Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And has commented on a number of different things he's they're choosing not to comment thoughts on this.
And they are choosing to speak it -- Planned Parenthood not -- the keynote address spot but Friday morning.
It's just an -- decision.
It is as I said.
On the broadcast I really think -- choosing any sort of pro choice outfit.
To go speak to one -- had been good to his candidates or his reelection campaign is one thing that Planned Parenthood is really in the cross hairs of this.
Trial the story around it.
And and and I think the fact that.
-- Planned Parenthood leader in Pennsylvania has admitted.
That they knew of this clinic and what was going on there from stories there are receiving from women seeking services at their clinics after going to Gaza health clinic.
And not actually following up on that -- themselves.
Really says something about Planned Parenthood not only that the in the testimony from the planned parent represented.
In the trial it's a very.
It's a very controversy all.
Issue and it's it's -- it's a very toxic case.
Four up pro choice defenders.
It is one where they need to make.
Their you know their opinions.
Clear about whether or not they believe that these that this clinic should be regulated the proper services be provided and just what is.
Abortion what is murderer.
Of of a born alive -- this is really the problem for president.
Obama is that by going to the Planned Parenthood.
Group -- speaking of them these questions will continue to dog him he kicked it she tried to do the safe legal and rare.
President Clinton wine which is fine but.
It really you know just saying if he violated medical ethics I mean at some point Planned Parenthood is involved in this case somewhat tangentially but involved.
And is really going to be heavily criticized for an associated with -- -- I think the President Obama could pick another pro.
Choice you know outfits it to be speaking to which -- -- -- -- -- -- I think it's going to be very tough for -- -- defense.
-- you know there are some people typing in here that.
Pointing out that George W.
Bush who is obviously and always has been and his presidency.
Before and after pro life.
Even in the pro life rallies in Washington address those -- Charles.
Never really went there and and address them.
It was always a kind of even though he supported that.
-- supported them there was still a distance there.
I guess -- these people who are making the point.
It's a little different.
And that tradition that of bush continued.
Goes all the way back to Ronald Reagan was the first marches on life and he decided not to attend -- to do it by.
Remote controlled by.
By a photo video or whatever and I think it reflects the fact that this is an issue of such emotions have some moral.
Divided the country were people of goodwill in the two sides.
Are so analyzing where they really isn't a solution.
That the wise way to approach if you were president and you have to be a president of the whole country.
Is to show respect for either.
Side and not to completely.
Sort of throw the way to the government on one side or another.
Even though that the position of the Republican administration -- of pro life one.
But I do think -- this administration Obama administration.
They really are going the way you -- extreme we saw -- Obama care they are demanding.
Like Catholic hospitals or Catholic Charities for example.
View of a -- Contraception.
And basically the morning after pill to be subsidized and included in any health care plan -- That it goes against the deepest beliefs.
Both Catholics and other believers.
That's a pretty extreme step.
And -- and -- with the reaction from the Catholic church and from other institutions was a rather strong one as a way of saying.
You've kind of stepped over the -- the line that we have.
It's not a and announced line but it's an accepted -- -- where you don't go over it as a way of imposing your views on the other.
And this is a case where -- -- president cannot say.
That if an infant is born alive it is wrong to let it die -- -- to -- it.
And I think he stepped over a second line.
Steve last word on this.
I guess now you know we we had a story about the media not covering this story.
And frankly it was an unbelievable part of this story that that.
Whole organizations wouldn't touch the story for a long time now they are covering it.
Now the White House as -- it has changed this this speech do you think the heads.
That has something to do with that the timing of the speech they say that.
The president wants to spend more time Texas -- the families and you know -- that at face value but.
Obviously it's a less prominent speech in Friday morning that it is there's -- as the keynote.
Well far be it for me to be cynical.
Yeah but yeah I think it probably did have something to do with the change.
Change timing the president's speech it's it's less prominent as you suggest.
I think it's remarkable if we stopped for a moment and think about where we were last fall and where we are today on the politics of abortion.
Last fall it was the case the Democrats wanted to talk about abortion anywhere.
All the time their convention was basically.
You know every other speech was something about.
Abortion or contraception or what have you.
The president when he whenever he could talk about it talk about obviously -- a way to try to to get out the women's vote.
If you look where we are now -- even though the got -- trial hasn't gotten nearly the amount of attention I think it warrants.
It's clear that the -- lot of attention that it has has shifted the ground and that's the White House is now I think tiptoeing around the issue.
You've got other democratic politicians were reluctant to talk about abortion you've got.
Pro lifers who are feeling emboldened them -- it did.
Talk about this case as much as possible to show what happens.
