tv Geraldo at Large FOX News December 1, 2012 10:00pm-11:00pm PST
primaries he was tougher on illegal immigrants than any of his rivals, rejecting the dream act supported by governor perry, mocking as an necessary city speaker gingrich's call for mercy for those who have been here ten years or more. the results were stunning stunnd decisive. barack obama won 79% of the latino vote. more than enough to give him almost every swing state and the popular vote. and with the latino population growing faster than any other, the future looks bleak for the g.o.p. either the republicans begin to attract more hispanics or latinos or they're headed the way of the do-do; so some republicans in the senate have proposed what they call the achieve act. the watered-down version of the dream act. and in the house of representatives, on friday, runs actually passed what they call
the stem act, which increases the number of certain visas. will those moves make a difference among latinos? will it bring them back to the gaap? fasten your seatbelts as i ask republican congressman raul of idaho, and lower at any rate sanchez of california. >> both welcome. i'm delighted to have you on the program. congresswoman sanchez, do you think this will make a difference in terms of the allegiance of voters for the republican party? >> listen. latino families and all american families should understand we need comprehensive immigration reform. that means that we need to make it easier for people who want to come here to work, if there are jobs to be done that -- it means we have to take care of the people who are already here, who have been part of our community, and the mixed families that we have, and it also means you just don't give a person a visa to be
here but if they're actually been here since they were two years old, that maybe you should just say, we need a program tone sure that they actually can stay here for the long term. >> congressman, is this an example of the republicans in the senate holding their nose and doing a gesture to the latino community and only using kind of two retiring senior senators as the scapegoats? >> i don't think so. this is the beginning of a conversation. marco rubio has been working in the senate, i have been working in he house. is was an immigration attorney for 15 years. the reality is we need have both parties work on this. i if you look at what the democrats did, they had two years in the house of representatives and the senate where they had clear majorities where they could have done something about immigration reform. instead they refused to do anything about and it what they want to have is the political football they can always blame republicans. they're using this as a political tool and they don't really want to resolve anything.
they were able to do something about healthcare reform but couldn't do anything about immigration reform and they want to keep continuing to blame the republicans for their failure of leadership. so, now we are actually doing something. they're going to continue to move the goalpost every time we do something on immigration, so they can have this political tool they can hit us over the head with. >> rue all, we have a stem bill and it's actually michael grimm, a republican from new york, and myself, who have put forward this in the house of representatives, who have had it. you guys have not allowed it to be passed. it actually adds more series saturday, 55,000 more visas for the very people that today you voted would be able to have documents. the problem with the bill you voted on today you said yes to it doesn't increase the amount of people coming to this country. it just takes away from one group and gives to another, and
that's a divide and conquer strategy. >> you're doing the politics -- >> just don't believe the that. >> your solution today was to vote no on a bill that was actually going to advance the ball, and go to the senate. the senate -- you have the democratic lead -- leadership in the senate. instead you have a threat from the white house and all of the democrats, except for 27, locking arms and saying that they refuse to do anything on immigration unless they get everything they want. >> no, it was one bill -- >> it was one -- >> it was one bill. not about stem. there's already a good stem bill. by the way, very bipartisan group behind it, instead. y'all went and made your own bill and then you wonder why it's not going to work for america. >> 27 republicans on your bill and i had 27 democrats on my bill. my bill actually passed the house of representatives today with 27 democrats voting for it.
