tv Americas News HQ FOX News January 30, 2017 11:00am-12:01pm PST
not just on the ups and downs of one days market fluctuation, but the overall commitment that businesses have two want to work with this administration to add jobs, create better jobs, add benefits, find out how the president can ease the regulatory burden they face. it's a holistic approach and process that is being undertaken to unleash the american economy. the approach he is taking a just and small businesses and large businesses, union workers, but he is looking at the energy sector. how do we unleash america's natural resources not just to help make us more energy independent, but how do we do that to create good paying jobs in america as well and get the economic boom that can come out of it? april? >> two questions. one, how important is national security information to you? you're saying they're at the table and they can come to the table if they want. . that's not what you said, to be clear. i just, i don't think i can
underscore this enough. what we're saying is, nothing has changed. we've, in fact, added and grown this. the director of national intelligence and chairman of the joint chiefs are by statute part of the nsc. full stop. what we have done is made sure that on issues of homeland security and domestic policy they're always welcome to ascend, 100%. however if the issue is on pandemic flu or other domestic type natures that don't involve the military, it would be a waste of time to drag the chairman of the joint chiefs over. if he wants to attend he's part of the committee, he can come any time. to try to talk about downgrading or not take this seriously, is a misreading of this. it's really a disservice. i think for those people who took the time to read it, they understand that. but i've seen so much misreporting, all this weekend, about downgrading this individual or upgrading. the language could not be clearer. it is 100% identical. and so, any mislead readtion of
it, otherwise, is a spread of misinformation. plain and simple. >> you're saying they're at the table. >> no, no, no, i'm saying they've always been at the tail and continues to be and he has a tremendous respect for them. any other reporting is wrong. >> how important are their suggestions or their statements to this administration? >> unbelievable. when you look at secretary mattis in the oval office, he was on the phone with cia director pompeo this morning. he's had, values their opinions -- i don't think you can express in words how much respect he has, whether it's chairman dumford, general mattis, general kelly, director pompeo. all of these individuals he's shown through deed and action and word how much he cares for them. the first stop was to the cia because of how much he values the work they do and respect he has for them. i don't know how much more he
can do to show how much he values them. >> my second question, when you talk about these seven countries, the muslim majority countries, talking to a former official of the obama administration in homeland security, they're saying what you are doing is different from what they did and much more restricted. what do you stay to that? we're going to put safety of americans first. we're not going to wait and react as i said in the statement. the president is going to be proactive with protecting this country. we aren't going to wait until we get attacked and make sure we don't let it happen again. he's going to do everything in his power to stop every threat that we face and every potential threat. that's the key point in this. how do we get ahead of threats. how do we keep america ahead of the curve when it comes to peep whom want to do us harm. that's what the president has done. if he made sure that every way possible we get down the path of securing this country, putting america safety and security first and foremost, bar none.
major garrett. >> shawn, you suggested over the weekend to steve miller that the action taken on the executive order might have been related to some specific intelligence, it was necessary to prevent something from happening and any questions about why certain agencies may not have been briefed-up, can be explained in part because it needed to happen right away. >> no, just to be clear, thank you, i appreciate that opportunity. i think what we are trying to say you don't know when the next threat is coming. you don't know when the next attack is coming. the best can you do is get ahead of it. if you wait you're going to be reacting. what i think, i want to be clear, on the president isn't going to wait. he's going to make sure he does everything in his power when he can, to protect the homeland and his people. that's it. getting ahead of threats is the key. not waiting until they happen. not saying, hey, once it happens how do we react to make sure it doesn't happen again. since becoming president, he's
continued to take steps, the executive order and otherwise, to make sure that this country is as safe as it can be and we're ahead of every threat. >> it was not put in place on the time line put in place and the procedures it was put in place, because of specific intelligence that was suggesting -- >> no, no, no, i'm not saying that at all. all i'm saying is his view in general is not to wait to get ahead of the curve. there wasn't a specific threat. we're saying you have to do this saturday, sunday will be -- the point that i'm trying to make is that we don't know when that hour comes. we don't know when that individual crosses into our border to do us harm. so, the idea of waiting when you don't know could it be that night, the next day, the next week. the president's view is i'm not going to wait. i'll make sure that we protect the homeland and its people with every measure can i. john roberts. >> following up on that a little bit, two questions unrelated. number of legal challenges
against this executive order, what's your level of confidence that you will prevail legally. and what's the basis for that level of confidence? >> well, the most prominent case is the one in the eastern district of new york. i think we won't have to prevail in that case. it doesn't make any sense. it deals with people who are being deported. the action never spoke to it, never intended to deport people. it had to do with how do we process peep in and detain them until we ascertain whether or not they can -- they sought to do us any harm. again, remember, we're talking about a universe of 109 people. there were 325,000 people that came into this country over 24 hour period from another country. 109 of them were stopped for additional screening. this is, we've got to keep this in proper portion, folks. this is 109 people being stopped out of 325 over a 24-hour period. everyone likes to get where they want to get to as quick as possible.