At least some abortion clinics I mean.
And and just final not I think you know the president.
I understand why he's tiptoeing around -- and and you know I think his his.
Claim that he has wanted to intervene in the case.
Is a bit of a dot I think the president United States in.
All circumstances at any time should be able to say.
As a as a matter of policy as a matter of ethics.
Doctors but babies who are born alive -- should not have their spines sniffed by doctors I don't think that's a controversial statement.
I agree with Charles and I think the president if he can't even say that.
He really is out on the extreme left of this issue.
OK let's go back a lot of people asking had to go back to the Boston investigation here.
Let's let me play -- -- the call -- homeland.
In the house and what he said about the explosives.
The device itself I think it's I just found out that it was detonated by transmitter.
Used by -- toward the car.
This is a very sophisticated.
Candle and a very professional battlefield way in the idea that these two young -- you know.
Did not get any training as very difficult for me to believe.
Steve I guess you know he's not alone.
If you start talking to these committee chairman the people up on Capitol Hill who are getting briefed and they should know.
At least the latest.
From the National Counterterrorism Center and others.
And they -- they are starting to sound.
I think there's no question about that and this is true of both Republicans and Democrats in people that you're talking to are involved in one way or the other.
With the investigations seem to be now shifting there hadn't been as as we talked about on the broadcast there had been this.
It was a near consensus and and it started really before we even have the names of -- and enjoy arsonists are and I have you had a leak to Newsweek.
In which it was reported that FBI agents had quote all but ruled out.
Any foreign influence -- ties of any kind any link to al-Qaeda or any and its affiliates.
And over the course of -- what the past five days.
-- now we're seeing that I think -- -- investigations with multiple US teams on the ground.
In the artist on interviewing not only the parents of parents are not half but friends relatives religious leaders in the area.
Doing due diligence on all of that because they're turning things up.
They're not doing this as a wild goose chase I'm told that they are seeing things that are suggestive.
Of ties to.
Certain radical mosques certain radical leaders in the area.
And they -- going after it I think it'll be very interesting to find out how the administration handles this we did have some some leaks from the administration.
And law enforcement officials suggesting that this was that we -- likely never see this and if this in fact happens going to be -- to see how they play given.
The fact that they've downplayed this.
Yet again as they had in Times Square in Ben Ghazi in the Christmas Day bombing in Fort Hood.
And -- she says -- car parts were used tonight he's in Indonesia about bombers trained.
A lot of people typing in -- B Steve mentions Ben -- This report coming out from five committees on the republic itself.
Pretty indicting of the state department of the administration.
In the White House.
Altering the talking points.
The list of things in that report pretty scathing Democrats pushing back hard saying it's all about politics.
Thoughts on the on the back and forth over that would.
Well I think the Democrats -- you know very well in advance of there was going to be an investigation on the house side Republicans who conduct and they could have.
-- them those oversight teams worked together normally and so that's.
That they you know if they don't like the outcome of the report a result they needed to -- involved in the process.
But at the same time as much as those who struggle to defend the administration's reaction to Ben Ghazi.
The AARP report that was conducted following.
-- the events and and the recommendations that have put forth and -- the fact that state department's going to follow it.
Is not enough to persuade people.
That the administration was telling the truth all the time because talking points were change as you point out.
There are things that the administration cannot say.
And there are things that they will not say involving Covert operations and that kind of thing and everybody knows that -- you don't change talking points.
And talk about something that wasn't there -- talk about something that wasn't exist and that's always going to dog them.
-- my dog Hillary Clinton and her further political ambitions but I think that.
It's an interest in being to raise in terms of what was going on this week if the administration wanted to believe.
That everything was going to meet neatly contained and it was just two Brothers.
And one led the other -- nearly acted alone and they were just.
You know here doing our own thing and it's all about the threat is behind us.
And and as I -- contained.
If there's evidence and that's not the case they're gonna have to be very open about this it's big it's you don't want to leap to conclusions and you don't want to overreact.
And you don't want to scare the public and certainly they don't want -- give us any information that later turns out to be false.
-- they have to appear like they're giving us all the information that they had when they can give it.
Because the leading us to conclude that this is over -- Only to find out later that.
That maybe it wasn't -- that as I said the threat is larger and more widespread.
And potentially linked to threats of the future I would be apparent -- the stake for them.
You know -- in Maryland says do we know with the survivors of the guys you are yet.
But -- we've been looking into this for a long time we do know.
Some people we've been in contact.
With people we've been trying to talk to people.
Senator Graham has talked to a few of them and said they have been.
Afraid to talk we are still trying to get them to talk their welcome any time.
And we are.
