Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And we're back now to continue our conversation with former Vice President Dick Cheney out the White House announced like this week that it how does reverse policy and that is going to start sending.
The Syrian -- small arms and possibly anti tank weapons but they also might make clear what they won't -- We don't at this thing at this point believe that the US has national interest and pursuing him very intense.
Open ended military engagement there are no fly zone.
In Syria at this at this job.
Is that why is for the president to get involved at all in Syria at this point is this -- -- and and generally speaking looking back how do you think this president has handled Syria.
Over the two years of the civil war.
I don't think it's been well handled I'll be the first to admit it's a complex difficult situation.
I frankly I think John McCain's -- -- -- -- John and I don't always agree on everything better debates over the years but I think I think -- pretty woman help.
And now -- to the point where it is it's hard to understand.
That it's the use of chemical weapons that is triggered this result -- said the other day.
Well there were 93000 people killed that weren't -- like.
That was the concern that.
It's not clear to me what the mission is here that they understand -- it is it picked strictly humanitarian.
Is -- to have geo strategic does the United States have a vested interest in the outcome.
And are we in fact potentially involved in some kind of proxy war -- Soviets Russians -- me who -- supporting the side.
I think it's important -- go down.
My instinct -- been to support the opposition sooner who he had an opportunity if you cared about and if it wasn't that actually had an opportunity earlier to provide support.
Without having to get American forces directly involved and they took a pass now they're gonna do it but the question is what -- -- day late dollar short.
And what about no fly zones what about standoff strikes on Syrian -- straps and things to.
Reduced there -- eliminate -- air superiority.
Well as Jack Keane said the other day on this network -- -- -- general former general index close friend of mine a great guy.
That from a military standpoint of being able accomplish something objectively.
Might well provides access the no fly zone.
-- what he would would recommend.
That's not without potential costs obviously Syria as a fairly sophisticated.
And I air capability.
Ground to air missiles and done so it's it's.
Problem and again I think it's important for the administration come back and specified what is the US national interest here.
And it seems to -- if the only reason you're going is because now you have evidence that they used chemical weapons and -- 150 people with chemical weapons.
Is that our national interest.
And I'm not sure that that they've got to straighten her -- much -- executive.
Let's talk about -- guys who would you raised in the last segment does that.
A general principle in the military no one left behind but back after -- policy.
Then secretary of defense Leon and not -- that that wasn't possible during.
Given that specific circumstances during the terror attack and -- got let's.
Basic principle is that you don't deploy forces.
Into harm's way.
What's going -- without having some real time information.
About what's taking place.
Given the circumstances that night and what we've been told about the deployment of forces was the decision by the president and the Pentagon not to send US forces.
During those seven hours try to rescue our people on the ground was -- an appropriate decision or not.
I don't think it was.
My experience was especially on 9/11 Chris especially in that part of the world.
-- where we anticipated that al-Qaeda.
Might well try to.
To mark the anniversary if you will nine elevenths attack especially -- -- location.
Where they had an enormous amount of intelligence that said.
The consulates in danger and you've got to -- the broadcast the first thing that comes out of the -- -- -- ambassadors they were under attack.
That should have been on the step before that ever happened we were always prepared and groups and organizations teams.
Ready to go operate at the drop -- -- and practice exactly that kind of operation.
I found it difficult to.
Reconcile Leon and I like he was good man but to the two reconcile his statement that we could have done anything.
They could've been ready before the crisis ever developed so they could respond short -- and I was an hour away.
That's -- that's airbase on Sicily it's -- NATO base and they've got it if he should not going to be ready and Libya of all places.
Then where are you'd -- reform the military has the capability and apparently didn't use it.
I think that was a bad call.
What do you think of the president's decision to name Susan Rice to be as a national security advisor well.
She appears to have been part of the cover up that.
One of the things here that that concern him as a really a political issue.
The my whole notion that this was a terrorist attack which it was.
Undermined the narrative that they solve the terrorism problem and got them glossy bin Laden.
Terrorism problem solved the so she went out pedaled the party line that'd been put together I guess with State Department.
But I think that was a huge mistake.
What she did was a huge mistake I think she lacks credibility.
And she doesn't need to be confirmed she can go in there -- -- national security advisor.