and i think the government did a phenomenal job of making sure that we process people through. we did so knowing so the people who are coming in hadn't done anything that was seeking to do us harm. plain and simple. that's important to note, when you look at the perspective of what is going on, you note the polls that were going up this morning, majority of americans agree with the president.nize t he's taken were to keep this country safe and make sure that we didn't look back and say i wish we had done the following. >> this is just one of a number. >> i don't think any of the others are pertaining. all of the enforcement and action regarding the executive order is in place and still remains right now. we feel confident if there's any problems we'll prevail. again, this is a national security issue. these seven countries were derived from what the obama administration deemed as needing further travel restriction. we followed through on that. as we continue to gee through the 90 day process review we'll
make sure that we put a system in place that that extreme vets these people coming to our country, potentially could do us harm. john? >> second question -- >> i'm sorry, i forgot. >> you can't for get things like. that [ laughing ] what's the president's response to iran flagrantly thumbing its nose at the security council? >> we're aware -- >> if i can finish, prime minister netanyahu coming here to the 15th is looking to the white house for more. >> sas. >> we're aware that iran fired that missile, we're looking into the exact nature of it. i will try to have more for you later. >> thank you, shawn. >> john? >> thank you very much. two brief questions. first, the president of doa put out a statement following the president's proclamation on the holocaust saying that the omission of jews and what they
experienced was, quote, painful, unquote. is the president aware of some criticism from the american jewish community and does he plan to do anything about it? >> well, i think he's aware of people what they're saying but by and large he's praised for it. the president recognized the tremendous loss of life from the holocaust. with respect to israel and the jewish people specifically, there's been no better friend than donald trump when it comes to protecting israel, fielding a better -- building a better friendship with israel. you look at prime minister netanyahu, he welcomes this administration, appreciates the friendship and respect he's shown to israel and the jewish people. to suggest otherwise, john, i frankly got to be honest, the president went out of his way to recognize the holocaust. and the suffering that went through it and the people that were affected by it and the loss of life. to make sure that america never forgets what so many people went through whether they were jews
or gypsies, guys, disability. i mean, priests. i get it but at the end of the day i don't think when you look at statement of israel or the jewish people themselves, i think there's no better friend to donald trump, especially after the last eight years. the tremendous respect that he's shown israel, the jewish people, and to suggest anything otherwise is disappointing. mark? >> second question. >> getting way too many second question. >> thank you. several ngos that have helped people from the countries affected have said they specifically have focused on people who interpreted for the military and said they would be affected by this. i believe secretary mattis said he hoped to specify that, to give these peep am better shot at it. is there going to be any change -- >> you look at that one interpreter yesterday, said i love donald trump. we recognize peep whom served the country, we should make sure
they're helped out. but it doesn't mean we give them a pass. the obama administration i think in 2009 let two people through the iraqi program in, they came to the united states, and tried to plan an attack in kentucky. i think that we got to recognize people who have helped this country served this nation, might not shall citizens, want to come here and we need to appreciate the service that they have had. that doesn't mean we don't let them in without a certain degree of vetting. that's what we'll do. the onus is on us to protect the american people and people who want to come into the country do so in a peaceful way. margaret? >> there is a question i'd like to ask. president trump said this morning he's going to do a big number on dodd-frank and i wanted to know what the time frame for the big number is, is this legislation that you're looking at, with republican
lawmakers or the big number can be mostly handled through an executive order? >> i think we're continuing to work with the affairs team on that. what you saw was the first step down the path of regulatory relief to the nation's small and large businesses as well. and i think that he understands, especially as a businessman himself, and some one involved in financing, the impact that dodd frank has had on lending in particular and the impact it has on small and large businesses. i think we're going to continue to wash with congress on reform. [ inaudible ] we will have more on that. we're doing two-for day. >> oh, great. i'm wondering, do you expect an e.o. on h1b as part of this coming any time soon? also i want you to be aware that president obama through his spokesman issued a statement on the executive order. >> okay, thank you.