>> your bill just not increase the amount of immigrants who can come to this country, and as we all know you ask your business people. they're looking for visas for these people to come. plus, it takes away from those people who have been standing in line for a while. that's one thing that -- >> that's not true. >> it's triumph you taking the visas away from one group of people and thing to a knew group. >> they haven't been waiting in line -- >> all rightment all right. excellent minidebate. but congresswoman sanchez, going back to the dream act and the president's executive order that granted basically a stay on all deportation for these youngsters, isn't congressmann labrador right, couldn't president obama have done that in year one of his first term instead of waiting until six months before the election? >> listen, one of the things we have been working on is trying to do comprehensive reform. when you work with just the
dream act, you working with just a little group of people. what about all the parents of the kids who have sacrificed here, who are needed in the jobs they're doing. have been here 15 year 25 years, if you really want to solve the issue of immigration once and for all, we need to do a comprehensive bill, and the republicans continue to say, well, if you'll just make the border stronger, then we'll talk to you about the other pieces. if you'll just enforce laws against employers. well, guess what, president obama did. he did those two things. then he said, okay, now let's talk about how we opened the gates a little bit more and let people in, et cetera, and they balked. so he said i'm just going 0 go ahead and do it for these dream kids and i'm proud. >> when she said we have to do comprehensive reform, that means she's going to be up willing to work on immigration legislation unless she gets everything she wants. we need to get both sides at the table, work together, do the
things necessary to solve the problem have a broken immigration system. the immigration legislation has thousands and thousands of pages in our code. we can fix things one step at a time. we can do it together. we can do it in a bipartisan way. but you will hear for the next two years, everytime we have any kind of solution the immigration problem in the united states, she and her colleagues are going to say it's not good enough because it's not comprehensive. and in other words what she is going to tell you is that she just wants a political tool so she can attack republicans for the next few years. >> congressman lab door, don't you agree that unless the republican party can, to use the acronym from your bill, can stem the erosion of latino support. there may never be another republican president. >> if agree with that, actually, geraldo. that's why i have been a leading voice in my party, talking about what we need to do here in
washington, dc on the immigration. i think we need a knew rhetoric and new policies that actually solve the problem at immigration. no republican needs to fool themselves. we need to solve the immigration problem so latinos can agree with us on other issues. >> latino families are no different than other american families. we first and foremost care about our families that's why the comprehensive immigration reform is so important. it's just not about the kids who were brought here. it's about keeping the families together. they can talk all they want. they can use the rhetoric all they want. the real thing is ideas and pom sunday, and i believe that's why latino families have been voting for democrats over the last decade. >> it's unfortunate the last four years have actually hurt latino families than the previous four years. more hispanic families in poverty motion hispanic families
losing their home and it's because of the policies of the president -- been in power for four year. >> those are o'the policies bush. >> an excellent debate. thank you both. congresswoman loretta sanchez, congressman labrador, thanks very much. >> because these dreamers and the latino and asia votes they represent is the biggest political story of 2012, we're devoting the first half of the show so toe how and whether republicans can save the g.o.p. from becoming obsolete by attracting this vote by changing policies. >> it could be the biggest political story of 2013, we're moving on to benghazi-gate, and where the republicans are escapeboating susan rice. the utah ambassador who made the disastrous appearances on the sunday talk circuit. then for comic relief, i go
>> in 2004, george w. bush runs 44% of the latino vote. this year mitt romney got a measly 28%. if he had gotten even 35% he would have won the pop already vote, mitt romney, and maybe the presidential election. so for the first time it can be said conclusively, but probably not the last time, the latino vote was decisive in this election. bearing that in mind here is craig with the senior latino senator, bob menendez, democrat of new jersey. >> i think what was incredibly encouraging was to see a significant increase in latino turnout. >> senator men anyone des, --
menendez when you learned the latino vote was the decides factor in the leaks, what was your reaction? >> a coming of aim. -- coming of age, this community has grown so in the country. served in the armed forces of the united states over many, many wores, contributed economically, finally here was the constantly referred to sleeping giant awakening. >> the awakened giant was enormous. 71% of the vote. making the difference in states like florida, virginia, new mexico, and colorado. and all exit polling saying the difference was immigration policy the ugly rhetoric attached to it. >> the republican party didn't understand that even for all of us who are united states citizens, the community knows someone who is a relative, a neighbor, a friend, who is undocumented. and they shared a seasons sense of that play.
