her. >> well, what's working for her is she has an entire -- read michael goodwin's column in the new york post. you can figure out what her campaign is. she doesn't have to campaign. she has "the new york times," she has the daily news, she has abc, she has cbs, she has nbc. she has an entire media empire that constantly demonizes donald trump and fails to point out that she hasn't had a press conference in 300 days, 200 days, 100 days, i don't know how long. fails to point out several signs of illness by her. all you have to do is go online. >> which her campaign and other people defending her saying there's nothing factual to the claims about her health and that that's speculation at best. >> go online and put down hillary clinton illness, take a look at the videos for yourself. >> okay. i want to make sure that we get to something that is criticism coming from within the party and give you a chance to answer that because this week 123 republicans, some current lawmakers, former lawmakers, other top gop leaders wrote a letter to reince priebus urging him to divert their money away saying, quote, we believe that donald trump's divisiveness, recklessness, incompetence and record breaking unpopularitily will turn this into a democratic landslide and only the available shift of all rnc resources will help the party from drowning with a trump emblazoned anchor around its neck. >> the most amazing thing to me is that republicans would do that to other republicans. i had the great honor and privilege of working for ronald regan. in fact, he's the only president i ever worked for. he always believes the 11th commandment is don't attack another republican. so i'm embarrassed for the other people who wrote that. i'm embarrassed for how frightened they get. that's not a sign of leadership. one chapter is about courage. reality is he is not that far behind. he is well within striking range in every one of the key states and in a couple of other states that most republicans don't have a chance of winning. so this is unnecessary fear on their part. and i'm sort of really disappointed in them but, look, donald trump is not a typical republican democrat liberal conservative candidate. this is an insider versus outsider campaign. she is the consummate corrupt washington insider, and she is thoroughly corrupt, and so is the clinton foundation. if i were back in my old job as u.s. attorney i would probably indict the clinton foundation as a racketeering enterprise. they took money from money launderers, criminals, dictators, people who abuse women as a matter of government policy. she did favors for those very people who gave money to the clinton foundation. for example, ubs gave the clintons altogether over $1 million. she made a call to the irs asking the irs to go easy on their attempts to get identities from ubs. in my day that was considered bribery when i was a u.s. attorney and i prosecuted several very prominent politicians and convicted them of bribery, including two congressmen. >> mr. mayor, we've got to leave it there. again, the clinton foundation and all those associated say they are not under investigation and they've been clear and transparent so we will stay tuned because there are those urging -- >> that's the biggest bunch of garbage i have ever heard. >> mr. mayor, we appreciate your time. >> the biggest bunch of garbage. they are, i believe, under investigation. there was a leak of that the other day. number two, if they're not, the justice department should be ashamed of itself. >> all right. we have to leave it there. thank you so much for joining fox news sunday, sir. >> thank you. up next hillary clinton is rising in the polls but could questions, new questions about her e-mail testimony hurt her campaign. a top clinton supporter ben carden joins us. next, what do you think of trump's campaign shuffle? is it going to get him the help he needs? let us know at fox news sunday and use the #fns. and power plants account for more than a third of energy-related carbon emissions. the challenge is to capture the emissions before they're released into the atmosphere. exxonmobil is a leader in carbon capture. our team is working to make this technology better, more affordable so it can reduce emissions around the world. that's what we're working on right now. ♪ energy lives here. and i'm just a guy who wantsants to sell him that truck.ck. so i used truecar. it told me what other people in the area paid for the truck i want. and because we're a truecar certified dealership, i already know the truck he wants. so we're on the same page before he even gets here. -it's fair. -and it's fast. look good? looks great. this is how car buying was always meant to be. this is truecar. ♪ look outside the beltway at the city hall in baltimore. now to a major story on the democratic side. hillary clinton will have to answer questions about her private e-mail server under oath. on friday emmitt sullivan, a president clinton appointee, ordered hillary clinton to respond to written questions from judicial watch, a conservative group that has extensively looked into her e-mails. joining me now to discuss the problems ahead is senator ben carden. welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> good to be with you. thank you very much. >> let's talk about the friday ruling by judge sullivan. he wants answers under oath because, quote, secretary clinton has not answered for the record and under oath