i think with respect to h1bs and other visa, it's part of the greater immigration reform efforts through executive order and working with congress. but you've already seen a lot of action on immigration. whether it's that or the spousal visas or other type of visas, there's a need to look at all of these programs. you will see both through executive action and comprehensive legislative measures a way to address immigration as a whole and the visa program. >> since we're doing two, i have two for you. on the nsc reorganization, with regards to the president's chief strategist on the nsc, wasn't something that existed in president obama's tenure. what does that speak about mr. bannon's role within the white house and the policy structure? >> david axelrod walked in and out of nsc meetings quite frequently, by his own account and several of your accounts.
this administration is being rather transparent. putting people, out in the public, who is going to be going in and out of those meetings not just letting people go in willie-nilly. this administration is trying to make sure we don't ride things, wait until after the fact. it recognizes the role he will play. steve isn't in every meeting. like axelrod he'll come in and out, but we wanted to be up front, see that that was state sewed it wasn't a story when he did. >> on the yemen strikes over the weekend, can you talk about the president's involvement, this is the first major threat, definitely had to speak to the family of the victim? >> he was aware of the strike occurring. he was kept in constant contact saturday night, of the status of the mission. both the success that it had, and the tragic loss of life that occurred to that member.
we are currently nolg department of defense -- currently following department of defense next of kin procedures and as soon as it is appropriate the president will be speaking with the family members. yes? >> thank you very much. on north korea, icbm, they announced that is the ins ins intercept icbs, it would be war. >> i didn't what? >> how let you know it would be war, if you intercept that? >> i'm sorry how did -- >> how did you respond. >> we're working through diplomatic channels on. that i don't have any further readout on that. >> one more. yesterday, i'm sorry, president trump called of south korea, also said that u.s. intelligence
could strengthen joint defense abilities. what is that particularly? >> they spoke about 7:00 last night. there was a readout provided of that call and we will have spur further steps. but the readout speaks for itself. mike? >> the supreme court pick. can you talk about why he waited until tomorrow night, sounds like -- can you tell white house the pick is? [ laughing ] is the pick, is he 100% sure this is the pick? >> he's 100% sure. this individual is part of the list he put out. maintains what he said he was going to do. but i'm not going to share any further guidance on that. but i appreciate the try. >> when you said "he". >> i said the individual. >> you also said he. he is the one. [ laughing ] >> shawn, following up on the
president talks about illegal immigrants that voted in the election. is he still planning to have an executive order? >> yes, he's planning to do that. >> second followup on your statement, about the holocaust statement. last night the republican jewish coalition called it an unfortunate omission, that the white house did not acknowledge the jewish people -- >> they weren't in president bush's acknowledgement either. >> president bush didn't mention anti-semitism. can you explain why you decided to depart from the bipartisan approach? >> the statement was written with the help of an individual who is both jewish and the descendants of holocaust survivors. to suggest that remembering the holocaust and acknowledging all of the people, jewish, gypsies, priests, disabled, guys, lesbians, it is pathetic that
people are picking on a statement. i remember we issued a statement at christmas time calling christ the king and many of the reporters that are in this room started wonder whether we were referring to the king as the president-elect. do you know how offensive that was to christians? i mean, the idea that you're nitpicking a statement that sought to remember this tragic event that occurred, and the people who died in it, it's just ridiculous. i think, he acknowledged the suffering that existed and wants to make sure it's enshrined in the people's memory. something like this never, ever happens again. and i think to sit there and suggest that he was trying to single out anything, and any people of which he has shown such tremendous respect for and such a willingness in terms of the state of israel to go out there and show the partnership that needs to exist between us. and when you contrast that, frankly, a statement, a
statement and you look at the actions of the last administration, the iran nuclear deal, them giving palestine an equal footing in terms of the addiments that was passed to the u.n. city council on their way out the door, to compare a statement that remembers the holocaust with the actions of the last eight years and disrespect shown to israel is unbelievable. where were the questions about the u.n. security council agreement and the idea of the unprecedented step, that the outgoing administration took as a massive slap in the face of israel. where were the questions then? [ inaudible ] did i say that? >> you mentioned -- >> know what i said. i didn't say jared's name. no, i'm not getting into who wrote it. he has several members of the jewish faith on his senior staff. to suggest that it was an omission of anything else, is kind of ridiculous.
