Skip to main content

tv   Your World With Neil Cavuto  FOX News  January 10, 2017 1:00pm-2:01pm PST

1:00 pm
the nahs dark hit an all-time high, 21, the dow is off about 25. "your world with neilca vupt owe," coming up. >> welcome everybody. >> neil: this is a world of hearings. nine planned at a minimum. two of them going on con currently today. a break in the one for jeff sessions, he is donald trump's pick to be the next attorney general of the united states. they have had rough questions for him. but so far, they've not really played a glove on him as they say. so his appointment to that position ultimately is not seemingly in began jer. the real fireworks could come tomorrow. it's not done today. but tomorrow we'll see new jersey senator corey booker in the rare case of testifying gains fellow senator. we have not seen something like
1:01 pm
that in the better part of a century, slalted for tomorrow. the one you're watching right now, confirmation hearings, general john kelly for homeland security. senator carper among those doing introductions on the general's behalf saying that he would be the right man for the right mission at the right time. all of this as we're preparing for what could be a big day tomorrow. the kelly hearings should wrap up today. no guarantee. the only one slated for more than one day is jeff sessions 24e6789 took a break and will be returning. among the news items that came out, was that he would recuse himself if a clinton e-mail investigation were to ensue. he didn't rule out the possibility of appointing a special prosecutor but he didn't favor it either. he said that it is a possible witness. -- possibility. he won't to say in the jeff sessions hearing, you're watching the general kelly hearing right now, but in the sessions hearing he did say that
1:02 pm
same-sex marriage although he's opposed to the supreme court decision, he would accept it, the same with roe v. wade, which he said is the law of the land and unconstitutional in his hands. though he dodged any talk of how he would change that or move as attorney general to change that, that he would recognize the law of the land across the country. he has also said that religious liberty would be a priority for him as would immigration reform, honoring the nation's laws already on the books o that subject, he has been dragged in repeatedly on these issues, at the prosecutorial overreach on the department of the justice department, but one thing that senator sessions made clear in case any of these things got heated, if it's the law of the land i will honor it. again and again and again despite about a half dozen protest outburst, most with those saying he was a racist. even though it was the senator who spearheaded action against
1:03 pm
ku klux klan cases that popped up in alabama, including that of a man who was a member of the ku klux klan who killed an african-american. and it was, then alabama attorney general jeff sessions who recommended the death penalty for that clan member. that was then, this is now. nothing that seems to interfere with either appointment, both for the attorney general want-to-be, that is jeff sessions, or john kelly for homeland security. tomorrow, before we resume the kelly hearing and let mr. kelly speak here, we will have rex tillerson, the head of exxon-mobil, slalted for secretary of state. already republican critics are building on that one, including john mack cain and lindsay graham. we will have treystry, john price for m. hhs, cia, i could go on and on. this the focus, john kelly for homeland security, making his statement.
1:04 pm
>> i thank them for this service and for their sacrifice. over the past 45 years, i have served my country as an enlisted marine and officer. i have led platoons through decision visions, held senior positions in iraq, served as combatant commander of southern command and as senior military assistant to two of my heros, secretaries gates and panetta. i have worked with our allies, the private sector, independent experts to identify innovative and comprehensive solutions to current and emerging threats. these atimes while varied shared the common characteristics of working within and leading large, complex, and diverse multi-missed organizations. while under great pressure to produce results. i'm humbled once againserve. this time with the wonderful men and women of the department of
1:05 pm
homeland security. as a nation we are rereminded almost daily that the threats to the homeland have not receded in anyway. the challenges to our way of life have not diminished. as i solemnly swore when i entered before the marine corps, if confirmed i will faithfully support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic every second of every day. i believe in america and the principles upon which our country and way of life are guaranteed. i believer in respect, toll rabs and diversity of opinion. i have a profound respect for the law and will always stwrooif to uphold it. i've never had a problem speaking truth to power and i firmly believe those in power deserve full candor in my honest assessment and recommendationles. i also value people that work for me, speaking truth to power. i love my country and will do everything within my power to preserve our liberty, enforce our laws and protect our
1:06 pm
citizens. i recognize the many challenges facing the department, should i be connell firmed look forward to partnering with you to protect the homeland. i look forward to discussing the felt of the department and answering the committee's questions. thank you very much. >> thank you general kelly. twient remind the members i'll limit questions to 7 minutes and be very disciplined in maintaining the 7 minutes. there are questions that i will ask and then reserve the rest of my time and defer to senator -- chairman mccain who has limited time. let me start with the three questions. general kelly, is there anything you are aware in your background that might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been dominated? >> there's nothing, sir. >> do you know of anything personal or otherwise that would prevent from you fully and honorbly discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you are nominated. >> nothing, senator. >> do you agree without reservation to comply with any