questions relative to the limited scope of discovery for the purpose and creation and operation of a clinton e-mail.com system for state department business. i think her closest aides at the state department do not have knowledge of her purpose in using the system. in response to this democratically appointed independent judge, will mrs. clinton have a chance to clarify this once and for all before the election? >> i think she's going to fully cooperate. she's pleased it can be done by questioning rather than live questioning. so -- but this has already been done. mr. comey has already made his findings that there's no criminal involvement here. three former secretaries of state used private e-mail servers. >> they did not use private e-mail servers. there's questions whether they used private e-mail accounts, g mail, but they did so only under secured purposes. it's an important distinction. >> well, it is. there is supposedly sensitive information by former secretaries of state that were used in that context. this is not unique. quite frankly senator corker and i want to look at this after the elections to find the best way we can use electronic transfer of information by the state department. so this is an issue that we need to deal with. but as far as what's being done now, look, this lawsuit is being done by a group that since the 1990s has been a right wing partisan group attacking hillary clinton. this is a partisan attack. at the end of the day it's used to try to distract from the important issues of this campaign, the differences between donald trump and hillary clinton. >> they have judicial watch made it very clear that they are very dogged about going after these e-mails. they've uncovered things congress couldn't get, other bodies couldn't get. they've had success. they'll continue. in the meantime the gop leaders of the house judiciary and oversight are now pushing for a potential perjury investigation, taking director comey's own statements and putting them up against mrs. clinton's statements. saying there are some discrepancies. they've asked the u.s. attorney to take a look at that. do you think the american people can believe there will be an open and transparent investigation? >> it's strictly a partisan witch hunt. i wish they showed the same degree of interest in paul manafort's connection in russia and what we've seen in regards to the trump campaign and the business deals donald trump has had in russia. it would be nice to see if they had involvement of what russia did in our campaign. instead they continue to go after the e-mail issue even as i said director of the fbi, director comey indicated that is not the case. >> he raised questions about extreme carelessness and the handling of classified e-mail. we have this poll of whether people believe she is honest and trustworthy. 38% believe she is. 59% believe she's not. where do you think that perception comes from? >> i don't know. i've known hillary clinton for a long time. she's trustworthy. she's ready from day one to assume the office of presidency, she's qualified and she's ready as compared to i think donald trump who has shown his recklessness and dangerous statements that he's made. his temperament to be commander in chief, his qualifications, no, it's not there. >> let's talk about the fact that the clinton foundation has been abuzz this week. there's been talk about a potential hack, potentially by russian interests and there's been a statement by bin -- bill clinton. "the boston globe" said it should be shut down. they said in part, the inherent conflict of interest was obvious when hillary clinton became secretary of state in 2009. she promised to maintain a separation between her official work and the foundation but recently released reports that the supposed partition was far from impregnable. they go on to say, listen, if donors really care about the foundation's goals they can find other ways to use their resources to that end. do you think the foundation should shut down altogether? >> first, let's recognize what the foundation has been able to do. the clinton foundation has been able to help millions of people, saved countless lives. 10 million people it's helped. it's extremely important to global health. they've done some really great things. now with hillary clinton being elected president, which we hope it will be, they clearly need to change the way they do business. they've indicated they will. they're not going to accept any donations from foreign entities, they're going to change the way that the clintons themselves interact with the foundation. those decisions will be made appropriate to hillary clinton as president of the united states. >> we will watch. by the way, you mentioned the health benefits and things they worked on. the clinton health access initiative apparently is a part of the foundation but saying it's not yet made its own decision about what it's going to do. those activities and donations may continue as well. let's talk about donald trump because i'm sure you would like to do that. this week he made several appeals to the african-american community. i want to play a bit of what he said tuesday in wisconsin. >> the african-american community has been taken for granted for decades by the democratic party. we reject the bigotry of hillary clinton which panders to and talks down to communities of color and sees them only as votes. >> he talked about crime rates in minority