I just question whether or not somebody's judgement was so flawed that they took what.
Who was apparently very bad information and penalties aggressively she did.
Let's turn to the I arrests targeting of conservatives.
Groups with a name Tea Party or patriot or 912 in their name.
In the Cincinnati office -- been interviewed by a house committee are telling conflicting stories as to whether this -- generated in Cincinnati whether it came from higher ups.
In the IRS and watch and there's so far no evidence.
No are hard evidence of any involvement by treasury of the White House.
-- so far up as someone who's been around this town awhile what do you make of the Ira scandal.
I think it's it's -- one of the worst abuses of power and -- when you think the power the -- And it clearly was used for political purposes to go after a particular category of organization.
Having to be conservative -- the political spectrum.
But there regardless of who want us that is kind of gross abuse of power that everybody's legitimately concerned about.
I think that I have trouble believing two guys in Cincinnati.
Dreamed this schema I just don't think that's true I wants.
I don't often talk about it but I was involved wage price control program back to the Nixon years.
I was the director of operations -- us when we got.
And no one of things I -- -- -- 3000 IRS agents who were trying to enforce wage price control.
The very professional organization.
They worked hard to take their rules and regulations written by -- cost of living councilman policy types and implement -- field.
I have trouble it was a long time ago but I have trouble believing that the professionalism and I had observed and in that organization who would be doing that at some guys on their own picking political class that.
To go after.
That they would do that with how it without doing administrative -- yeah all right -- I was the first time a botnet that's not that but that they would do.
We've seen here with respect for the way they've operated.
-- and I think -- I personally believe I cannot conceive of the situation which didn't come from.
The other scandal now is the Justice Department raising the possibility of prosecuting Fox News is James Rosen.
For his role in revealing but seems to have been national security classified information back in 2006.
There if I love the way you're talking to six.
But will it turn off of I think -- -- it is able withdraw like lectured that I ought to get out but sometimes -- -- but no problem.
Back in 2006 there were reports that that you raised the possibility of prosecuting.
In New York Times reporter James rise not roles -- but James rise and for breaking the story that they Bush Administration had ordered -- was engaged in warrantless wiretaps first.
Is that true did you consider the prosecution of James -- and of the New York Times and secondly what is your general philosophy about whether or not reporters.
Are liable for -- criminal prosecution for exposing national security secret.
I was not advocating prosecuting crimes and I did think that the New York Times.
Violated the law because there is indeed a provisional law says it's it's a felony offense.
To publish information about communications intelligence in the United States it's never been.
-- -- But it's a felony calling for a sentence of ten years to do that now -- prosecuted the New York Times.
I urge that we ought to investigate and either the law's the -- -- -- that's never been enforced nobody ever had the nerve to actually go after.
The New York Times and but it's on the books.
And I thought in this case obviously.
Not admittedly I'm -- hard rock on some of these things and and it's probably wise -- -- said -- now we don't want to prosecute the New York Times.
But there is a provision of law it's very clear its publication of communications intelligence.
And it's never been forced.
But today today while -- that are taken off the books.
But it wasn't aimed at the reporter.
It was specifically.
-- the New York Times have been asked by the president United States.
But the publisher and the editor and the Washington bureau chief in the Oval Office.
As he asks them please not publish this it's gonna do enormous damage to our national security.
And they went ahead.
Your -- -- you got a heart transplant fifteen months ago right a couple of questions one what are you able to do.
Now that you were not able to do before the transplant and secondly and it doesn't it.
I don't expected to get warm and Fuzzy about gonna try to put you on the psychiatrist's couch for a moment.
What does that mean you and a deeper sense to have this new lease on life.
Literally you know.
Well it it is that's not a short of America -- Obviously go deep debt to the donor -- the donor family -- com.
I was near death through weeks ago three years ago it was an end stage heart failure liver and kidneys shutting down.
And on an emergency basis they went in and planet that popped in my chest.
With battery operated.
That kept me alive for twenty months and that got me the transplant.
And I wake up every morning now with a smile on my face thankful for the gift of another day I never expected to see.
vice president it's always a pleasure to talk with you is there -- see happy Father's Day thank you and -- too many what do both of us -- her.
Filter by section