1:07 pm
request or summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of congress? >> do i. >> thank you. senator mccain? >> general, as you know we passed legislation on the defense bill prohibiting torture, including walterboarding -- waterboarding. do you intend on follow that law? >> absolutely, senator. >> and what is your personal view of waterboarding and other forms of torture? >> senator, i don't think we should ever come close to crossing the line that is beyond what we as americans would expect to follow in terms of interrogation techniques. >> that would be basically the geneva conventions? >> absolute i, yes, sir, absolutely. >> there's an epidemic in the country, of opiods. it's coming from mexico, manufactured in mexico, regrettably according to information that i have, a lot
1:08 pm
of it is coming across the arizona-mexico border into phoenix, arizona. and being distributed nationwide. as you well know, we are experiencing a dramatic increase in deaths from overdose. this is taking place in older americans, who have turned from oxycontin and other sources. former governor of new hampshire will testify of the really severe aspects of this, what many of called an epidemic. the fundamental belief that if there is demand there will be a supply. what is your view of that situation? >> i would start off saying it's
1:09 pm
amazing to me, but i just found out recently that an old friend who is not so old, 62 years old, just, after a very successful life, just overdosed on heroin. and i think to your point, it's cheaper, more available in many ways than some of the opiods, since she could not apparently get a prescription for what she thought she needed. most americans don't realize it. 100% of the heroin that we consume in the united states is, in fact, produced in mexico. it's creeping down into central america. they have responded, the cartels, the networks, have responded to the demand. so indead of asia, south ash yashg it now is all produced here -- south asia, it's produced in the western hem is fore. poppies are grown in guatemala, colombia. but it is all produced here.
1:10 pm
an awful lot of the opiods, what looks like pharmaceuticals are produced in mexico and pirated up through the border. part of the problem, and this is, i think, the outside my particular area of kwon firm, part of the problem is we are a very very overly medicated society. huge amounts of opiods are prescribed legally for things that, in the past, would probably not receive that level of medication. so the point is, huge problem, getting worse, in the profits, they're just unbelievable to the cartels that control the whole marketing and transport. >> there's been a great deal of conversation about building a wall and it's been my experience that we need to have barriers. but building a wall is not the way to prevent the flow of drugs or people illegally across the
1:11 pm
border. i think it requires ranging from drones to towers to use of some of the technological advantages that we have. if you would just briefly tell us what you think is necessary to have a secure border. >> yes, senator. a physical barrier in and of itself, as a military person that understands defense and defenses, fiscal barrier will not do the job. it has to be really a layered defense. if you were to build a wall from the pacific to the gulf of mexico, you would still have to back that wall up with patrolling by human beings, sensors, observation devices. but as i've said to many of the senators present and i've said for three years, i believe the defense of the southwest border starts about 1500 miles south, that is partnering with some
1:12 pm
great countries as far south as peru, really, that are very cooperative with us in terms of getting after the drug production and transport. very, very good with us, to include mexico. we could have better partnerships, i think we can work closely with them, give them more of what they need. we certainly share intel with them, information with them now. we have legal attaches in many of our embassies, they develop unbelievable amounts -- >> i don't mean to interrupt. but isn't it technology that would help us secure the border as much as anything else? i'm talking about surveillance, talking about capabilities to intercept, but not to just sit there. in other words, the kind of, frankly, the kind of border security that we see in israel. >> technology would be a big parent of it, yes. >> and that tech -- a big part of it. >> would that be drones,
1:13 pm
observation devices? >> you know the aerostats, observation devices mounted in certain terrain, uavs for sure, sensors in places, perhaps, that the wall can't be built or won't be built any time soon in terms of that project. but, yes, sir. >> finally, the morale of our border patrol is not real good. and i think you know from your leadership experiences that if the morale of your force is not good then it's hard to get the mission accomplished. i hope, i know you are aware of that and i hope you spend some time with these really outstanding men and women who are doing arduous work, sometimes under very, very difficult conditions. it's very high on the arizona border. there is morale problems there. a lot has to do with they think
1:14 pm
they're not given the capabilities to do their job as they think they can do it, most efficiently. and i know you will be focusing a lot of attention on that. >> i will, senator. >> senator mccaskill. >> general kelly, on friday the office of director of national intelligence released a declassified report on the assessment of russian activities and intentions in our recent election. to quote from the report, russian efforts to influence the 2016 u.s. presidential election represent the most recent expression of moscow's long standing desire to undermine the u.s.-led liberal democratic order. that these activities demonstrate significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations. we assess russian president vladimir putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 kamd at the u.s. presidential election. russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the u.s.
