tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News January 28, 2018 11:00pm-12:00am PST
york city. thank you for spending part of your evening with me on this "fox report". january 28 2018. have a safe and productive i'm lea gabrielle. leland: fox news sunday next. chris: i'm chris wallace, president trump to announce 2018 agenda in the state of the union address while the russia investigation closes in. ♪ >> you want to fire robert mueller? fake news, folks. chris: the president bushes back from davos where he makes his case for america first. >> america is open for business and we are competitive once again. but america first does not mean america alone. chris: we will get a preview of the president's plan from year two from white house director legislative affairs mark short.
then -- >> no collusion whatsoever. chris: will the president really sit down with an interview with special counsel robert mueller? we will discus that. the republican ls secret memo about fbi misconduct and those probe clinton text messages with house oversight chair trey gowdy only on fox news sunday. ♪ ♪ plus president trump offers to help the dreamers. we will ask the sunday panel about the president's new immigration plan, is it the basis for a compromise? and our power player of the week, those in iraq and afghanistan who risk their lives and u.s. troops. hello again from fox news in washington. tuesday night president trump will lay out his vision for 2018 in his state of the union address, he will say policies have created a stronger american economy and he will announce
plans he thinks will boost growth even more. joining us now for a preview marc short, marc, welcome back to fox news sunday. >> thanks for having me. chris: what's the major theme to have president's speech, what are the two or three major priorities. >> the president will talk how america is back and growing economy, economy that now is growing at 3% clip over the last three quarters, economy that has lowest unemployment rate in 17 years and lowest unemployment rate in african americans and hispanics, i think talk about the fact the america is open for business and the president will make appeal to democrats, to make an appeal to say we need to rebuild our country and make an appeal to do infrastructure in a bipartisan way. the fact that we are continuing to wipe out isis but that we have growing threats such as
north korea. and one of the concerns, chris, we have dramatic threats on the global scene, yet where we are in congress, we still can't pass a spending bill to fund military because democrats will continue to hold military hostage to pursue another agenda and he will ask that we rebuild piltrary. chris: you talk about reaching out to democrats when he sends out tweets about crying chuck schumer and bashes nancy pelosi is not the best way to do that. >> well, just this week, the president made an enormous appeal and showed leadership in putting forward a plan to resolve daca situation, an issue that has plagued the country for decades and yet the outcry from democrats when he went further than many people thought he would in providing not just permanent residence but path to citizenship for roughly 1.8 million people in the country, democrats have continue to cry that they don't want to solve the problem. we are anxious to solve the
problems. will democrats, chuck schumer and nancy pelosi show leadership and protect from radical-left-wing base or continue to play politics on this issue. chris: let's put up the president's framework that was announced this week. a path to citizenship as you said for 1.8 million people eligible for dreamer status. $25 billion for a wall, limiting chain migration to nuclear families, in other words dreamers can't sponsor parents and end to visa lottery. blow-back was fierce from both sides. >> that plan is a campaign to make america white again. >> he might be able to roll over the never trumpers but if he continues down this line former trumpers is going to be a much more difficult category for him. chris: you have to admit, it wasn't just backlash from democrats, backlash from
conservative hardliners, what makes you think you can get a deal through congress on all of this, big ambitious plan before the daca deadline expires in march or do you think because the court has blocked the rescission of daca you have more time? >> chris, i have heard a lot of outrage over speaker pelosi's comments when he makes racial allegation like that, i've heard members even in modern democrats say that was over the top. the president hosted dozens of meetings, some republicans, some democrats, some bipartisan, a lot of meetings with a rational compromise plan that, i think, is something democrats asked for. we started by saying we we wanted to protect 690,000 people that have permits under daca, in this country producing, contributing to the economy. we, of course, we want to protect them, we don't want to
send them away, the democrats say the population would be larger. you should go back to 2012 which is when obama put in place unconstitutional order. the president did all of those things because it's time that we fix the other issues too. americans want to keep our border secure, end chien migration. chris: do you think you can get a deal by march or because of court action you have more time before march fifth? >> we are anxious to get a deal. i think the question belongs to democrats in congress. right now the courts have said the deadline is not there. they won't have grace period. if the court overrules, that program will end immediately. chris: you're quite right, there's backlash from democrats and also backlash from republicans and one of the biggest issues is something that the president said this week. take a look. >> whatever they are doing, they