neighborhoods, failing education, high unemployment. does he have a point? >> no. i think there's a clear difference between donald trump and hillary clinton on their economic message which is critically important to the african-american minority communities. that is hillary clinton's program will help all. she wants to invest in building our infrastructure, to build our roads, build our energy infrastructure. she wants to invest in people, debt free higher education. she pays for it in a responsible way by asking those who are taking jobs away from america to pay an exit fee as well as closing loopholes. donald trump's widening loopholes for the wealthiest in the nation. no, there's no comparison to which candidate speaks to the needs of the middle class families. >> we'll talk a little bit more about their economic plans coming up, but i want to talk to you about foreign policy. you're the ranking member on the senate foreign relations committee. you were very vocally and publicly opposed today iran deal. there are new revelations this week, fallout about the $400 million payment that was converted into foreign currency, given to the iranians. this week the state department admitting that there was some direct connection with the release of americans that were being held in iran about that. i want to play what president obama said august 4th and what the state department is saying this week. >> we do not pay ransom. we didn't here and we don't -- we won't in the future precisely because if we did, then we would start encouraging americans to be targeted. >> it would have been foolish, imprudent and irresponsible to not maintain maximum leverage so if you're asking me was there a connection in that regard at the end game, i'm not going to deny that. >> to a lot of people it sounds like a ransom payment. what was it? >> it was announced in january of this year. secretary clinton was no longer secretary of state. this is under secretary kerry. clearly what was done here is we paid money that we owed. we were going to have to pay this money. it was clear and to the extent it had anything to do with hostages, i think secretary kerry made it clear that money would not be released unless our hostages were back home. so i think what they're saying is, no, it's not paying ransom. we won't do that. but we made it clear we understand we owe the money and we're going to have to pay the money but we want to make sure our people are protected. >> a top iranian general said, quote, this money was returned to the freedom of the u.s. spies and it was not related to the nuclear negotiations. so if there's a perception here, regardless of whether anyone wants to use ransom that there is leverage in taking americans and getting something in exchange, isn't the perception part of the problem anyway, especially for our enemies? we've had at least two more americans taken by iranian authorities since this payment. >> first let's make it clear, whatever the iranians say, you can believe just about the opposite. they rarely tell us what is going on. america has a very strong policy. the obama administration has carried out that policy. no, we will not pay ransom because that only encourages more to be taken. i agree with that point. we are not going to pay ransom. here we had to make this payment. it was a matter of when we were going to make it. it was litigated in american courts, money that was owed, it predates the american administration. it was going to have to be paid. the administration made judgments as to when to pay it. >> you can understand the perception would cause a problem. >> i understand perception. understand this was well understood at the time in january. it has nothing to do with hillary clinton. she was not secretary of state at the time. just make sure people understand. >> not asking in that context but just about this administration. i want to ask you about syria as well because this week the video and the pictures and images of this little boy, the 5-year-old being taken out of the rubble after this airstrike hit his family. we've since learned his 10-year-old brother wound up dying as a result of that airstrike. this comes five years after president obama said it was time for bashar assad to step aside. five years later we have millions of refugees who have left the country, hundreds of thousands by all accounts who are dead. why is this apparently worse than ever before, the chaos in syria? >> yeah. part of the problem, of course, is that russia is helping the syrian regime. the syrian regime has committed atrocities and we see that in aleppo, we see that in other parts of syria and then we have, of course, the isil forces that are also causing these problems. >> but what could we have been doing better? >> what you have to do, you have to work with our international partners. that's what the obama administration has done. we can't police the world. if we put our troops there, it's going to be counter productive, we know that. we have to build up local capacity, exactly what the obama administration has done. we are regaining territory, at the same time building the capacity to hold that territory. we have done that. we have to continuously do that until there is no longer an isis and the caliphate is over. >> we all look forward to that day. senator ben carden, thank you. good for coming back. >> thank you. up next, trump resets his campaign again. we'll bring in our sunday group to discuss the shakeup. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about house republicans pressing the fbi over whether hillary clinton perjured herself. >> i think what he didn't like is who should hillary clinton be. donald trump's new campaign manager kellyann conway. it's now time for our sunday group. fox news political analyst juan williams. juicily pace and the campaign for the associated press and charles hurst. want to begin with the news that hillary clinton will have to testify under oath about the use of a private e-mail server while serving as secretary of state. michael, her campaign -- by the way, we have a statement from brian fallon i should put up taking this as a sort of victory. they said judicial watch is a right wing organization attacking them since the '90s. this is trying to hurt hillary clinton's campaign. we are glad the judge has accepted our offer to answer the questions in writing rather than grant judicial watch's request which was a deposition which is a different thing. still these answers are under oath and they're very specific questions about her server. >> it's important. it's good for the american people. there's been a lot of conversation about hillary clinton's e-mails from a national security standpoint. this gets at a different question. was she trying to hide her e-mails and hide her business from public scrutiny. i think there's a more important aspect to it. hillary clinton is a master at parsing words to the point where they have no meaning and using those words to say something that's a lie to the american people. a couple of weeks ago she was on this show and she was asked by chris wallace a number of very specific questions about whether she lied to the american public. she said that the fbi director said that she had been truthful in her responses. well, the fbi director was talking about her responses to the fbi, not the american public. it's the functional equivalent of saying what your definition of the word is is. they've given american people the opportunity. >> you have 30 days to answer the questions once they get to her. we expect judicial watch will get them out promptly. we want the answers before november 8th. there's one pending regarding e-mails into october of 2018. >> i think they would be smart not to push it past the election. it's so blatant. they have made the big deal of wanting to answer questions and see the answers. this is a perfect opportunity. they do see this as a win in the sense that they can do these written answers which obviously gives them more control than if this were in a deposition and she would be pushed in real time. if they did push for a delay it would be very fair for republicans and democrats to criticize them for that. >> we'll stand by to see how quickly those questions get to her. that's the key at this point. from facebook we have a question from annette demass auld. i would like to know if the standard for justice is the same for average americans as it is for hillary. charles? >> fair question. just last week we saw where a navy s.e.a.l. that was involved in the osama bin laden raid wrote a book about it, "no easy day," was forced to hand over all the proceeds, some $6 million from the book. basically for violating the nondisclosure rings which is a serious issue. my goodness, you have the secretary of state showing such cavalier disregard for national security, our secrets. and nothing happens to her and then you have a guy who's actually, you know, in there risking his life doing the same sort of thing and, man, they really -- they drop a ton of bricks on him. it looks incredibly unfair. >> juan, are you ready for the story to go away? >> i don't think it goes away. in fact, it's the way it goes away, shannon. if it goes away because people perceive that there is, as the facebook writer suggested, an unequal dispensation of justice in america and that the rich and famous and politically connected have one standard while the rest of us have another, then i think it damages everybody, not only hillary clinton but it plays into the idea that you hear from so many trump supporters, oh, the system is rigged, the election is rigged. you have to move away from that. they did not make a mistake. there is no legitimate basis for prosecuting hillary clinton. 6 could it be interpreted differently, i think we're going to see a lot of that. guess what, republicans are under pressure given the poll numbers that you have cited this morning that show her beating donald trump convincingly. >> he didn't treat her with kid gloves. he made a lot of mistakes that she was extremely careless. foreign hostile actors were able to access her communications. this is somebody who wants to be the commander in chief and handle the most sensitive information. >> that's a legitimate argument to be made. this was exhaustively reviewed by the fbi. if you talk to the clinton campaign people, there were hours of testimony before the congress and we still have no evidence that she violated. >> not under oath. >> but it does go -- >> your point. >> yeah, exactly. it goes to the issue of her judgment and whether she was fit to be the top commander. >> i think that's fair. i think she comes across to my mind as entitled, privileged, deciding she can set the rules, right? >> she doesn't come across. she is entitled by privilege. >> at the beginning of the week it was trickling with steve bannon being contacted. we