1:15 pm
democratic process, denigrate secretary clinton and harm her electbilt and potential presidency. we further assess putin and russian government developed a clear preference for president-elect trump. we have high confidence in these judgments. general kelly, do you accept the conclusions of the tin tell generals community regarding russian interference in your election? >> with high confidence. >> on border security, i think that secretary -- senator mccain covered a lot of this. i want to point out that the budget we have annually on border security equals the combined budgets of fbi, atf, dea, secret service, u.s. marshals, plus the entire new york police department budget. $19 billion in fiscal year 2016. fiscal year 2016, we had 331,000 people apprehended at the border.
1:16 pm
almost 50% of those turned themselves in. in other words, all of the border security agents in the world, all of the fences in the world, wouldn't have made any difference, they said hey, take us, we're here, we want asylum. so, i guess my question to you, is do you have it on your agenda to examine the spending priorities of that $19 billion and look at the efficacy of every place we're spending that money, and most importantly how would you address the fact that almost half of the people coming to the border right now, that we're apprehending, are not trying to evade detection. they're just trying to find some place safe. >> on the first question, senator, any time i've ever taken over a new organization, certainly i go talk to them and look hard at how we're doing business. people that would have come before me, if i'm confirmed, did
1:17 pm
a great job. secretary johnson and others. but my typical approach is to do a top to bottom assessment. and i will do that. on the asylum issue, i believe, i'm confident that most of the people that are coming up here from central america are coming here for two reasons. one -- three, probably. one, the first is it is very unsafe. some of the most dangerous countries on the planet. that's unfortunate. because of that, not only because of that, but a lot of social issues are, lack of economic development. then finally, they're very confident. if they pay the money, get on the network, they will get to the united states and they will be in their view at least, unlikely that they will be going back to honduras, guatemala, other countries like that. >> i'll look forward to your assessment and i know we talked in my office about the drug cartels and what big role they have, and the people showing up seeking asylum.
1:18 pm
most of the violence is attributable to that. as opposed to policy lses of the obama added a mshgs. the enhancements on electronic system for travel authorization, i think people don't realize i'm aware of a situation recently where because of the electronic enhancements we were able to stop some one from coming to america that was coming from a visa waiver country to south america, then planning on coming to america and doing us harm. we were able to stop that travel. in fact, since february of 2016, 40,000 individuals have been denied visa free travel due to the enhancements put in place. along with that, as we tried to do preclearance in various countries around the world. so that we are checking people before they get on the plane with maybe some one would call it extreme vetting.
1:19 pm
that is now going on across the globe. have you had a chance to look at that, and do you believe that -- i mean that's really the border that i'm most worried about, people traveling here from visa waiver countries with an eye towards doing our country harm, and our ability to stop them. >> senator, i think that the visa waiver countries clearly are countries that have at least law enforcement and information systems in place that we have confidence in. nothing is perfect. many other countries as you know don't have nearly that kind of system in place and we wouldn't have the confidence there. but nothing is perfect. many countries, again, high degree of confidence that their citizens that come here would not cause problems. but ever vigilant. and in those countries that don't have the systems in place. we somehow have to convince
1:20 pm
ourses that everyone coming here, we have a reasonable expectation that they won't do us harm, whether it's crime, terrorism. >> some of the enhancements put in place are, are you a member of global entry program, have you been present in iraq, sudan, syria, after march 2011. other questions that are part of this. do you believe it's important that we expand this program, the enhancements and the preclearance program? >> i think it's a good idea. i don't know exactly, the details of it. but it would appear a good idea. we have to have confidence in the information we're getting onsite to prevent people that would come here to do us harm. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator mccaskill, our next new member has shown up, senator holburn. i gave up my question slot to senator mccain, i know chairman enzi is managing activity on the
1:21 pm
floor, i'll defer, then get back on schedule. >> i thank the chairman. i do need to go back to the floor. and i do appreciate the chance that i had to meet with general kelly. in my early days here in the senate, there was a change in the makeup of the majority and we became the minority and it created a problem of vacancy in the foreign relations committee. i happened to get that foreign relations committee spot. and they had to redo all of the committees. there was one committee that apparently nobody wanted because i became the ranking member on it. that was just shortly before 9/11. so right after that, i had a lot of people saying, so, how did the new guy get the anti-terrorism committee? i was own a united nations committee that was supposed to find the bad guys. and i guess it was fortunate or maybe unfortunate that just
1:22 pm
about all of us were accountants. so what we did was followed the money. and we got 130 countries involved in it. and several of them found the bad guys and prosecuted the bad guys, in some cases executed the bad guys. it was effective until they figured out what we were doing. you're going to have a huge role in the anti-terrorism area. i think we spend $46 billion on your budget. and we've got to be sure we're finding the bad guys. i would be interested in any approaches that you would be doing to effectively spend that money and develop policy that will help us. >> to the degree that i'm familiar with what is going on already, i think any time that
1:23 pm
we can work with partners overseas, and again we have representatives, "we" meaning the enforcement agency people, in most of the most important countries in this regard around the world. in our embassies. they really do have pretty good -- they have very, very good relationships generally speaking with the local law enforcement, local intel people. anything we can do to, you know, get into that level of information. i know in southern command as an example, most of the intel, most usable intel i got tended to come from the cia -- not cia, f.b.i. and the dea representatives in our embassies. but anything we can do to kind of enhance the information sharing within the law between other countries and ourselves. certainly within our own inner agency.