are doing a great job. it's a nice thing to have ib -- incentive that after period of years becoming citizen. >> when president trump issued executive order in 2012 he did not give dreamers a path to citizenship, he simply said they could renew their status in a sense and this is what some conservatives are saying, isn't what you're offering or the president offering isn't it more softer than what it gives dreamers than what president obama was willing to give. >> if we can help to fix this problem once and for all which is the other parts of the proposal the president has put forth. the second in the meeting that you televised at the white house when the president had 20 members of congress over, he said, i will provide cover from our side on this issue, the question is, are chuck schumer and nancy pelosi willing to provide cover from left-winger and radical base, so far they are not showing the same
leadership. chris: you think you can get conservatives who may not like the idea to get citizenship to go along? >> perdue, tom cotton, these are not exactly dove on the issue of immigration, they are hawkish on it. conservatives recognize the benefit to securing the border and fixing long-term problems. yes, i think we will get widespread support on our side. politically it's not a policy, flatly falls, 70% of americans support it. when you say you're going to secure the border and end chain migration, 70% of americans agree. it's not a policy issue, it's a politics question. chris: the president will push infrastructure plan and here is the outline of that. $20 billion in federal money to leverage at least 1 and a half trillion dollars in state and local and private investment. here is the problem, infrastructure has traditionally
been 80-20 split. but what you're proposing is a 80-20 split, 20% federal money and 80% from other sources. why is that going to work? >> i think it's going to work for reasons that the infrastructure needs to be fixed. part of the central part of campaign and needs bipartisan support for it. there's no doubt that democrats in congress would want more federal dollars on the issue. we have to recognize, chris, that we have a significant date problem in our country and can't be all federal that pays for this, so a partnership is what makes sense. the other thing that the administration has pledged to do is continue to roll back the regulatory constraints that i think is also limited private investment. when you do that, they'll be additional private investment coming in to make sure it's real. chris: there was a report this week that the white house wants to scale back when you say regulations, environmental regulations an critics say the effect is that in order to get the projects going, you have the
clean air act and clean water act. >> the administration has no plans to gut the clean air act or clean water act, chris, but what you have seen by rolling back the regulations the economy has taken off, we want to make sure that our economy continues to grow. when you see 3% compared to 8 years of 1.8 growth in the obama years, much of that because of rolling back regulatory burden and allowing the free enterprise system. chris: for all of your plans for 2018, all the victory lap is president is going to take for the economy and what was accomplished in 2017, i think it's fair to say that there is a cloud that continues to hang over this white house and that's the russia investigation. direct question, did president trump want to fire special counsel robert mueller last summer? >> i'm not aware the president wanted to fire robert mueller. let's keep in mind a couple of things. robert mueller is still the
special counsel, taxpayers have spent millions and millions of dollars and have not proven any collusion thus far with russia. the white house continues to cooperate in any every manner providing any document that the special counsel has asked for. we have continue today comply fully. robert mueller is special counsel. i'm not familiar with any conversation that i've had with the president intimidating to fire robert mueller. chris: would congress object to make it harder or impossible to fire him, is that something the president would sign? >> i don't know. chris: the president responded this week to report that is the special is investigating him on the issue of obstruction of justice, here he is. >> there's no collusion. now they are saying, o well, did he fight back, fight back -- [inaudible]
>> it's obstruction. chris: what does the president think the difference is between obstruction and fighting back? >> i don't know, i'm not involved in those conversations regarding the investigation. you know the president has been frustrated and felt that there's been billions of dollars of taxpayers spent and no evidence of collusion. he recognizes that something that's been underreported the day before he accepted position of robert mueller, so i'm sure there's concern that obviously he was going to be named special counsel, he came to be interviewed and fbi director did not mention the potential conflict there. chris: finally, let's look at it from the other side, sop top republicans in congress talk about bias and corruption at the highest levels of the fbi and the justice department in their investigation both of hillary clinton and of donald trump. one, does the president believe that's true, that there has been abuse, that there has been bias