were told it was in addition. >> what do you make of the changes in the campaign? >> i think there was a period where they said donald trump needs to stop being provocative. you need to give poll tested answers. that's not donald trump's brand. it's not what got him this far. it shouldn't be what the republican nominees did. using provocation to get attention to talk about serious issues, let's talk about the serious issue of how isis got on the scene. the reason that isis is the global threat and not the jv team, they avoid president obama's procedures. when donald trump is being provocative by starting conversations about that, by starting conversations about whether liberal domestic policies have helped people in detroit, that's the type of provocation getting media, being his best and linking it to his actual purpose. it's when the provocations are more a nile lis stick. i think this is trump saying i'm going to be provocative, i'm going to be myself. it needs to be connected to good conservative movement. kellyann conley has been connected and steve bannon. it tapped into this populist message. it allows donald trump to be donald trump. hopefully tying it to good conservative policies. >> julie, would he see a lot of praise for him for the disciplined teleprompter courses, talking about law and order, going against isis and expressing regret. >> this was no doubt donald trump's best week in quite a long time. the problem for trump is that he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt anymore when we see him have a one off good speech or a strong week because we've seen that before. if you remember when paul man na for the was hired, he was doing well. can trump get up there day after day, week after week and to michael's point, both be himself but also focus on his core message, focus on policy? because he does have a message that should be resonating with the electorate, when he talks about being an outsider, when he talks about being the only candidate that can bring change. that will resonate with people. that gets lost under so many other things. i'm not sure he can maintain this for two and a half more months. >> i think the pivot is lucy and the football. every time charlie trusts that she's really going to hold it, no. who's he going to apologize, ted cruz, ted cruz's dad, ted cruz's wife? the media? lucy right now is the american people or i'm going to tell you, republicans who want to vote for a republican and who keep thinking if he changes, i could do it. >> all right. panel, we've got to leave it there for now. the state department admits the u.s. held off paying iran until american hostages were freed, but do not call it ransom. back in two minutes. i've seen guys who know less before but this dude is in a class by himself. >> hi. >> would you like to come in? >> no. >> it does smell good. ♪ welcome to my house >> are you all right? >> no. >> i can't believe you shot me. >> welcome to my house. >> it's my house. we do not pay ransom. we didn't here and we don't -- we won't in the future. >> we took advantage of the momentum, and it would have been foolish and you and i would have been having a much different conversation if we had gone ahead and released the money and then iran reneged on the deal. >> the obama administration under fire after the state department conceded a link of some kind between a $400 million payment to iran and the release of u.s. prisoners in january. we're back now with our panel. charlie, it's interesting because we're hearing from families who have been paid out damages related to the death of their loved ones. that $400 million that was sitting there that everybody keeps saying was iran's money, those families thought they were being paid and it was sitting around waiting to be returned to iran. this week they find out that's not the case with that money. >> yeah. it really is. this whole -- the administration has handled this whole thing so terribly. and i love -- i don't love it. it's tragic that they regret the appearance that it looked like a ransom. well, the appearance is all that matters because this is why, you kn know, iran abducts people. this is why we have the problem in the first place because of the appearance that you can actually, you know, win one over on the united states and this -- of course, obviously the 400 million is -- you know, that's the highest bounty that, you know, you could ever dream of in terms of encouraging this sort of -- this sort of behavior. >> well, and the fact that, one, iran had taken we know at least two americans in since that payment and who knows what's going to happen or what kind of negotiation there will be over the two of them. as charlie said, at the end of the day, okay, maybe at the end of the day they don't want to use the word ransom. but if the end result is now that americans are endangered, what's the difference? >> there is none. the appearances and the way the state department and the obama administration handles this really seems to be guilty of malfeasance. initially they said we are being so transparent. we talked about this in january. we put out a press release, et cetera. what's the news here? there was no connection. now we know this week given admiral kirby's statement, it's one of using leverage. it was negotiated on a separate track. the timing came together because we're finally talking with the iranians now. we had the opportunity to incyst that the hostages