1:24 pm
we've gotten much better at it since 9/11 in terms of information sharing. one of the things i will definitely get into if confirmed is to find out how well that's going domestically. we have the department has some responsibilities in terms of information sharing. we have an awful lot of great systems in place. i'm not sure, because i don't know if they're all talking to each other and sharing in a way they should be. >> glad you mentioned that. because one of my pet peeves has been that for people coming into the country legally, that we check them in on a series of computers and we check them out on a series of computers. but i'm not sure that we got the computers connected. so that we could know who was here and who wasn't here. i think most effective even forcement is if we find them as soon as their vees ta runs out. -- visa runs out. i hope you put that on your list
1:25 pm
of things to do. recently, i was flying back to wyoming and the person sitting next to me was a member of the border patrol. and he didn't know that i was a senator but i was very curious about how things were going. he had just been to a training session. he had been doing it for quite a while. and he was pretty depressed. i would say, had low morale. told me that they could do a lot of things but because there's rampant law breaking along the border, he felt that orders from washington kind of tied his hands that, they couldn't respond effectively. as a commander, i know you relied on your officers and your troops and you developed plans and you executed misses. in some very difficult situations for keeping the morale of the people who are under you going.
1:26 pm
have you developed any plans for how you're going to check on the border patrol and see if there's morale things that could be changed? >> one of the things i've always done, learned from some of the finest leaders, certainly in the u.s. military. you have to get out and about, you have to get out and figuratively speaking kick the tires, move around. interesting you make that point. i was just prior to my leaving active duty because i worked so closely with homeland security and law enforcement, even though mexico wasn't in my area of interest, i took a trip up to el paso. in uniform, just went to the port of entry, met with some officers there, just to thank them and to tell them from my position in the south they were doing a great job. met with some of the border patrol folks. same thing. when you say things like, listen, just how are things going, pull out a tape recorder because you're going to find
1:27 pm
out. that's very, very important way to find out about things. encourage people to speak truth to power from the bottom up. and certainly, any time the whistle blower calls in and makes an accusation or makes a comment, it's very definitely worth listening. that's how i do business. sometimes you get an earful and wish you hadn't asked the question. but you should always ask the question. >> i appreciate that, i used to be in small business. sitting in an office didn't solve all the problems, you had to get out and see what was happening. thank you for your answers and my time is about to expire. >> thank you, senator enzi. senator carper. >> quick note, we talked about this when you visited with me in my office this week. but there is a unit within the department of homeland security, that goes by an acronism and the acronism is nppd. we talked about people say, what is that. what does that represent.
1:28 pm
there's a lot of confusion, not much understanding. as it turns out, it refers to cyber security. and refers to infrastructure, protection. and it's an agency that's supposed to do both of those. but just by hearing the name you would never know. any thoughts on that? >> well, when i looked at the org chart one of the first question is had, what does that block do. so, i agree. i think it's a name change, not always important, might be in this case. it's been brought up to me a number of times. you did obviously. but other people within the organization. not within homeland security, i've not spoken to anyone in homeland security because of the mou. but people brought it up to me, past members of homeland security. as we talked in your office, we'll take a look at that. >> thank you. i was stationed in san diego for
1:29 pm
a while, ventured into mexico. and there was a time when people were back and forth between southern california and mexico rather easily. and there's a time when there's a huge amount of illegal immigration from mexico into the u.s. i'm told today, there are more mexicans going back to mexico than mexicans coming in to the united states. and why do you spoez that is? are there any lessons from that development, that might be applicable for the immigration of people, large immigration from honduras, guatemala, salvador? >> great question. i have a great deal of experience in central america. i told the people in high regard. and i understand, empathize with their problem. they, for the most part, don't want to come up and leave their homes, their families. but there is a lot of economic -- isn't a lot of
1:30 pm
economic opportunity there. and there's certainly a level of violence that in our country we couldn't imagine. honduras, when i took over in southern command, was the most violent planet by u.n. numbers, most violent country on the planet, 91 deaths per 100,000. our country is about 5. a lot of good work down there. not always perfect. but the president has taken that down by a third. still horrific levels of violence. but my point is, they don't -- most of the time don't come here for any other purpose than to have some economic opportunities and to escape violence. my view, and i stated this for three years when i was at southern command, when i testified before this committee in april, my you view is if we can help them, if we can help them by reducing our drug demand, which is the fundamental problem of many of their problems, by reducing our drug
1:31 pm