in the investigation and two, as the washington post reports today, does he want to see the four-page memo to that effect coming out of house intelligence committee, does he want to see that released to the public? >> well, one, we don't know what's the memo, it's classified. we haven't seen it. the president generally sides on the side of transparency, yes, i think he believes that should be put out. on the first question, i think that where we stand is that, again, there's been significant investigation so far and no evidence of any sort of collusion. chris: when he hears things like the text between peter strzok and lisa page -- >> of course, that frustrates him, mccabe's wife received $700,000 in political contributions from one to have clinton's personal friend and was leading the investigation into hillary clinton. at the same time spoken to the agents and talked about how much
he appreciate their work and efforts, but, yeah, i'm sure he's concerned about some of appearances of conflict at the top of the agency in the last administration. chris: i want to button up one question because attorney general sent note to special -- to house intelligence committee saying it would be a, quote, extraordinary reckless to release the memo because if they reveal sources and methods, is that a concern for the president? >> but at the same time i think he's more incline for transparency in the investigation and to the extent the house advocated public release, i think the president is receptive to that. chris: marc, thank you for your time this week, always good to talk with you and we all will be watching the president's speech on tuesday. >> thanks for having me. chris: up next sunday group to take a closer look at the president's agenda.
feel like 50? how can i share new plans virtually? how can i download an e-file? virtual tours? zip-file? really big files? in seconds, not minutes. just like that. like everything. the answer is simple. i'll do what i've always done, dream more, dream faster, and above all, now, i'll dream gig. now more businesses, in more places, can afford to dream gig. comcast, building america's largest gig-speed network. >> the world is witnessing the resurgence of a strong and prosperous america. i'm here to deliver a simple message, there has never been a better time to hire, to build, to invest and to grow in the united states. chris: president trump at the world economic forum in switzerland this week telling leaders america is open for business and time now for sunday group, gop strategists karl rove, columnist for the hill juan williams and catherine lucey who cover it is white
house for the associated press and former republican congressman jason chaffetz. well, katherine, you were on the davos trip with the president, how much was he received there and counting on economic recovery, the good numbers from 2017 continuing into 2018 to help republicans in the 2018 midterms? >> yeah, so the big question going into the trip was the america first president versus the davos globalist and quite closely received, held a reception and leaders got polite response and the president clearly was there to bring his economic message as you said and kind of take a victory lap. he talked about the booming economy, he talked about tax cuts, he talked about regulation changes and i think this clearly is going to be part of his pitch for tuesday in the state of the union and something republicans are going find in coming months.
chris: karl, let's pick this up, going to take a victory lap for strong economic numbers and talk about infrastructure and creating jobs and talk about immigration reform, how strong a message for this year and how strong a message for republicans to run on in november? >> well, it depends on how much he says and what he says on tuesday night but also depends on what he does in the months following that. first of all, i think he has to be careful about appearing to be too self-congratulatory. but this is a moment where he can reset, but the reset depends upon him following through in the weeks and months ahead. he needs to make the case and the case can't be made that people are going to feel this tax cut, they are begin to go in their own lives in february when the withholding tables kick in
and everybody gets bigger paycheck, that's the moment he needs to be driving home, not only affecting you in that way but affecting glow the money being pumped in the american economy by american businesses to build new plants and equipment, to refurbish their stores, to create and build and buy new things that are going to require at the end to have line somebody in a factory, somebody in a farm, somebody in a ranch to create whatever it is they need. chris: the key is and how he's going to do on tuesday night, how he is going to do wednesday and thursday, he did great in speech to congress last february, but then he got back into tweets and needless arguments right afterwards. >> this is the moment of optimism, people are starting to feel optimism about the economy. this is the moment to strike that note of optimism that he missed in inaugural address when he talked about the dark and gloomy place called america. [laughter] chris: your boss didn't like that, bush 43.