>> shawn, i'm sure you are aware there is a dissent cable circulated inside the state department and takes issue with the executive order. are you aware of it, what us your reaction to it, are you concerned that you are facing a bureaucracy at the state department that may not be working in the same direction you are? and if it is two for monday, the second thing, if i can press you on the very first question you were asked, on safe zones. president trump said a couple of times before the election that he wanted persian gulf countries not only to be open to this put to support it. >> yeah. >> to pay for it. is that the request he made of the king of saudi arabia and the phone call over the weekend? >> on the first part, the first part dealt with -- >> the state department. >> we're aware of that, this is a procedure part of the state department's way of letting career officials, career foreign service officers express themselves. we are aware of it.
but i think that any government official, anyone who doesn't understand the president's goal in this, and what this actually was. i think this has been blown way out of proportion and exaggerated. again, you talk in the 24 hour period, 325,000 people from other countries flew in to our arments and we're talking about 109 people. the obama administration identified, and the career bureaucrats have a problem? they should get with it or they should go. hold on. this is about the safety of america. there's a reason that the majority of americans agree with the president. it's because they understand that that's his number one priority. and it's his number one duty as it should westbound any leader to keep our people and institutions safe from attack. and these steps are common sense steps, that the president is taking, to make sure that we're never looking into the rear view mirror saying we should have done something like this. >> who's going to pay for it.
>> he did have a conversation with them about financing as well. >> thank you, sir. president obama, his statement that was referenced earlier, said that heed heartened by the level of engagement taking place in communities around the country. does president trump have a message for the protesters? does he have a message for 1909 people that you mentioned? and since it's two for monday, on the memo about the plan to defeat icis, the president in his campaign said that he plans to defeat isis. does he? >> yes, and he's talking to the generals to make sure they provide the feedback that he needs. that's a conversation with the joint chiefs, secretary of state designee, homeland security secretary and secretary of defense. he's having that conversation with his advisors. he talked to the joint chiefs with a plan to implement some of his recommendations and some of theirs to defeat isis. >> on the message, the
protesters, specifically, to the families who this weekend were caught up in this. . and i think that it's a shame that people were inconvenienced, obviously. but at the end of the day we talk about a couple of hours. i would rather, you know, i'm sorry that some folks may have in order to wait a little while. but i think the president would much rather know that he's not placing a call to some one who was killed because some one was let in the country to commit a traft act. if you weigh the calls we have to have, some one temporarily inconvenienced coming into an airport, and i think when you do talk to those people as i mentioned, a couple interviewed, they said we understand the president was doing this in the best interests of the country. coming into the country is still a privilege. we're the greatest country on earth. being able to come to america is a privilege not a right. and it is our duty, and it is the president's goal, to make sure that everybody comes into this country to the best of our ability, is here because they want to enjoy this country and come in peacefully. so he takes that obligation
extremely seriously. and so, hold on, i'm going to finish this question that she was so good on the second one, to make sure that somebody is inconvenienced a little. and people experience this all the time. sometimes going in and out of tsa. we have to wait in lines too. but we do so to make sure that we're getting on a plane to make sure that we're going to a destination, not to commit a nefarious act. the safety of the country, safety of the people is at the forefront of this president's head. this is where he wants to go. so, again, we have to keep all of this in proportion. we had 109 people that were temporarily detained. they're all in. but they were temporarily detained to make sure the safety of the other 324 million americans was put first. i don't see how that's a big problem. >> the extreme vetting, advocacy groups are saying we have extreme vetting, it takes anywhere from 18 to 24 months for people who are applying for
asylum or refugee stat to us go through the vetting process. how do you justify making it more extreme? and do you plan to add more countries to the list? . it's a 90 day review period. and if you have other countries let us know. again, i understand, it's interesting that you are talking about adding countries when i keep hearing all these questions about was it too much and too quick. you can't have it both ways, you can't argue we should add countries and we're not -- >> some of the countries that have are not in the list. >> and we're reviewing the entire process over this period of time to make sure that we do this right. i don't think you have to look any further than the families that were, of the boston marathon in atlanta, san bernardino, to ask if we can go further. there's obviously steps that we can and should be taking. the president is going to continue to do what he can to make sure this country is as safe as possible.
>> shawn, last time we were told by senior administration officials that top immigration staffers on capitol hill and other offices were involved in drafting the executive order. that doesn't jibe with the reporting that we have, we're hearing from office 245s they weren't involved. >> you're talking offices that weren't involved. >> we're talking any offices on capitol hill. >> there's 535 offices plus territories. did you talk to them all? i'm not under an obligation because you called one of 535 offices to tell you who we talked to. as we told you last night, there was staff from appropriate committees and leadership offices that were involved, yeah. go ahead. >> thank you very much twochlt questions, please. one, on behalf of the indian american community, they're thanking president trump for the level of --
[inaubdible ] under president trump's administration do you think india will be a member of the security council and what changes can we see at the united nations. >> the president is pleased with ambassador haley being confirmed and spending her first week up there in new york, she will do a fine job representing us. and i'm not going to get any further with regard to sikhs on the security council. >> as president trump and president of india spoke three times since president trump's victory. my question is, both leaders, i understand, are on -- my question, how will that work for u.s.-india relations. and india is waiting to welcome president trump. >> well, i appreciate that, they had a great conversation the other day. and the relationship between the two countries will continue to grow stronger.