demand at the same time helping them improve their police, their militaries are actually pretty good, human rights is -- >> neil: we are monitoring john kelly's hearing. watching the hearings for jor jeff sessions to attorney general. we're getting word now that a verdict has been reached in the dylann roof case. he was the man behind the 2015 massacre at that south carolina church. he had stead again and again unrepentant, i had to do it, i had to do it and i did it. the word today, the only issue here was whether he would get the death penalty or life in prison. that decision has been reached and is going to be announced shortly. separately, though, on these confirmation hearings they're going pretty much as expected. there was some heated
1:32 pm
questioning of jeff sessions for attorney general. but, again, nothing that would shake confidence that he is going to be approved for that job even though the fireworks could come tomorrow when we're told new jersey senator cory booker will be in the unusual role of testifying against a fellow senator. that is something we simply have not seen in the better part of a century in washington. so far, so good for donald trump's picks for the two key cabinet positions. at least half dozen more continuing tomorrow with rex tillerson at state. we're going to have steve macu. nuchin, tom price for hhs, and cia. before we get to that, i want to step back. behind the scenes, over at the trump tower, there have been machinations to republicans and their legislative strategy. not the least of which is how to proceed with repealing the healthcare law. you might recall rand paul on this very show, the kentucky senator said he thought it would
1:33 pm
be a good idea even though he hates the law as much as his fellow republicans, to have repeal vote in place with a simultaneous replacement. he said he would bounce it off the president-elect trump and trump agreed. that would be a good idea. lo and behold, donald trump earlier today indicates he would be open to a quick repeal followed by a replacement measure in quick order. the read on all of these cross-currents right now is speaker ryan, has said that he would lean now in favor of a concurrent move on healthcare, repealing the measure and then finding a replacement. it is confusing. republican kentucky governor matt bevin joining us, thank you for taking the time, governor. i guess there's confusion -- >> you're welcome, neil, happy new year. >> neil: confusion, where you have the majority leader, mitch mcconnell, advocating steady as she goes. ranld paul say ig don't like the way we're going about it as republicans.
1:34 pm
do you have any thoughts on this healthcare matter? >> i think in general, the majority of americans are with senator paul in theory. that is if you're going to replace something, do it at the time that you repeal that which you're going to be replacing. to do this simultaneously, i think, makes great sense. i think some of the receipt sense, hesitancy, maybe speaker ryan, maybe president-elect trump is driven by the sense that there may not be the will among the elected officials in congress to move this quickly. it's unfortunate, but i think that may be the reality. whether people like interest or not reality has to come in to play. so to that end, i think there are people wanting to not overpromise and then end up underdelivering. people in theory like the idea of repealing and replacing but they're also being pragmatic in trying to find the best way forward. i think all people are not as far apart as these three seeming choices would indicate.
1:35 pm
>> neil: the general rule of thumb, there was an agreement within the party, governor, on how to replace it. but all were in agreement about repealing it. rand paul said the measure and mechanism we're considering budget resolution would make the deficit worse and debt worse. do you share his concern about that and any boomerang on your state? >> you know, it will affect our state, it will affect every state. we're a state that happens to be a recipient state. of all of our medicaid costs, for example, we as a state only pay 30%, 70% is paid by the federal government. any measure taken at the federal level that affects healthcare is going to have a very significant impact on kentucky. so, i personally would like to see us come to a conclusion where we can replace it at the very same time that we repeal it f that is not practical then let's at least get out of the way and come up with the very
1:36 pm
best approach that we can. >> neil: governor, you've been pushing, making kentucky a right to work state, changing the way typically states look at their public workforce, more to the point. update us. >> i mean, as it stands as of this week, we are now a right to work state, we're the 27th right to work state. we were the last state mount south to have not passed this. the tuchbt costs to us was high -- opportunity costs from an economic development standpoint. cfos and ceos repeatedly stated when asked that they do not want to expand in or move to a state that's not a right to work state. this was always a detriment to us, relative to states around us. that's been remedied. just this week our legislature did the following things. we repealed the prevailing wage requirement in the state. we passed right to work legislation. and we passed paycheck protection. all three of these empower the individual, empower the
1:37 pm
employee, encourage the employer, and create a better economic possibility for, in this case, the commonwealth of kentucky. i'm excited. it is a fantastic, new day here in kentucky. >> neil: obviously a lot of union protests, this is something that is familiar in states that led such efforts, governor scott walker comes to mind. but the union guys say that you let them down and shafted them. what are you saying? >> i think that's absolutely not substantiated by the facts. i encourage, frankly, people who are still confused by this to look at the actual lay of the land. if you look at the fastest growing union membership, it's only in states that are right to work. interestingly, the five fastest growing states in america for union membership, increasing, are right to work state. tennessee, number one in the country. the state of indiana put right to work back in 2012, has 50,000 union jobs than they did in 2012. michigan we've seen a similar trend.