on the president's new framework for immigration, it seems as though the president is going as many to strike a deal. how is it possible for all democrats in house and senate to not be jumping all over this proposal? congressman chaffetz how do you answer and the concern from conservative that is the president is giving too much when he gives them a path to citizenship. >> particularly in conservative circles he added path to citizenship, i don't like the component but puts the democrats in a box. i don't know that the democrats can actually say yes to anything
and this is something they are really going to have to contemplate and when you have people like senator perdue like marc short pointed out and senator cotton saying this is a good solid framework. chris: two republicans, really strong liners on immigration issues. >> it puts the ball on the democrats' court. i don't know if they can pass in the house quite as smoothly but if all democrats get behind it in the house, enough in the house on the republican side of the aisle that they could actually pass. chris: on the on the other hand, you talk about the democrats, they are saying that the president is caving to the right-wing of his party, take a look. >> the white house unfortunately has proven unreliable and wildly unpredictable. within the course of hours they say different things, every time the president moves forward on one thing, his staff pulls him back and undoes what he said. chris: but, juan, isn't
citizenship for 2 million, not only dreamers but people eligible for dreamer status who hadn't signed up yet, isn't that a huge concession? >> yeah, that would be terrific. the first point to say run into opposition as you pointed in interview with marc short, the people from ted cruz who is a hardliner, daca didn't have a pathway to citizenship, you have breitbart calling amnesty don, heritage staying this is a nonstarter. why are they saying this, chris? he goes after legal immigration, severe cuts in terms of legal immigration, attacks the idea of diverse lottery system, that's wrong and also oppose to family reunification which had been the premise for immigration policies in the past and when you think about this, this is not comprehensive reform, this is not dealing with the 11 million that are already ready here. this is the president's
presentation at a moment when the democrats are saying $25 billion, you just got a huge tax cut, now you want $25 billion for a wall that essentially is symbolic -- chris: are you saying that democrats, 2 million people in this country illegally, even the dreamers as sympathetic as they are, are in the country illegal you're saying democrats should jump on the deal? >> he's the one that tried to do daca, this is going to be a bargaining chip, in exchange of this i will demand concessions, i want my wall, okay, the democrats are willing to give added money for security on the border, the thing are you willing to give 25 billion, not to address comprehensive immigration meanwhile the real pressure and the president said that he's going to have to take heat from the right, conservative media, from heritage and from the freedom caucus on the house, will paul ryan -- he has enough votes from
democrats to get it passed. >> he can potentially get it passed. the reason democrats are fighting so far against the wall, the wall will actually work. >> 45-year low in terms of crossing. >> still a long way to go. there is no way that you can give pathway to citizenship to dreamers if you don't also solve the nightmare that is down in the border and to secure and lock down that border is a fair compromise. >> i think we have -- >> i don't know that i could vote for that. >> that's the real issue here. will paul ryan -- chris: there are two issues, right-wing to have republican party and the left-wing party, just final word go to you, karl, you broke your immigration reform in bush 43 white house do they get a deal? >> they don't need to, as you reported in interview with marc short has basically put this all
on hold, could they get a deal on march, yes, this is good opening framework. let's be clear about it, the president has gone a long way to path to citizenship, this is not 25 billion-dollar wall, this is a $25 billion for a wall, additional agents, technology and infrastructure along the border. we have been talking secure border, yes, crossings are down but we still don't have secure control of the border. one thing that juan touched on that he's absolutely right, the democrats, black caucus will fight hard to defend the diversity lottery because lotteries are weird but diversity means we draw people from countries that don't normally flow in to the normal immigration flow, largely african countries. chris: yes or no, all depends on the good will of people on both