yes? >> first one, to follow up on the question, my understanding the wheels were in motion on this raid over the weekend. did the president specifically have to okay it? >> he did, yes. he okayed it. >> and then there's a report in the independent, in the u.k., the president plans to withdraw from the paris climate agreement within days. >> i don't have anything for you on that. >> on immigration, the first one is the president always said he -- he attacked senator schumer this morning over fake tears, he said it was 95% that he shed fake tears over the weekend. but mr. schumer did not attack president trump, he went after his policy. was this gracious of the president? >> i think the president's tweet speaks clearly for itself. he understands, senator schumer as kellyanne pointed out, where have senator schumer's tears been other problems going on in this country. homeless, people throughout new york looking for jobs.
in eight years with all of the stuff going on in terms of crime and the economy, i haven't seen too many tears from senator schumer. >> my other question, you said it's been 109 people. but the associated press is reporting that the congressionally approved program by which 300 iranians who were a threat to persecution in this country were coming to austria as a waystation to come to the united states, have been blocked from coming to austria. >> right. 109 were detained in the u.s. >> but there are 300 who have been blocked from coming. >> okay. >> so that's 409. >> no, no, that's not what i said. i said there were 109 people detained. let me answer the question, 109 people detained in the united states. they were processed through in a way to make sure they weren't causing anyone in the united states harm. they were processed through the system. that's what i said. that's exactly what happened. scott? >> shawn, what's your level of
concern about any kickback from some of these countries that are on that list of seven as far as how relations may work in the future? some people critical of facts you have countries like saudi arabia, afghanistan, where we have had attacks on u.s. soil with connections to those countries. do you foresee them being added? >> are you asking our concern with their reaction to us. >> yes. >> the president's number one goal is the re-tex and safety of the united states and its people f they want to act in a way that's inconsistent with their concerns that's up to them to do it as a sovereign nation. it is our duty and his duty to make sure that this country and its people are protected first and foremost. >> shawn, the human rights campaign has issued a statement saying that, citing rumors president trump will have an executive order undermining lgbst rights.
>> i won't get ahead of the executive orders that we may or may not issue. there are a lot of executive orders, things that the president has talked about and will continue to fulfill, we have something on that. >> any chance of the 90 day ban being extended indefinitely? >> right now it is what it is, the executive order calls for 90 days to review the seven countries. nd, again, at the end of that, we'll see where we go from there. right now, that's the goal of this. >> and the supreme court, i don't believe you answered this question earlier, what was the reason that president trump decided to move up his announcement from thursday night to tomorrow night? >> because he wanted to. he wanted to move it up. he was ready to go. he made it, as he mentioned on friday, making his decision, he made the decision and the president chose to go with it. plain and simple. daniel? >> the new york immigration coalition claims that a syrian refugee with a visa was mugged
as a detainee. why was that individual allowed to enter the country, was it a violation of president trump's -- every individual that's gone through the process has gone through vetting, make sure they don't pose a threat to the country. the individual must have gone through the system. it's plain and simple. >> the daly briefings weren't on the president's schedule tuesday, wednesday or friday of last week. it's not on there today, either k you confirm that he has not received the daly briefing? >> he gets it every day. he gets it every day. i just answered the question. >> shawn, thanks. the travel ban over the weekend, do you see eights recruiting tool, michael hayden said that he believes this travel ban could make the u.s. less safe. what do you say to those who argue the travel ban will make the country less stay? >> let's go back and look at what it is. seven countries that the obama administration had already identified needed further travel restrictions. >> but they didn't have a ban. >> i understand.