Effort in that but so far have been unable a large portion of the survivors.
Are unable to talk because of their jobs and there are some who are back on the job and not classified position and that's who would like to talk to Charles.
Your reaction this that -- -- situation.
And overall that the feeling that.
While many people now on the left and the right perhaps thinking we're not getting the whole story about these investigations overall.
Well that's the one thread going through every one of these incidents.
Thank -- of the Boston attack.
The underwear bomber.
The Fort Hood shooter let's be really clear about what happened in every one of these cases.
The administration's reaction immediately.
Used to go into damage control.
Meaning controlling any damage.
That would resounding and its reputation or its its confidence.
And one -- abilities to pretend -- were to say is the president did.
After the the guy who tried to bring the airplane down over Detroit it was an isolated incident he said that right away it wasn't true.
It's a way of saying how can -- control isolated incidents.
Or when you get the Fort Hood shooter.
You say you don't want to jumped to any conclusions and in the end as of this today.
The the administration has define -- -- workplace violence.
And that is as -- we speak how the administration has defined it as we saw -- bad guys that you can't even speak now with some of the survivors.
The first instinct was to it to pretend there was a video.
So that you could have the secretary of state the clintons say four months later oh at this point what difference does it.
Mate if it was a terror attack or if it was a video.
It makes a difference and -- -- you get the administration.
Immediately sort of implying or leaky.
That that this was an isolated incidents -- how could we have done anything.
Clearly it's not covering up and try to minimize the effect -- it was an enormous screw up in in many departments.
Not speaking -- each other not sharing information.
And not following up on the Russians who we learned today.
It did not have a one off intervention with the US but at least two and probably others.
So there was obviously a let down in many elements of this.
The first things into the administration always to say isolated incident a couple of guys -- one guy acting on his own.
And who us we didn't screw up what could we have done.
Kathy writes the whistle blowers -- should protect the -- -- survivors get the arrival lawmakers have talked to them.
And so far and none of them have.
Come forward for one reason or another and we don't know the reason and we -- pressing and people asked this all the time why isn't this happening.
If I don't have an answer for an -- It's not like we're not -- Patty and for -- -- Virginia Charles you're right.
But the administration is getting away with -- -- in Flagstaff.
I hope you fox producers.
Use our questions get an idea of what you should be covering and -- Okay Dave in Flagstaff.
I think wants to be a producer isn't the big -- video guy still in jail in.
-- -- You know one of the things that's tough is a lot of stuff comes over the Internet a lot of stuff flies around.
And in the investigations.
You have to be careful about what.
You you know put out there and get people spun up about and what is accurate what is.
That's an appropriate.
Question to put to me today as a matter of fact.
I had dad just to give people an idea of how that sometimes -- -- as I've been working on the in the Boston story.
Sort of day and night for the past several days and I learned this morning.
That the CIA was contacted after the FBI basically shrugged his shoulders and said that that there was nothing more than they can do I learned that the Russians went -- the CIA.
-- learn that at about 11 AM and I spent the better part of the day trying to get confirmation.
That that was the case and couple hours after I first learned that I got what I would consider to be sort of half confirmation somebody said.
Yeah I think that's right but it wasn't solid and the rule in journalism of course is you always need to sources.
So I didn't report it -- men and about 530 the Washington Post put up a story in which they said the CIA.
It was approached by the Russians after the FBI's reported back to the Russians.
And the Washington Post had a story but.
You know it's just a measure of how carefully we do take you -- -- how seriously we do take our obligation to to pass on things.
That are accurate -- and it twice today I'd I'd.
Passed on report something because it wasn't as sources sourced as well as I was confident reporting -- so that's just the way that the business works I'm gonna keep.
Plugging away and we've got we've got interest in new scoops presenting themselves every day on this story.
Yeah it seems that every day maybe -- Pennsylvania asked why not subpoena the survivors and doctor Carter Pennsylvania.
Similar question why does the house subpoena the survivors.
But I've you know it is possible Mike Rogers that house Intel committee chairman said.
He didn't think -- subpoena was the right way to go for survivors that they should be.
Compel that way but -- -- suggested that he might.
Have one or two ready to have to go do you have any sense about them well I think -- Reach a conclusion after -- the investigation in conducting the investigation about.
What their grounds were and I don't think there's agreement that using subpoenas.
Come on on the survivors as is appropriate the survivors are not eager to talk as you know.
And I think they came to a consensus that that wasn't.
You know it's something they should do now for various reasons that day -- some Nick Cannon some they cannot say.
I think happened if if if someone becomes more willing -- in the future to talk.