sides, the president doesn't help by tweeting about schumer, but schumer doesn't help by going to the floor and nancy pelosi's comment was so over the top for immigration reform, everybody who is an adult ought to start acting like an adult. chris: we will see you a little later. up next president trump with reports that he we wanted to fire special counsel robert mueller and has the fbi tried to protect hillary clinton to get donald trump, tray
chris: there have been two competing narratives in the russia probe this week, first the president trump is getting closer with an interview with special counsel robert mueller amid reports he we wanted to fire mueller last summer and second, had the fbi have been biased all along for hillary clinton and against donald trump. joining me now from greenville, south carolina congressman trey gowdy, house oversight chair and member of house intelligence committee. congressman, we will get to your concerns about the fbi and the department of justice in a moment, but let me begin first with this, do you still trust after all you've heard, do you still trust special counsel robert mueller to conduct a fair and unbiased investigation? 100% particularly if he's given
the kind of resources and the independence to do his job. chris, he didn't apply for the job, he's where he is because we have an attorneying -- attorney general who had to recuse himself. mueller didn't raise his hand and say pick me, we as the country asked him to do this. by the way, he has -- there are two components to his jurisdiction, there's a criminal component but there's also a counterintelligence comp on the part that no one ever talks about because it's not sexy and interesting but he's also going to tell us definitively what russia tried to do in 2016. so last time you and i were together, i told my republican colleagues, leave him the hell my alone and that's still my advice. chris: president trump wants to sit down with mueller and conduct an interview. here is the president. >> i'm looking forward to it, actually. >> do you have a date set yet? >> talking two or three weeks but i would love to do it.
subject to my lawyers, but i would love to do it. chris: as practical matter does the president have any choice, doesn't in effect have to sit down for interview and let me ask you this is aa former federal prosecutor, when he does that interview, how dangerous is that legally for the president? >> well, i don't know what he's going to say and i don't know what he knows, so i can't address how dangerous it is, if there's no collusion and if there's no obstruction of justice there's not much danger. there are two aspects to this, chris, there's the legal aspect and the former prosecutor in me wants him to testify because he's uniquely well situate today answer certain questions. the conversations between he and comey there are only two persons in the conversation, we heard comey, if there's another side, we need to hear it. that's the legal point. i want him to testify from legal standpoint, let's not kid ourselves, political component
now, twice now house democrat colleagues have moved to impeachment. twice have said he should be impeached and that's without answering a single question. adam schiff said he had evidence of collusion before he began the investigation. the politics of it, i don't think he got a fair jury, i do think he has a fair investigators, fair prosecutor in bob mueller but doesn't have a fair jury and will have to decide whether the legal part outweigh it is political part. chris: the house intelligence committee is expected to vote this week on whether to release that 4-page memo that you had a big hand in writing that alleges abuse and bias inside the fbi and the justice department as i discussed with marc short, the washington post reports the president wants to have the memo released. do you agree with that?
>> i do, i'm sorry that we are to this point. this memo is nothing but a -- a thousands of pages of documents provided to us by the department and the bureau. there's nothing in this memo that the department is not already aware of. if you think your viewers want to know whether the dossier was used in court proceedings, whether or not it was velted before it was used, whether or not it was vetted, if you were interested in who paid for the dossier, if you're interested in christopher steelers relationship with hillary clinton and the democrat national committee, then, yes, you'll want the memo to come out. if your adam schiff who is con siciónently -- consistently wrong, he didn't want us to find out any of this, chris, he fought, in fact, gps went to court. gps went to court from finding out that the democrats paid for the dossier.