the president recognizes that it is his duty and obligation to make sure that we keep 24 country safe. and by instituting a process by which we look at these countries over a 90 day period, and the process by which people can come in and out of the country to ensure the safety of each and everyone of us, is something that makes a heck of a lot of sense. i understand, and i think in a lot of cases, i say this respectfully, but some people have not read what exactly the order says. and are reading it through misguided media reports. when you actually read the report, and understand the nexus of it, and how it's working, again look at how it worked. when you talk about the 325,000 people, 109 were temporarily inconvenienced for the safety of us all. [ inaudible ] >> and they were processed through, kristen that,'s the process. you can go through and nitpick and say this individual. but that's why we slow it down a little. to make sure if they were five years old, they're with their
parents and don't pose a threat. to assume because of some one's age or gender or whatever they don't pose a threat is misguided and wrong. >> let me ask you about the rollout as well. did secretary kelley find out about the executive order as it was being signed and did secretary mattis find out hours before -- >> i'm going to tell what you has been briefed out previously, all appropriate agencies and individuals that needed to be part of the process were. everybody was kept in the loop at the level necessary to make sure it was rolled out properly. >> on that note, how well were those departments briefed? i mean you just said yourself that the willing is willing to act quickly when he has to keep the country safe. is there a lesson to be learned about what happened last week in terms of maybe better preparing the departments that are relevant? >> well, but, right, i understand the question that you're asking. there's two things that have to be cleared up. one is if we announce this a lot earlier it would have given people plenty of time to flood into the country who could have done us harm.
that's not a sound strategy. the people that needed to be kept in the loop were kept in the loop. the people that needed to be briefed were. if, again, i think this is largely overblown when you look at the context of how big this was, and the number of people that caught up, it's relatively minor as a percentage of the overall total. when you look at how it worked on a saturday, 109 people out of 325,000 were slowed down going in. i truly believe that it is being blown out of proportion. the exdon't which this actually was, for what it did. and i think, frankly, government functioned very well. we made sure that the people coming in weren't coming in to do us harm. we made sure that the peep whom went back to the country, one of the seven, did so without any intent on do this country or people harm. they all got in after the screening. the system actually worked really well. that's the take-away from this, the system worked well, the country is safer for it.
>> you want to respond to the former president? >> can you answer, i know you said 109 over the last 24 hours, since the executive order. how many went through, since that 24 hours, have been detained -- >> i don't, to my knowledge i can try to get that you number. i don't believe it's many. those were the folks basically caught in trance whigs the executive order was issued. then it becomes a prospective thing a-flying through the country. it almost should be a minimal amount, if any. that primary initial wave were the peep in transit when the executive order was executed. the rest of them weren't allowed to actually enter back and are going through the process through the consulate and regular system. it is an easy way of ensuring that the system worked well. >> just to clean up something you said earlier in the briefing, respect to the career diplomats in the state department that disagree, they should get with the program or they can go. are you suggesting they should
resign their posts? >> the president has a very clear vision, he's been clear on it since the campaign. he's been clear on it since taking office. he goz egg to put the safety of this country first, implement things that are in the best interests of protecting this country prospectively, not reactively. and if somebody has a problem with that agenda, then they should -- then that does call in to question whether or not they should continue in that post or not. the president was elected, and i think again look at the polls that have come out so far. the american people support what the president is doing. everyone in here needs to get out of washington once in a while and talk to people throughout america that are pleased that this president is taking the steps necessary to protect this country. and so, i do, look, i know the president appreciates the peep whom served this nation. and the -- the people who served this nation. but if they have a big problem with the policies he's instituting to keep the country safe that's up to them to question whether or not they
want to stay. i do think, again, you have to remember the goal of what the president is doing. david brody? >> what is the president's message, shawn, to senate democrats who intend to filibuster his supreme court nominee. >> it's not just the president's message, the american people's message, they want change, they want it bold and decisive. that's what they voted for in donald trump. for senate dem kratses to look at this -- democrats to look at this opportunity to slow walk and play political games with these people unbelievably qualified to lead the candidate or the choice they have made before, think about this. he met with a bunch of senate democrats to talk about the qualities they want in a judge. before they even heard who the individual is, you have some of them saying absolutely no. that shows you that it's all about politics, it's not about qualification. the president has a right to have this nominee taken up. that is part of -- so, for them, it is going -- the default used to be less qualified confirmed.
it is now going to always no. that is a sad message. not just what they heard from the president, but i think that they heard loud and clear from the american people. especially if you think where the democratic party has gone in the last eight years, they have lost seats at every level. they were supposed to take back the senate, they didn't, the republicans did well in the house, we won the presidency, the president won nine of 13 battle ground states, 2600 counties. the message came through loud and clear, the american people wanted decisive leadership. they're getting it. if you are a senate democrat you have to wonder whether or not you're getting outside of washington. thank you very much, see you tomorrow. >> that was white house press secretary sean spicer wrapping up his daly briefing after a -- daily briefing after a huge few days at the white house. he covered everything fromtor threats, small business, and terrorism. address some of the blowback
about who is sitting at the table with the president's security council meetings. watch this. >> the president also signed a memorandum modernizing the structure of the national security council and the homeland security council. there's been a lot of misreporting this week about what this memo does and does not do. so let me walk you through this real quick. there's two issues at hand. one is the makeup of the nsc and the other is the makeup of the principles committee. the principle committee is merely the nsc minus the president. the idea is that the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the dna are being downgrade ordinary removed is utter nonsense. >> utter nonsense. chris is political director, what did you make of that reaction? >> well, here's an interesting situation. if you're the white house press secretary and you're out there talking, the subject at hand isn't just that they have discuss excused these members of the security council from meeting.