They're gonna make it clear to the committee into you and other reporters at fox as well and and -- know where to go but I think there's something that's holding.
The house back from actually I -- taking that course.
But the band is coming to a crescendo here and ensor we as we -- close at 730s we've had five people including Joseph and swans Borough North Carolina.
Asked this question and they are frequent watchers here on line.
Food jumped the shark this week so go down the row.
First Charles who jumped the shark -- have you read this camera camera I haven't been here for this game you know.
OK so I would you know who jumped the shark who do you -- explanatory yes I do -- no I want you to spend it and -- that this week's winner.
It's a long story you do it get.
Shorts -- cliff note version.
There's an episode of happy days where the -- He no longer is used his motorcycle to jump over school buses he's in the water and he's.
On water skis and he's jumping over sharks.
In the water and when happy days went to that.
The show essentially -- point of no return it just didn't get viewers after that so to show you jumped the shark and never return.
Exactly who jumped the shark.
Like I you know they're not doing well this -- They've -- other over I would nominate the mother of the bombers.
Who apparently is reported to have said.
Of that she had to get another side if he has to actually -- She would do it and say allahu Akhbar which is this cry of Jihad.
I didn't quite suspect the parents certainly -- the father probably not.
But this is sort of reminiscent of the mothers of suicide attackers.
Among the Palestinians who are honored offended.
In their societies.
And the most famous of which she had three voice.
Who died in fighting the Israelis one was -- suicide attacker who killed a lot of interest in Israelis and said I wish I had a hundred sounds that I could give.
In his -- highlighted -- malignant part.
With the extreme Muslim society.
And she was -- a figure of whom we knew nothing but she went way overboard here in really exposing I think.
How deep woods is Islamist -- you hide its ideology.
In the house -- -- was -- only the Internet it looks as if might have had other people involved including the -- but this was in the air.
-- people on here ABC look confused and disgusted with you jumped the shark that.
His jump shot industry practice trying to come up and what actually -- -- it got so that they can.
Actually -- do think that one of that one of the bits of news outside of the bombings is any investigations is that.
Immigration reform is and -- up a little bit of trouble.
Since the Boston investigations have begun and people have called for a pause.
In a pushing bring to the floor and pass -- -- both houses.
There's a lot of strong opposition to the bill before they came out and senator Lindsey Graham -- -- -- is one of its great proponents and I have great respect for him.
Actually told someone who put in the Wall Street Journal today that he estimated -- -- seventy votes in the senate half of the Republicans.
And a good number of of Democrats that is very far short of seventy votes at this point.
And that's a little bit it's about shark jumping things could change but as -- this week it doesn't have seventy -- -- doesn't look like it well.
I see him you know very.
-- -- All right -- -- thought so so in my mind that the people who jumped the sharking in -- -- this week.
Are those who are still clinging to any other excuse.
And radical Islam to explain what happened in Boston.
Last last week you have people who initially said.
Despite the fact that we had seen to attack simultaneous attacks with bombs.
Not time to go off twelve seconds apart just one block away from one another.
Up the road even after we had all that information you -- people who not only -- we're not ready did to call it terrorism.
But who were saying it might not be terrorism despite the fact that the bombs were packed with nails and -- and whatnot.
Then you have a crowd who shifted the explanation to this sounds just like something right wingers would do it's a really unsophisticated bomb this is the way.
Right wingers militia types would would attack if they did attack and they stuck to that as long as they couldn't tell that didn't work then they shifted to the disaffected immigrant argument which we've seen -- written again today in the New York Times and elsewhere that that.
Really Americans were just too mean to these guys and really set them -- and and sent them.
On their way and the latest one which was proper I think by think progress first -- -- -- I've read it tended fit in time magazine if I'm not mistaken.
In the last 24 hours.
Is the idea that general concern I -- was.
Who could have been radicalized because he was a boxer and took too many blows to the head.
Yes that that that might qualified and by qualified Steve -- Charles thank you very much.
For the online show via Brady Bunch from Washington DC.
This -- been a lot of fun out here -- the interview with President Bush and mrs.
bush tomorrow you can see a clip of -- tonight on on the record with Greta Van Susteren.
-- an interesting interview we -- -- for the museum and library.
There's a lot to see here and you get to see really how they've structured this place they don't shy away from the controversies.
In the bush.
And there are a lot of decisions.
That it's USA.
-- -- -- Go work through the library.
As a visitor.
Kind of put yourself in the shoes at the president as he made decisions.
Through the timeline of his presidency I will take you through that.
Tomorrow and talk with the former president.
And former First Lady.
Should we have to stay tuned we'll see you next week from Washington for special report on line control room little goodbye.
Filter by section