of course, you don't want the the information to come out. he didn't want us to find it in the first place. this memo answers what i think are legitimate questions and i do think the fbi should look at it before -- before it is released and i have provided that counsel to chairman nunes. so i want to play poker, i want to bureau to know everything that's in the memo. i think you'll be surprise. it's not a hit piece on the department and the fbi. i would not have participated. chris: let me pick up on this, because the reports are and you kind of indicated that in your answer that the memo centers on this question of the fisa application, the department of justice, fbi application in 2016 for a warrant to conduct an electronic surveillance against this fellow, then trump campaign manager carter page. your complain according to reports is that you say that when they made the application they didn't talk about the roll
of the -- role of the russia dossier and it was opposition research paid for by the clinton campaign and democrats saying you're cherry-picking the information, one the fisa warrant on carter page is not as essential as you're making it and, two, there was a lot more in the application than just the dossier, that the fbi did not rely just on the dossier to get the warrant. >> well, i can't even confirm for you that there is a fisa warrant and i can't confirm because that's classified and i will not disseminate classified information. are you interested or not whether the world's premier law enforcement agency relied on work product produced and paid for by the democratic national committee? chris: the question i'm just asking is this, sir, and, yes, i can understand you're not going to confirm it, we are talking about the fisa warrant of carter
page, did they rely just on dossier or did they rely on other material? >> well, for me to answer that question is confirmation that there is one. let me ask you this, chris, if they relied on a path, is that significant enough for the american people to know? if they relied on it do you want to know that, if you're the judge, do you want to know that a third that you're providing for was paid for political opponent? whether it was relied upon, 80% or 20%, do you want to know that the democrat national committee paid for material that was never vetted, that was included in a court proceeding, do you want to know whether or not the primary source in these court proceedings had a bias against one candidate? do you want to know whether or not he would do anything to keep the candidate from becoming elected president? chris: i want to -- i have two more questions i want to get to and we are running out of time because i want to address those texts between lisa page and peter strzok who were two key
figures in both clinton and trump investigations. in february of 2016 during clinton e-mail probe, page sends this text, one more thing, she, clinton, might be our next president, the last thing you need us going in there loaded, you think she will remember or care that it was more doj, department of justice, than fbi? strzok, agree. i will e-mail you and redacted saying. there's no question that's a deeply troubling political bias expressed by two fbi officials. i guess the question i have is did strzok have power to get -- protect clinton?
>> how would you like -- chris: was that just peter strzok or was that a lot of people that weren't party to clearly biased and outrageous text? >> i think what you will see and one reason the judiciary committee and oversight is investigating is there was tension between the department of justice and the fbi. but peter strzok was the lead investigator. that's who interviewed hillary clinton. so these same two people whose bias was so insidious that bob mueller fired them the moment he find -- found out about it, they should be kicked to the curb, were the ones interviewing hillary clinton, editing the memo to take out references of president obama, edits references for grossly negligent, no, i can't prove to you that they were the final decision-makers, nor do i have to. what i have to prove to you is two really important people hated him, would have done anything to protect her and thank god michael found out
about them while they were investigating. chris: we are running out of time here, there's clearly troubling evidence and clearly the memos are deeply troubling and go to it investigating that. there's also issues of potential hype by republicans and i want to give you an example, ron johnson brought up the issue of a secret society inside the justice department. here he is. >> what this is all about is further evidence of corruption, more than bias but corruption at the highest levels of fbi. secret society. chris: but then we saw the only text on this that page wrote to strozk. he bought russian calendars as gag, seems kind of depressing, maybe it should be the first meeting of the secret society which led to this exchange.