that he said today. don't have things to do with national security, de facto, they aren't military things but he used avian flu or pan tell demic mngs they wouldn't be required to be there for that. the underlying issue, is that the president's chief strategist, steve bannon, was put on the list, now he's there. the narrative that formed was a political -- guy who writes speeches, in to politics, is taking a seat the national security council and maintain there's a reduction of status. you see how sensitive the white house would be to that. >> as you saw there in the video, chris, and this was towards the front end of the briefing, he had papers flying, and highlights on the papers, and he was very defensive about the whole thing out of the gate. it was right then that he was saying this is no different than what happened in obama's white house, talking about david axelrod was coming in and out of
meetings as needed. we have some sound from that, i want you to hear that, too. >> i think it shows that this administration is trying to make sure we don't hide things, wait for them to count after the fact. it recognizes the role he's going to play. steve won't be in every meeting. like axelrod he'll come in and out when needed. but we wanted to be up front about it and make sure that that was stated so it wasn't a story when he did. >> he calls the reports utter nonsense, then makes the comparison to the obama white house, the only thing that we're different is we're putting it down on paper. >> transparency. >> is that steve bannon will be there. >> right. when you bring political figures into the discussion of national security you open yourself up to accusations that you are making choices not in the national interest but in your own narrow political interest. that's always the danger, the exposure. in the bush white house they told karl rove when he came sniffing around, no, no, you go down here, you figure out how to sell it, what we make.
you don't make the policy. this is reflective of how powerful bannon is in the trump white house and how much control he has over the process. but also, remember, in a new administration you have turf wars. because this administration where the vice president has an enormous amount of sway, mike pence is very influential. you have something we've not seen before, the chairman of one of the two major national parties, serving as white house chief of staff in reince priebus. nothing to say kellyanne conway. this may be bannon establishing turf boundaries, i'm a pretty big deal. >> he also made it clear, sean spicer did, nobody is being downgraded, he kept using that word. chris starwall, thank you, standing by during the whole press briefing, appreciate it. >> mr. trump is in on the defense today after heavy criticism of the executive order on refugees, and other foreign travelers. our political panel weighs in on the temporary travel ban and
what you just heard, and the impact that this is having around the world. so beautiful. what shall we call you? tom! name it tom! travelers. studie s show that toms have the highest average earning potential over their professional lifetime. see? uh, it's a girl. congratulations! two of my girls are toms. i work for ally, finances are my thing. you know, i'm gonna go give birth real quick and then we'll talk, ok? nice baby. let's go. here comes tom #5!
the future of business in new york state is already in motion. companies across the state are growing the economy, with the help of the lowest taxes in decades, a talented workforce, and world-class innovations. like in plattsburgh, where the most advanced transportation is already en route. and in corning, where the future is materializing. let us help grow your company's tomorrow - today at esd.ny.gov
>> this is a national security issue. these seven countries were derooifd from the obama administration deemed needed further look. as we go through the 90 day process review we'll put a system in place that that extreme vets these people coming into the country, that potentially could do us harm. >> press secretary sean spicer moments ago expressing confidence the administration will prevail against any legal challenges to the president's temporary travel ban. seven majority muslim nations. jess da tarlove senior director of research for bustle.com and mercedes schlaff, former spokesperson for george w. bush. mercedes, sean spicer making it clear that the president, the white house, is being pro
proactive and this is about the safety of america. what did you make of what you just heard? >> well, this should come to no surprise, donald trump made it clear during the campaign that, he was going to be working on extreme vetting, that he was going to ensure that he was going to put america's security first. and one of the way he is was going to do this is through a temporary 4589 in terms of allowing individuals to come in from hot beds of terrorist nations. i think that the president is just filling in the space there in terms of ensuring that we are in charge, that we are focused on not only ensuring the border security but as well as the national security. of course with this surprise, it did cause a bit of chaos when how the airports were handling or border agents were handling it. but i think at the end, something that the president was focused on doing and he's accomplished it. >> that surprise element was on
purpose, as you just heard, the press secretary said if we announced this a lot earlier, it would have given plenty of time for the bad guys to flow into this country and do us harm. >> he said bad guys, donald trump tweeted bad dudes, i believe this morning. also interesting the language in donald trump's use, he used the word "ban" when he maintains that wasn't a muslim ban. i agree, i wasn't surprised by what sean spicer said, he was defensive and tried to shift the blame to the obama administration. saying that you want to look into seven countries is not the same as restricting travel or banning immigration from those countries. we also, the syrian refugees, this is not something first of all is popular with people in the united states of america. but but there's no senior official saying there is cause to halt this program f you go back to what happened in 2011, the favorite of people on the right right now to say, well, bar rock obama banned iraqis, there was an imminent threat,
two refugees in kentucky were connected to building a bomb. barack obama slowed down the proper the process. thought one month where iraqi refugees weren't settled in the country. >> we wanted to get response from both sides of the aisle, thank you for reacting. back with the panel on the president's flurry of executive actions. they're going to stay right there. see you in a minute. achoo! (snap) achoo! achoo! (snap) (snap) achoo! achoo! feel a cold coming on? zicam cold remedy nasal swabs shorten colds with a snap, and reduce symptom severity by 45%. shorten your cold with a snap, with zicam.
