So who really does speak for the president . And the israeli Prime Minister arriving in washington to start a new relationship with the white house. Iran, hezbollah, syria and settlements. There is plenty to discuss. This story begins at the end of december. President obama had just imposed new sanctions on russia in retaliation for moscow hacking the election. Donald trumps senior Foreign Policy advisor, general mike flynn, hopped on the phone with russias ambassador to discuss the penalty. Now us law bars any private citizen from conducting Foreign Policy. But the greater mistake was to mislead the Vice President. The National Security advisor told mike pence that sanctions never came up in his calls with the Russian Ambassador. Not true. The conversation had been bugged by us intelligence, disproving the generals account. In his resignation letter, flynn sai, unfortu nately, because of the fast pace of events, i inadvertently briefed the Vice President elect and others with incomple
i don t believe anyone doubts the american people s values or the commitment of the american government or the government s agencies to advancing those values and defending those values. and the president s values? the president speaks for himself, chris. tow the line, my young soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines. hold the line until our country gets back to understanding and respecting each other and showing it, being friendly to one another. wow. each of those on their own is remarkable, it s stunning. what do you make of that? yeah. i mean, tillerson s comments were very reminiscent of what sean spicer used used to say in press briefings, saying the tweet speaks for itself, and let it go from there. i think that s the distancing tactic that rex tillerson was trying to take. but people thought he was saying the president doesn t speak for american values.
cross hiss base. given the stakes right now, how is that sean spicer three times talks about barrel bombs as being one of the red lines? in a thing like this, your words seem to matter. i find it interesting in that clip that you played, in the beginning, it appears that he s reading. the point i would make here is that this is the trump administration, not the sizer, the haley, the tillerson administration, until you heard from donald trump himself on this, i frankly think part of t this is the chaos that he likes to have, different people, strong people putting their views out. but at some point he will make the decision. he has said he wants to take iraq s oil. do you think that s still on the table? i think if you have the top ranking foreign policy people in
this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of newt action. when you watch babies being gassed and suffer under barrel bombs, you are instantaneously moved to action. this president has made it very clear that if those actions will continue, further action will definitely be considered by the united states. if you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, you will see a response from this president. that is unacceptable. so clearly that word was used by on purpose there. again saying it three times, but shortly after that white house briefing, a senior administration official said that spicer was not drawing a line around barrel bombs. because that would be a dramatic escalation of things, because it happens all the time, every day there. a senior administration official said our posture is the same, nothing has changed.
determines how we act. do you think the trump doctrine fits into that? i think it does. if you recognize the threat that our country faces if there is a use or spread of chemicals of mass destruction, the proliferation of those that spread to other groups is a clear danger to our country and our people. and then there s a confusion over sean spicer s statements over barrel bombs. spicer s statement on barrel bombs, you were in the briefing today, explain exactly what he said. reporter: sean spicer was asked exactly what it would take to sort of provoke another attack in syria, would it have to be a chemical attack, would it be a conventional weapon? so sean spicer, not once, not twice, but three times said barrel bombs would be enough. let s watch. the sight of people being gassed and blown away by barrel bombs ensures that if we see