they looked at it, is a called them to do as the civil right issue of their time. at the end of the day when you have u.s. citizens citizens andl permanent residents being unlawfully detained in immigration raids you feel like you're a second class citizen. >> the dream act has been floating around for years. republicans introduced the achieve act, yet the hispanic caucus rejected that. why? >> the problem with the achieve act, it doesn't achieve the dream. the dream is to take young people who came here through no choice of their own, their parents brought them, who only flag they recognize and pledge allegiance to is that of the united states, whose only national anthem they know is the star spangled banner, their only country they know is the united states, is a positioned to be a pathway towards earned permanent residency. >> you fought this issue for so long. due think there can be a bipartisan solution? >> for the first time in many years, i am cautiously
optimistic. there is a working group of eight senators, four republicans, four democrats, a similar working group is being put together in the house of representatives, of republicans and democrats. the president, i believe, will use political capital to make this happen. the republicans as a party must clearly read the tea leaves and the results of the election and understand that we need to think about this in a different way. >> both ronald reagan and george w. bush viewed latinos as natural republicans, socially conservative, family and church oriented, but since the coming of the tea party, latinos have been turned off to the g.o.p. by its harsh and sometimes extreme rhetoric on border control and immigration. now, as geraldo wrote in this 2008 book, if latinos keep turning out and voting democratic at the same rate, may
never be a republican president. >> i got a copy, and i was prescient. >> it's in the national interest0s of the ute. it's in the national security interests of the united states. it's in the national economic interests of the united states. to achieve comprehensive immigration reform. >> craig joins us live. craig, especially where you are, not all latinos are democrats. >> that's right. er geraldo, we're here in the jiminez cigar lounge in new york, which is a third latino, and peter is a third-generation latino and believes illegal immigrants should go back to the end over the line. >> they paid their fines, and they are patiently waiting for the chance. now, what type of message are you sending to the people who did it legally? you did it the right way.
get to the back of the line. >> the back of the line. so the republicans here but they disagree with peters are opinion. you're an immigration attorney. what is your opinion? >> me and peter argue this a lot. the same world at ellis island was open. and a new system has to come into effect and that's the american dream act. it's a process where these students and immigrants become legal in this country to do what they need to do to move forward so we can move forward when we came to this country. >> other people you voted for obama? >> very quick. >> yes, i am for this. i believe the creek act will allow dreamers to make a positive contribution the economy. >> the opinions vary as minute as the different cigars they make here in jiminez tobacco. >> bring me back a cigar. coming up. the most ferocious illegal
>> back live. bipartisan ended because of vehement objections by my next guest, tom sanc redo. welcome. i'm in the studio with three dream act kids. are you willing to concede their point of view won big-time this election and yours lost? >> no. their point of view had nothing to do with the outcome of this election because in fact time after time after time, poll after poll after poll tells us that hispanics in america do not vote on immigration as their primary issue. it's about the seven or eighth
thing. it is not important to them, they vote in large part for a lot of the same reasons other americans vote, and unfortunately for republicans they vote for bigger government, and an expanded state. >> you're not reading the same polls i am. >> i see all the polls, geraldo, every one of them. >> that was the number one -- >> nothing to do with it -- >> -- stopping block for people crossing the aisle to vote republican. >> if we passed the dream act, geraldo, would you have voted for romney? >> yes, as a matter of fact i endorsed romney -- >> oh, come on. >> you asked me, i'm telling you. i endorsed romney-ripe but because of immigration i was voting for obama-biden, because of immigration. >> you are unique in that respect. most people, most latinos didn't when they tell pollsters why
they vote, they i'm voting because of the economy, because of jobs. all of the same reasons that everybody else gives. immigration is down by four or five. >> i got you. here's diana. you're from columbia, how old are you. >> 15. >> how old when you came here. >> eight years old. >> would you have this child deported now? >> no. i wouldn't do anything about it. it's not my responsibility. her parents made a decision. they're going to have to live with it. it will play itself out, both the courts and legislation. but it's irrelevant in terms of this issue, because republicans being forced to deal with its this way -- >> it's not irrelevant. >> it is. i wish it were. >> i wish it were if reality. >> you're going to doom the party to objects lessen. >> you want me to be this antiimmigration, horrible gait
who hates latinos. it's not true. >> the distinct of point of screw that i do and they do and that the 71% of the latino voters did. >> but they voted for obama for different reasons. they will vote democrat no matter what the republicans do. we may pick up five or circumstance percent, that's great. and i would do everything i possibly could to make sure that the republican message gets through to majority -- to as many hispanics and latino voters as possible, and that is that, you know what? a lot of the things you came here to escape, a lot hoff the problems of the country you came here to escape are the things democrats are going to put in place. >> congressman, don't goway. we'll have more with you and our dreams. the second most
-- "geraldo at large." >> scapegoating susan and grooving with grover are coming up, first we're coining with former colorado congressman tom tancredo, and now children who came here with their parents. >> cassandra, are you afraid that you will be deported? do you live in fear of that? certainly prior the president's executive order. >> well, geraldo, i do.