>> secret society within the justice -- >> there's a possibility. chris: final question, don't republicans hurt their credibility on real issues of bias when they make such a big deal about secret societies and coups? >> yes, republicans are the best i have ever seen of taking good facts and overstating them and changing the narrative. i don't know what they meant by secret society, i didn't use the phrase. it's fair to ask them. but if it were a joke, chris, then was it also a joke to mention the insurance policy, was it also a joke to talk about impeachment the morning after president trump won, was it also a joke to say, i have no interest in participating in investigation if he's going to be cleared, there's a pattern and republicans are better served by letting the texts speak for themselves, i have no idea what they meant by that, i don't know if it was a joke or not. it's not my job to figure it
out. these two witnesses need to come in and tell us what they meant by it and everything else they said over the course of 18 months, republicans would be well served, let the texts speak for themselves and quit engaging in hyperbole which they seem to do a lot. chris: we look forward to the investigation continuing. congressman gowdy, thank you. we will follow developments in the week and in the future. >> yes, sir, thank you. chris: special counsel gets closer to interview with the president while bias grows in the fbi. the panel returns
never happen in a country that loves freedom and democracy like this country. >> conspiracy theories with virtually no fact, paranoia, delusion, why? they are afraid of the truth of the mueller investigation? chris: house freedom caucus mark meadows and senate democratic leader chuck schumer at odds over allegations of bias inside the fbi and the justice department who are back now with the panel, congressman, you were the former head of the committee that trey gowdy now chairs, how convinced are you that there was bias inside both the clinton and the trump investigation? >> well, based on the surface what we have seen so far there's clearly bias, but remember the hillary clinton investigation is a closed investigation. we should be looking at that. that's what we do as a country. we are self-critical, we do go after these things. i think the most definitive report will be what americaal, inspector general for the
department of justice, that report will come out in the next 60 days and obama appointee with 450 employees, when he comes and testifies before the oversight committee, that would be the most definitive word. chris: juan, you to admit that some of the strokz-page texts are troubling especially when peter strzok was the lead investigator both in the clinton case and in the trump case. >> come on, chris, people have personal opinions, we come out here and do an honest job -- chris: you're not at all troubled by the texts? >> no, remember they are lovers, this is pillow talk. i don't know that it has impacted their capacity to lead an investigation. what i see here if repeated effort coming from the right, they throw spit balls tat wall trying to somehow disparage the fbi, discredit robert mueller, don't forget -- gone after these
people. chris: how about when peter strzok and lisa page are saying, well, let's not go into the clinton investigation loaded for bear. >> wait a second, they are talking, hey, crist, president trump we wish would come on this show and then -- chris: i'm not joking. >> i know. we wish. chris, if you want him to come back, maybe we shouldn't ravage him this time, that's a joke between juan and chris, that's indication how you're going to conduct the interview. this is again discredit the fbi because they are worried that mule certify going to find out. >> start today draft the memo before they interviewed 16 people. >> no basis at that point to charge her. they go into the interview, this is what we know at this point, but you guys want to make it into something -- i mean -- >> it was cristal clear. >> if those emails had been referencing donald trump in the
same way that they were hillary clinton, one would be rational and reasonable and understanding what to say here. look, robert mueller, the test to this is, the day that robert mueller found out about the emails and read them, he fired strozk, he could demote him and send him to human resources to end his career. that's how bad this was. i don't think it's the fbi, but do i think two bad actors and i agree with the congressman, when report comes out -- chris: inspector general. >> independent official with powers to subpoena and powers to observe anding -- and interroga. we will be shocked at the behavior of the two individuals. chris: the president in comments before he went to davos left door wide open to sitting down with special counsel robert
mueller, how upset were the lawyer that is he gave a lot of negotiating power and in the end, though, do they really think he will have a choice sit down and talk to the special counsel? >> well, certainly the white house tried to walk it back a little bit after he said he would love to do this. yes, he could refuse voluntary interview, he could do but ultimately to your point, mueller has subpoena power, so he could use that. chris: and we should point out if he subpoenas him, he testifies before the grand jury and he doesn't have lawyers along side of him. >> and could prompt a legal fight which seems not helpful. what we are looking at right now is the president has made his intentions quite clear, what's not clear what the scope of the questioning might be, the setting, how exactly this might come together. chris: congressman chaffetz how much legal jeopardy when the president sits down in this interview, given the fact that he has told different stories about why he fired comey,
questions about, you know, when he kicked everybody else out of the room, he told him to go easy on mike flynn or not, kind of tension sitting? >> well, it's brought with peril but i think his temperament is such that, yeah, bring it on. he's been very definite definitt there's no collusion. >> this week came out that he's asking deputy fbi director who did you vote for and comes out this week that we have been mislead about interest in firing mueller almost a year ago. i think this guy thinks there's something to hide and he's trying to obstruct the investigation. >> democrats took the point before he was sworn in. they have to fixed their battles and scream about everything. i don't think they have a case. chris: thank you, panel. see you next sunday to be continued. up next our power player of the week. how one american soldier kept
his promise to the combat translator who saved his life. vo: gopi's found a way to keep her receipts tidy, even when nothing else is. brand vo: snap and sort your expenses with quickbooks and find, on average, $4,340 in tax savings. quickbooks. backing you. i knew at that exact moment, whatever it takes, wherever i have to go...i'm beating this. my main focus was to find a team
of doctors that work together. when a patient comes to ctca, they're meeting a team of physicians that specialize in the management of cancer. breast cancer treatment is continuing to evolve. and i would say that ctca is definitely on the cusp of those changes. patients can be overwhelmed ... we really focus on taking the time with each individual patient so they can choose the treatment appropriate for them. the care that ctca brings is the kind of care i've wanted for my patients. being able to spend time with them, have a whole team to look after them is fantastic. i empower women with choices. it's not just picking a surgeon. it's picking the care team, and feeling secure where you are. surround yourself with the team of breast cancer experts at cancer treatment centers of america. visit cancercenter.com/breast appointments available now.