1:38 pm
wages increase, employment goes down, and there's more opportunities for both union and non-union workers align. alike. when there are jobs there will be good jobs for people regardless of union opportunities. >> neil: if this is a little different than wisconsin, where you aren't sort of reinventing the books, you are allowing people a choice, right? >> that's exactly right. we are giving people the ability to not be forced to be participants in a union. in our state, prior to the enactment of this law, it was in some shops that were unionized a condition of employment. there's nothing more american than having the freedom of choice. there's nothing more unamerican than being forced to be a member of something and then adding insult to injury, to be forced to pay for that membership in something you may not actually want. we now empower the worker, an empowered worker is good for an employer. whether that employer is a union
1:39 pm
shop or not, empowered employees have proven time and again to be more effective, more efficient, and more productive. >> neil: i ask every governor of a state that becomes a right to work state, i'll ask you this as well, governor, if you'll indulge me, the read from unions that say that's fine for the governor to say, because all of these who didn't want to be part of the union are benefitting from the contracts that our efforts made panel. -- made possible. >> certainly for those that are, right now, under current contract, nothing changes. it would be for -- on a going-forward basis that is a possibility. and when contracts are renegotiated, this law would apply in those instances. their argument might, in fact, be proven correct. the counter point that i have said and would say to those who might take that to be gospel, if the unions offer for the $1, $2, $3 a day they charge in dues,
1:40 pm
something that justifies why they're charging those deuce, people will gladly pay them. people pay $3, $4, $5 for a cup of coffee, they're getting value. they'll pay less than that for union deuce if the union is delivering to collective bargaining other things, the types of things they ever historically offered and say they're offering going forward. the onus is on the union to justify and prove the value proposition to the individual worker who would gladly pay if the value proposition is there. >> neil: i know you're focused as you should be what's going on in your fine state of kentucky. you also are a rising star in the republican party. and your win proved that when you were polling quite a ways back of your opponent and scored a comfortable victory. if you'll indulge me on what's going in washington, republic answer might have stumbled out of the gate. i don't mean to disparage the party. but with the ethics committee
1:41 pm
issue, obviously hadn't been run by donald trump, they shelved that. now talk that the big tax cut, after meeting, might not be as big or timely as earlier envisioned that, can change. now, on this privilege on the, whatever you call it, the pivot on healthcare, whether it's going to be repeal, then repeal quickly, not so quickly, you get the idea that it's sending mixed messages to people. i'm wondering, if it concerns you for your party, that it is the message isn't consistent. >> it doesn't concern me and i'll tell you why. what donald trump is realizing, and in fact i'm sure already knew, what the american people know deep down even though some of them wish it were not the case. what i have come to realize as governor of the state, no one individual, whether a governor or in his case an incoming president as a magic wanld. there is no ability to say we'll do x and will that that happens. that's what monday are can is
1:42 pm
do. we're not a monarchy, we're a democracy. donald trump has to do exactly what i have had to do in kentucky, work with the duly elected legislative body. both the house and the senate. who may in their own respective caucuses not agree even among the each other, let alone with one another. there are many moving parts, that is the greatness of america that, is the challenge of america. frankly, great leaders thread the needle. it takes time. there's nothing being said about donald trump and this incoming administration that was not said the a more microcosm level about our administration. everybody can easily throw stoenls. they can say when's not working perfectly. where somebody said x and now they're doing y. this has ever been thus. i have substitute confidence. i'm not concerned. mike pence, directed primary responsibility for the transition team, is brilliant. he is an executive. he is somebody with legislative experience in washington.
1:43 pm
he's a man of the highest integrity. and i have confidence that this is going to be one of the greatest administrations we've seen in our lifetime. >> as you know tonight, sir, the president is going to give his swan song speech in chicago. i know you're busy in kentucky. fox business network will carry it live. i know you don't have it. you really will regret it, hopefully you'll watch it. leaving that aside, you think he was a great president? you talk about great leaders. do you think he was? >> he being who? >> neil: the president of the united states, barack obama. >> i'm sorry, the outgoing one. >> neil: the outgoing one? >> i don't think he was a great president, i don't even think he was a good president. i don't think he was overly productive. when you elect some one, regardless of their charisma, regardless of ability to string phrases together, if the most
1:44 pm
experience they have ever had is community organizing, america's in for a tough run. the business community is in for a tough run. the ability to rely on, accountbly, the kind of things that are neededtor wis to be successful are in for a tough run. we had a tough run. for all of the hype and the fluff it's not been a good eight years for america relative to our standing in the world and relative even to our standing among the ourselves. i believe there's a chance to chart a new direction. i haven't been that impressed with president barack obama. not anything personal, i just think he's highly ineffective president and one who has done more to undermine some of the very core principles and pillars of america. you talk about wasted opportunity. race relations, he is a man that could have done more than anyone in history and he not only missed that opportunity, he exacerbated a problem that existed whether he came in. >> neil: i'll put you downs on a maybe on barack obama, then. thank you, happy new year to you, good seeing you again. >> thank you, sir.