mostly because this is my home lean and i have lived 12 years here. >> how old when you were brought here. >> six. >> from mexico? >> yes. >> as you have seen other youngsters being deported, does that make you live in a perpetual panic? >> yes, because i wonder each time when it's going to be my turn, and i'm afraid i don't want that to come. >> now, you're from south korea, how old were you when your parents brought you here? >> one year old. >> how old are you now? >> 32, so 31 years ago. >> you have lived all that anytime fear of deportation. >> yes, and i hope that we're trying to do something right now so we don't always have to live in fear. >> you should know that most of the illegal immigrants coming in now are from asia, rather than from latin america, particularly mexico. but congressmann tancredo, how do we -- a better question. don't you think the republican party could have been more
compassion nat. conciliatory and practical for youngsters like this? everybody wants them to have a fair shake, don't they? >> yeah. absolutely. nobody is -- i don't know anyone who looks at these kids and go, they should be thrown out of the country. because they're parents brought them here? i sympathize entirely. i truly do i know that -- maybe it's hard for people to believe but die. i understand the problem. and, yes, absolutely, is there a way to work through this? i think so. but my only point, geraldo is, it will not change the political dynamics because the reason that we have this fight going on about immigration is political. all of the people you had on here, representative sanchez and the senator. they know that the issue for them is poll -- politics. if all the people we're bringing
into the country would vote republican, you would not see this great enthusiasm on their side for expanding immigration or anything else. it a political decision. because they know for the most part the people coming will vote democrat, and it really doesn't matter what the republicans do. that's me only message the republicans. do what you want to do compromise where you want to compromise. do not believe this wail change the voting dynamic. >> i disagree. marco rubio, elected in florida, elected in texas you have susannah martinez, governor of new mexico, all republicans. i think you're on the wrong side. i have to go. >> there are motive elected republicans -- hispanic republicans than hispanic democrats elected office. that should tell you something. we have a
>> does the uncompromising grover nordquist still stand for consecutives. my next guess, the author of a book,. let's go to grover's position. where do you stand on that? some republicans dessert the new new taxes pledge if that's the only way to make a deal? >> they should not dessert the no new tacks pledge. and hurt the end game for democrats is to have the fiscal clive. it's not something i'm reading tea leaves on. take a look at a new yorker article in the middle of this year by ryan liza.
he spoke to a number of obama people and they said unless republicans break the no-tax pledge they want to go into a fiscal cliff. they believe there will be a short recession and at the end of the recession the economy will go sky high and people well railize that big government is good soup. they believe that use, you have a
>> we knew that those with ties to al qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy issue and clearly the information given to the american people was wrong. and in fact ambassador rice said today it was wrong. >> we are significantly troubled by the answers we got and we didn't get, certainly overwhelming evidence. >> he is a member of the senate foreign relations committee which would consider the confirmation of ambassador susan rice if the president were to
nominate ambassador rice to succeed hillary clinton as secretary of state. but senator johnny isaacson of georgia said he would not confirm her. why? >> i don't think she is confirmable right now because of the lack of information we have on the entire benghazi issue, from the administration. susan rice is the tip of the sphere. the administration has put her there. there are unanswered questions why we didn't have security for christy veins, why we couldn't get security there why it took so long to admit it was terrorist attack. so the president has putter in a difficult position, floating her name as secretary of state but not nominating her and having her come to thisol and do interviews with unanswered questions. it's unfair. >> are you making her the scapegoat, senator? >> no. we're trying to get the answers. every single member, even senator graham and senator mccain came back and said