chris: we are still arguing about the texts. during our long wars in iraq and afghanistan, we've heard a lot about the bombs among american soldiers but another special bond between u.s. forces and their local combat translators. here is our power player of the week. >> i wouldn't be sitting here talking to you today if it hasn't been for my afghan translator. chris: in 2008 matt was on 14th day serving in afghanistan when he was knocked out by a taliban mortar, as he came to an afghan translator rushed to his rescue. >> when i focused crawling in the bushes. >> he decided to run across the battlefield, knock me down and shoot them at the same time and
saving my life. chris: he promised he would help in the translator ever wanted to come to the u.s. months later he called. >> they were trying to hunt me down or one of family. >> i said, sure, it might take six months, maybe a year at the most. it ended uptaking four years. >> out of that experience he started no one left behind. >> we appreciate that. chris: group devote today saving afghan and iraqi translators who have risked their lives protecting american soldiers. >> if we don't keep that prevent, the prevailing narrative around the world will be that the u.s. will abandon you if you choose to partner with us. >> startedstarted in 2013 helpst immigration visas, going through a rigorous background check. >> the average time it takes to get through security screening
is 3 and a half years. >> welcome home. chris: once they arrive, the group has chapters in ten cities, meets at apartment and finds them housing and helps them get a job. >> thank you very much. >> including a visit by then defense secretary robert gates. he talks about how helpless you feel coming to a strange country. >> there's no one to help, no one to welcome them and they don't know what to do, everything in the country is different. >> starbucks and lyft partner with nllob, four years later he has steady job and owns his home. since 2013 the group has helped 5,000 translators and family members come to the u.s., but he says more than 50,000 more are trapped. >> for those who are still waiting in afghanistan and iraq, is this a matter of life or death? >> this is absolutely a matter of life and death.
if we don't keep this promise, the people that we ask them to help fighting in, are going to murder them. chris: whether we keep faith with combat translators will send a message, will this country protect or abandon people who help us in future conflict. >> if janice had not believed that we would have kept our promise, he wouldn't have served with us and i wouldn't be sitting here talking to you today, i have pts and as far as i'm concerned u helping my brother come home and start his new life in america was the most healing thing i've ever done. chris: to learn more about the group no one left behind, go to our website fox news sunday.com. now this program note, be sure to tune local fox station for president trump's state of the union address anchored by shepherd smith and i will see you on fox news channel for special coverage with bret baier and martha macaula.
have a great week and we will see you next fox news howie: on our "buzzfeed," president trump says he wants to sit down with robert mueller. but the white house is rocked by a bombshell report he wanted to fire robert mueller. >> that contradicts a narrative that's been consistent coming out of the white house. but gives us the clearest picture to date that may have been an effort to obstruct. >> i'm confirming maybe donald trump wanted to fire the special counsel. >> does he not hav