be in flight before the money landed. i get that. i think the appearances we're talking about present a real problem. on the other hand, if i was doing a negotiation and i was holding the money and shannon had my hostage, i'd say, shannon, let my people go. i understand that. i'm saying the other point to be made quickly, there are some families out there, american families who still have their loved ones being held and obviously the united states is not paying any ransom money for them. >> we all remember a couple of years back there were families who had loved ones missing who said they were threatened by the u.s. government they would potentially face prosecution if they engaged in a ransom-type deal. >> absolutely. this is part of a much larger debate about how the u.s. deals with countries that are holding or terror groups that are holding american citizens. when you talk to some of these families, they actually in some cases want the u.s. government to be paying ransom or taking steps that we don't take. you hear about families that go to really unbelievable measures to try to get money to release their loved ones. i think any of us if we were in those situations would look for some way around this. so you can understand if you are a family member of someone who has been killed while held overseas or a family member of someone still overseas, why this rings really hollow to you. >> it should also be put in the context of the entire iran deal. we now know that the united states gave $1.7 billion of foreign cash to iran. we gave $150 billion of sanctions relief. we allowed them access to ballistic missiles technology, international arms and we released seven criminals that the united states was holding all to get an extraordinarily complicated framework that's going to be hard to enforce and at the end of which iran will be a nuclear state. this fs a horrible deal. this ransom is one component of this horrible deal. there was one done by a foreign policy and they were so intent on getting the foreign policy achievement that it wasn't able to take a step back, what are we getting, what are we giving? does that make sense? >> we want to lead into syria. we saw the images of a little boy who lost his brother after this family was hit. he comes from the rubble. he's stunned. you see him touch his forehead and realize looking at his little hand that there's blood here. this conflict has been raging for years, but it took this little boy to restart the conversation and get the attention. now if we look at the money that just went to iran, their admission that they've been propping up the assad regime, now they have an extra $1.7 billion that they could use to that end, five years ago this is what the president said about syria. we have consistently said that president assad must lead a democratic transition or get out of the way. he has not led. the time is for president assad to step aside. juan, five years later we have that little boy, millions displaced, hundreds of thousands dead. >> it's a tragedy. i have a grandson. you look at that little guy and you just -- your heart just goes out to him. you know, shannon, there was a picture also of a dead child washing up on the shore earlier. so you understand the number of people. i think it's now more than 400,000 that have lost their lives in this conflict. again, you come ba being to what can we do? the argument would be, do we want to enforce that red line? what would that mean? it doesn't mean just airstrikes, it would mean potentially putting american forces at risk. i don't think the american people want to do that. what can we do? >> one thing -- one thing is you don't draw a red line that you then ignore. when the president made that statement five years ago assad was in a very, very tough position. it looked like he might -- his government really might fall. there probably could have been some things that we could have done that would have helped that happen, but the problem -- this is a problem we've seen with this administration all along, is that they -- they just squander our leadership. now of course obviously vladimir putin has gone in there. russia is flying sorties out of there and firing tomahawks out of the mediterranean sea. the obama administration has completely removed the united states from being a legitimate voice. >> let me just quickly add that i think that this story will be in the news for the next few weeks because the united nations is now i think going to issue a report indicating that the use of chemical weapons has continued and if that's the case, then it will be the united states confronting the russians over this. >> we're back to the red line though. >> we are. look, i think if you are a voter in this election and you look at that picture of that little boy and you feel sick to your stomach like most of us do, you should look at your presidential candidates and demand a plan. neither hillary clinton or donald trump have a plan for addressing the civil war in syria. so much of the debate about syria has been overtaken by the islamic state and that is very fair. but there is a civil war raging for five years and i have not heard a presidential candidate lay out a plan for how they would address that. >> what's going on in syria is the direct result of the foreign policy of president obama, hillary clinton, and john kerry. we are going to give leadership to russia, to iran. you look at what could have