they're willing to listen to her. they have had a difficult meeting this week. susan collins still has questions. i have questions, and i'm sure the american people do. so we need to get the benghazi situation behind us, get the facts out, and make sure we never lose an american ambassador again because our defense mechanisms were asleep at the switch. >> since the cia says they were the one who developed the talking points, and she merely recited the talking points, why blame her for failing either in the intelligence community or in the larger obama administration? >> well, you have to ask the question, why did it take the cia two months from the attack to finally say we're the one that scrubbed the documents given to her. we really knew all along or there was a terrorist based attack, and i if that's the case we have to find out who knew what, when, why we didn't take action and have the he ability to protect the united states ambassador. >> would you be precise? what exactly do you want to know? >> i want to know why the
documents didn't contain the correct information from the beginning, or at least weren't corrected in real-time within a few days of the attack when we knew and have heard testimony the united states knew it was an al qaeda-based attack and was not a spontaneous attack, and why for now almost 11 weeks we sat here with misinformation and slowly but surely getting disclosures, first from clapper, and then secretary of state's office, to decollect attention away from the overall. we need an investigation, the facts on the table, get susan rice off the point of the spear and get the facts before the congress of the united states. >> do you feel it's possible the president of the united states ordered that this attack be put in the context of a spontaneous demonstration to save his own image as an al qaeda killer? >> well, let me answer that question this way in the absence of the administration tells us what were the facts, you have to
consider if the real story wasn't told during a political campaign the reperuse to keep the subject off the front page office the paper but that's an assumption. we don't have the facts to know for sure. >> would you be mollified in any way if the president were to announce tomorrow that we got the bastars who did this? >> that would help but it doesn't answer why we lost our first ambassador since 1979 because we couldn't protect him and didn't have the intelligence to proe protect tim and why we were sill in benghazi when the britts and other countries left as well. >> thank you very much. >> my condolences to my friend senator isaacson, he was hoping profoundly georgia would beat alabama in the sec championship football game but the bulldogs got beaten by the crimson tide, 32-28 in the last-second,
hart-stopping thriller so it's alabama, not georgia, verse notre dame for the national championship. here's my question for my next guest. are susan rice and joe kelly being scapegoated by grumpy old congressmen? that's next. look, if you have copd like me, you know it can be hard to breathe, and how that feels. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open for 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. spiriva handihaler tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help
personally. she doesn't take crapola from anybody . she said it was a dog and pony show geraldo. i never seen anything like it >> do you feel sorry for her? or should she be held to a high standard. >> i absolutely feel sorry for her. she gave us information that we know was not true. she was begin unclassified talking points from the cia. look at them and put them in her purse and go rogue and say i think it might have been another thing and speculating on the cause, something we can do. but she has un ambassador, she had to deliver talking points she was given. i don't think it is fair she is blamed for this. >> what do you think of paula broadwell being flirtacious
and salacious vamp and same with jill kelly . sexy, and seductive, what do you think about them getting. >> there are two of her. twov her she has a twin. if they were short, fat unattractive people not in the position of power, we would have lost interest in all of my feeling about the petraeus scandal. i feel something when i look at. q. in the end of it, what did it mean? i have yet to see a smoking gun here to be -- just the affair. >> you have the men, two powerful generals, john allen and david petraeus helpless victims to these sirens. >> first of all no one brought up. jill kelly is a narcisist and
and publicity hound. insped of going to the f.b.i.. why didn't she call petraeus and say by the way, i am getting strange e-mails from an anonymous source. as your buddy, what do you think of this? she went straight to the f.b.i.. what an idiot. she was wanting publicity . the girl is broke! >> you don't feel bad for them like the tight clothes reviewed. >> don't feel bad for them. she is a vixen and a siren and loved the publicity. did you see her coming in and out of the house and flailing her hair and in and out of her car she liked the publicity. broadwell was in serious deep stuff and she hid away. you can see jill kelly looking
out of her window and she hired a publicity lawyer and did charity work to show her in the favorable light. she is biggest -- ever. >> finally tonight, i was surprised by my friends at fox and friends on friday morning when they told me i had gangnum style. ♪ who knew i could dance. hey sexy lady. ♪ ♪ open gangnum tile. ♪ hey sexy lady.