>> back with our political panel now. jessica and mercedes, thanks to both of you for sticking around. you both had a chance to listen to the white house press briefing that just ended moments ago. what was the biggest surprise? jessica, you shared with us, you were not surprised with sean spicer and the white house's defense of the travel ban. a lot of other news made in that briefing. including an announcement that israeli prime minister benjamin
netanyahu will be visiting the u.s. on february 15. >> that's interesting but not surprising. prime minister netanyahu has been tweeting plenty of support for donald trump and looking forward to that visit, especially i'm sure to discuss moving the beam s i si to jerusalem, donald trump has said he will support that. one surprise line, relating to the jewish people, i couldn't believe that sean spicer said they went out of their way to ak nl the holocaust in -- acknowledge the holocaust on holocaust remembrance day. that was a big shock. but sean spicer is doing his job, just like kellyanne conway does every weekend. they both must be xaused. >> a lot of work being done. mercedes, what took you by surprise? >> sean spicer has business boxing gloves on every time. oneshing shawn does well, goes back to the media, say there was one tweet out there regarding they were downgrading the joint chiefs of staff, he's not going
to be part of the national security council committee. and shawn is able to debunk time and time again these false reports from some of these media outlets. i think shawn has been very successful. plus, the fact that you're talking about a numerous amounts of information from deregulation, the fact that donald trump met with small business leaders, as well as being able to talk about the potential supreme court pick which should be coming tomorrow. >> mercedes, to that point, sean spicer said president trump promises to slash bureaucratic red tape. this trump presidency has brought a lot of confidence back to job creators but that gets lost in the shuffle. jessica? >> i free with that. americans rin cred pli optimistic about the economy under a trump presidency. i find the contrast between the favorbilt and that figure interesting. i'm sure we will aak that. but americans are looking forward to cuts in regulation and bringing jobs back. let's hope it's done responsibly
and we don't end up in a war with mexico orring? like that. >> the big news tomorrow night will be the announcement of the supreme court pick. >> yes. >> thanks to both of you. >> thanks, sandra. >> thanks. another big appointment at the white house, someone with close access to the president, but you may not have heard about this person until now.
audi pilotless vehicles have conquered highways, mountains, and racetracks. and now much of that same advanced technology is found in the audi a4. with one notable difference... ♪ the highly advanced audi a4, with available traffic jam assist. ♪ all finished.umm... you wouldn't want your painter to quit part way.
>> as we just mentioned, the president will be announcing his nomination for the supreme court seat left vacant after the death justice scalia. we'll have that covered right here. one important appointment at the white house of someone that will likely have unique access to donald trump. sheila craig, a former photographer for the bush administration and sarah palin's vice presidential campaign president in 2008 is now the chief official white house
photographer. she was a white house photographer under the bushes and first lady laura bush's personal photographer. that's it for us here. thanks for joining us this afternoon. i'm sandra smith. here's shep. >> shepard: it's noon on the west coast, 3:00 in d.c. where president trump is defending his travel ban. arguing there are "a lot of bad dudes" out there and he's trying to keep america safe. a lot of americans feel very differently. protests widespread across the nation and some republicans say the president has now gone too far. hurting our cause and potentially our troops around the world. now a u.s. state attorney general taking the president the court. so the president now moving up his supreme court announcement too tomorrow. we'll look at the judges and where they stand. the shakeup on the national security council. president trump's c