1:45 pm
>> neil: governor matt bevin of the great state of kentucky. the president will be speaking around 9:00, 8:55, join fox business network, we'll gauge foreign market reaction in what he says as final words as president of the united states. more after this. just by looking in my eyes. they can tell when i'm really excited and thrilled. and they know when i'm not so excited and thrilled. but what they didn't know was that i had dry, itchy eyes. but i knew. so i finally decided to show my eyes some love. some eyelove. when is it chronic dry eye? to find out more, chat with your eye doctor and go to myeyelove.com. it's all about eyelove, my friends.
1:46 pm
1:47 pm
i'm val. the orange money retirement squirrel from voya. i represent the money you save for the future. who's he? he's the green money you can spend now. what's up? gonna pay some bills, maybe buy a new tennis racket. he's got a killer backhand. when it's time to get organized for retirement, it's time to get voya.
1:48 pm
>> neil: we will know shortly whether dylan roff, the man behind the charleston, south carolina church massacre that took out nine precious lives, will be living in prison for the rest of his life or executed. that's coming momentarily. when we know it, we will let you know. dylan roof is arguing on his own behalf as his own lawyer. he didn't call any with its and said in the end to jurors, i still feel like i had to do it. i stid it. -- i did it. the only wrinkle here, whether
1:49 pm
he is in prison for the rest of his life or executed. we're focusing on two hearings going concurrently, two cabinet picks for donald trump, senator jeff sessions, for attorney general. and retired general john kelly, to be homeland security secretary, expected to wrap up today. no guarantees. at least six others are planned for this week. up to seven or eight, is an aggressive republican confirmation hearing rollout, if it goes aspected. i do want to take to you the one that's making more news and generating more controversy, that is for jeff sessions, a day i head of what will be day two for them, that will feature new jersey senator cory booker in the unusual position of testifying against a fellow senator. that's tomorrow. this is the hearing ongoing for jeff sessions today. >> the department of justice is tasked with protecting voepter rights and prosecuting fraud.
1:50 pm
if millions upon millions of fraud lenlt votes why cast i imagine the next attorney general would be quite concerned about that. did the president elect tell you anything about what caused him to come to this conclusion? >> i have not talked to him in -- about that in any depth, particularly since the election. >> um-hum. so he didn't share any evidence of voter fraud with you? i would imagine as the man who once -- that he wants to make responsible for come batting fraud at the ballot box, he would want to make sure you had all the evidence necessary to take action and protect the vote. he didn't do that evidently. before we move on, i should note for the record that state election and law enforcement officials surveyed in mid-december, found virtually no credible reports of fraud. among the nearly 138 million votes that were cast.
1:51 pm
>>. >> neil: dylan roof has been sentenced to death, in the charleston, south carolina. the man behind the killing of nine churchgoers at a prae dominantly black church in charleston, south carolina. acted as his own lawyer without calling any with its in his own defense. the only issue, whether he would be facing life in prison or death. it is death. jonathan is here with more. >> dylan roof looked down with his hands folded as the jury read its verdict. they agreed to all of the prosecution's allegations against him that he willfulfully committed these murders, hated african-americans, that was a hate crime, then they handed down their decision that dylan roof, indeed, should be sentenced to death. the jury had to come up with a unanimous individual on the sentence in order for him to be sentenced to execution.