been done. we shouldn't have left a void in iraq. we should have enforced our red line. we should have gotten involved earlier in supporting syrian opposition forces. we could have started the bombings when we did but had more threatening bombings. this is an administration that does not perceive america as having a leadership position in the world. the result of it's what's going on in syria and history is going to look back very, very ill-favorably on what's going on. >> there's a longer history than the one you described when it comes to nation building, to promoting democracy in the middle east. we can go back to republican administrations as well and that when you are talking about that kind of american involvement, lots of people would say, hey, the congress of the united states never voted to support president obama on the use of military strikes against the assad regime. >> but remember what was happening as that vote was coming forward and the backdown that happened. one has to remember when they really thought they were going to have to face that vote in congress. >> yes. they wanted it but they never got it. >> yeah. well, sometimes you don't want what you got and you don't got what you want. all right. thank you very much, panel. we'll see you next sunday. up next, we're going to bring you the story of one man that was inspiring congress to actually work together. huh. it was a life changing diagnosis, but he didn't take no for an answer. after beating the odds doug oliver is inspiring congress to work together to help others gain access and to fund medical studies that could immediately change lives. >> there was no treatment available, no cure and no hope for a treatment in the near future. >> doug oliver was in his mid 40s when he noticed a rapid decline in his ability to see. he had no idea when he went to see his eye doctor that he would leave with a grim life-changing diagnosis. he would soon go blind. >> the most difficult thing was at that same appointment he wrote in great big red letters, no more driving. and so my life changed that day. >> oliver gave up his driver's license but not his determination to find a cure. he combed through medical journals and looked for clinical trials. he found one in florida but it came with a hefty price. he raised the money with scores of donations. within days of treatment he began to regain his sight. he's lending his voice to a bipartisan group of senators. he wants to make cutting edge treatments more accessible and affordable. their aim is to spur cures in the short term and money saving solutions over the long term. >> dr. francis collins says within the next ten years we'll be using stem cells from your own body to restore a diseased heart. up to now you've got to have a heart transplant. he says we'll have a vaccine for zika, a vaccine for hiv/aids. we'll be able to identify alzheimer's before you see its symptoms. >> the house has already passed its version of the legislation and although it isn't an exact mirror to the package of 19 bills the senate is hoping to pass, house speaker paul ryan has agreed to work out the differences in a conference this fall giving supporters real hope that it will reach president obama's desk before the end of the year. and that he'll sign something that skeptics say rarely comes together anymore in washington. a major legislative package hammered out by crossing the aisle. >> so you would think that if president obama, the republican house and bipartisan senate are for this, we could get it done. that's why i'm optimistic. >> doug oliver not only got his driver's license back but was able to see his grandchildren for the first time. lawmakers still need to hammer out exactly how they're going to fund the new medical initiatives. to find out more about doug's work. go to our website. we'll be back next sunday. have a great week. we'll see >> announcer: if you're looking to make more money and take control of your personal and financial future, then get ready, because than merrill, the star of a&e's hit tv show "flip this house," one of the most successful real-estate investors in the country and america's number-one real-estate-investing expert has one heck of an opportunity for you. than is hosting a one-of-a-kind free two-hour real-estate wealth-building workshop where you will learn his three-step system for getting started flipping homes and buying and holding income properties. than and his team are currently looking for a small group of motivated individuals who want to work directly with his team and learn the exact step-by-step system he's used to flip hundreds of properties over the

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Louisiana , Germany , Iran , Washington , Florida , Boston , Massachusetts , Virginia , Wisconsin , Syria , Russia , Aleppo , Lab , Ukraine , Iraq , Saudi Arabia , Mediterranean Sea , Oceans General , Oceans , Ohio , Capitol Hill , District Of Columbia , Americans , Iranian , Syrian , Russian , Russians , American , Iranians , Angela Merkel , Ronald Regan , Hillary Clinton America , Francis Collins , Doug Oliver , Michael Goodwin , Obama Hillary Clinton , Kelly Ann , Michael Dukakis , George Bush , Shannon Breen , Vladimir Putin , John Kerry , Ben Carden , Jimmy Carter , Chris Wallace , Juan Williams , Charles Hurst , Hillary Clinton , Brian Fallon , Steve Bannon , Emmitt Sullivan , Rudy Giuliani , Ted Cruz , Jim Comey , Paul Ryan , Reince Priebus ,