1:52 pm
otherwise, the default sentence would have been life in prison without the possibility of release. earlier today, dylann roof acting as his own attorney, delivered his own closing argument. his closing argument lasted for only five minutes. he quietly asked the jury to give him a life sentence. and then rhetorically asked the jury, quote, wouldn't it be fair to say that the prosecution hates me because they're trying to give me the death penalty. anyone who hates anything in their mind has a good reason for it. sometimes that's because they've been misled and sometimes it isn't. but i would say that in this case, the prosecution along with anyone else who hates me are the ones who have been misled. in his brief closing argument, dylann roof argued he was not filled with hapt as the prosecution allege, but the lead prosecutor in the says delivering a closing argument that lasted a little bit longer than two hours, argued that roof
1:53 pm
remained unrepen tanlt and reminded jurors as recently as this very trial he had attended some of the hearings walking into the courtroom wearing shoes with hand written racist symbols on them. obviously the jurors were persuaded by the prosecution's case and their closing argument agreeing that dylann roof should pay the ultimate penalty for killing nine members of emmanuel ame church in 2015. neil? >> neil: thank you. former defense attorney jeg jarrett on what he makes of this. gregg jarrett, he didn't express much remorse for this. but even when a death penalty is handed down, it can take some time. >> yes, it can. this is pretty quick. dylann roof himself pounded the nail in his own coffin, he was model of ineptitude when he
1:54 pm
delivered a stilted five-minute closing argument in front have the jury, offering no remorse which might have ban mitigating factor. instead there were myriad of ak ra vating factors that -- aggravating factors, pre-medcation. it was especially cruel and heinous and atrocious. there were multiple killings. all of those are aggravating factors. nobody called to the witness stand, expert for example, who could have argued a mitigating factor like a psychiatric expert who could have said, well, he suffers from, you know, a mental disease or defect. he's not insane. but he has a diminished capacity. somebody else who says he has, you know, intellectual deficiencies. those would be minute gating factors. nobody called to the witness stand, like a criminal justice expert to make the argument always it was made in the boston marathon bombing death penalty case, if the harsher, more
1:55 pm
severe punishment that would put somebody in a cage for the rest of their life, a quick, painless death by lethal injection. none of that was here. it is no surprise that within two or three hours this jury voted unanimously, neil, for death. >> neil: gregg, what happens, there are many of those who even when it's not requested will either, you know, against the death penalty, they will advocate on mr. roof's behalf to stall that or go through the legal process to keep this thing dragging out. how likely is that? you see it often with the death penalty cases where it can go on for years. >> it can. although, about a decade ago the federal government tried to put in an expedited method. timothy mcveigh is one individual who waived his right to appeal. he was put to death fairly quickly. that can happen here.
1:56 pm
my guess is will be a new team of lawyers, they will make all kinds of claims that dylann roof shouldn't have been allowed to represent himself, which is a speeshs argument, the sixth amendment gives him the unfettered right to represent himself. and he did so. and the judge was absolutely certain to put it on the record that it was a knowing and intelligent, volunteer waiver by dylann roof to have his own counsel. the judge, even though he made that waiver, made sure that stand-by counsel was there to assist him every step of the way. so that's not going to be an argument ta's a winner for dylann roof. >> neil: we're getting word that some of the family members of the victims will be talking to the press very, very shortly. what was remark an as you pointed out, was how peaceful their response was, not vindictive at all, which flew in the face of so many other
1:57 pm
incidents. where it ignited riots and disturbances. nothing like that here. so it added to the great sense of loss. i'm sure many family members of those killed that day are against the death penalty itself and might regret the decision. >> they are. >> neil: might have favored a life in prison sentence. >> yes, some of the family members of the victims had been very public about how they didn't want retribution in this form to take a life for a life. nine different lives. but look, it's not up to them. it's up to these 12 jurors. and they were all death penalty qualified, which means they answered in response to the question, can you, if it comes to a sentence somebody to death, they all said yes, we can. we can judge fairly and confidently the evidence presented within the four walls of the form. and that's what unfolded here over the course of several weeks. the guilty phase, and now the
1:58 pm
death penalty phase, sentenced to execution. >> neil: now, no remorse here as oudz the part of dillon roff, that was largely expected, he telegraphed it to the jurors in the last waning days of this. weird, you know. >> he had this manifesto of hate, racial hatred, that was in both his handwriting and online. and then his videotaped confession, in which he -- hate was spewing from his mouth. he offered absolutely no regret or remorse. even today, at the end during his closing argument as he was standing just a few feet from the jury box, he basically said i can't tell you i regret what i did. he still hates, today. and that came across clearly to the jurors who sentenced him to death. it's a very, very strange case. and it's sad case for all of
1:59 pm
those who lost their lives. not to mention the survivors here. it's a tough thing, i talked to so many jurors who sentenced people to death. it haunts them for the rest of their lives. >> neil: gregg jarrett, thank you. again, this pretty much as expected, this man behind the shootings in the church, is going to die. and closing arguments, he said some really revealing things. i think that it's safe to say that no one in their right mind wants to go into a church and kill people. and my confession to the f.b.i., i told them i had to do it. obviously that's i didn't have to do it. no man made me do it. what i meant with i said that was i felt like i had to do it. going on to tell a local affiliate wciv, and i still feel like i had to do it. that hatred, that rage, that is why that young man is going to be put to death. good night.
2:00 pm
>> hello, everyone. i am kimberly guilfoyle along with juan williams, dana perino, greg gutfeld. this is "the five" ." this is a fox news alert. big day on capitol hill. two cabinet nominees take the hot seats for their confirmation hearings. jeff sessions is testifying before the senate judiciary committee and retired marine corps general john kelly, nominee for secretary of homeland security, is being questioned by the senate homeland security committee. 11 republicans and nine mo

97 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on