THE FIVE

Obama administration presenting mixed message on Syria; Hollywood eerily silent

Secretary Kerry at odds with president?

 

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," September 9, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kimberly Guilfoyle, along with Bob Beckel, Eric Bolling, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld.

It's 5 o'clock in New York City. And this is "The Five."

(MUSIC)

GUILFOYLE: We've got a jam-packed show for you tonight -- less than an hour away from a brand-new interview with President Obama on Syria. Make sure to stay tuned for that.

Tomorrow night, the president will address the nation at 9 p.m. A special programming note, set your DVRs for a special 11 p.m. edition of "The Five" tomorrow with reaction to his speech.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Boo.

GUILFOYLE: Wow, immature.

Now, today's developments on Syria. It was all hands on deck from the administration and their allies in a final push to convince the country that we need to attack.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: The Assad regime's inhuman use of weapons of mass destruction against innocent men, women and children violates a universal norm at the heart of our global order. And, therefore, it demands a strong response from the international community led by the United States.

JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: If there are no consequences, Assad gets the message he is free to use these going forward.

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: The evidence is powerful. And the question for all of us is: what are we going to do about it? Turn our backs? Have a moment of silence, where a dictator can with impunity threaten the rest of the world he's going to retaliate?

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

GUILFOYLE: All right. So, Eric, what do you make of these comments? Strong push across all fronts. You even saw Hillary Clinton.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Everyone was out today. Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry.

Susan Rice today said there is no negotiating with these people. This is what we have to do.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, said she had -- maybe we should sit down and negotiate.

The bottom line is and Bob pointed it out last week. He said, I'd like to find out where the American people are now, because in the last poll we had, we had 48 percent of the American people against attacking Syria.

Guess what, Bob? We went from 48 percent against to 63 percent opposing attacking Syria right now. So, it's gone up 15 percent, 70 percent of Republicans oppose, 66 percent of independents oppose. And 53 percent of Democrats oppose doing this.

The American people don't want this. I can't figure out why in hell we're going to do this.

GUILFOYLE: I'm going to ask, Dana.

So, from a communications standpoint, let's talk about some messaging. It seems that they are not connecting with the American people to be able to get the kind of support across the board that they need. Perhaps there was some problems, you know, with the videos that came out. People were very suspicious and didn't want to get involved in Syria. A lot of "that's not our war, our problem."

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: I think you're being kind in the way you're describing their situation. So, if you want to support the president, it's not your responsibility to convince the American people. It is theirs.

President Obama on Saturday was not out talking about this. He was playing golf. On Sunday, they had on the Sunday shows Denis McDonough, the chief of staff, not convincing.

Today, when President Obama -- right now he is in the middle of right now doing six network interviews. But one of the things he has to do is clean up the mess from everybody else in the administration who's been speaking today, including his own secretary of state, John Kerry, which basically undid everything that the president talked about last week.

GUILFOYLE: I'm glad you brought that up. Let's take a listen to Secretary Kerry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Is there anything at this point that his government could do or offer that would stop an attack?

KERRY: Sure. He could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in next week. Turn it over, all of it, without delay, and allow a full and total accounting for that. But he isn't about to do it. It can't be done obviously.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: All right. This is the latest communication message --

PERINO: But if that is an option, why wasn't that an option two weeks ago when John Kerry gave a full-throated speech about why intervention was necessary and it needed to be immediate? And now, President Putin has taken them up on their offer, OK, I'll call on Assad to do that.

GUIFOYLE: You gave him that idea.

PERINO: No, not really. I think that's probably in the cards. I was just reading the tea leaves?

BOLLING: Isn't that another red line, though?

PERINO: Which one?

BOLLING: Didn't John Kerry just draw another red line? We'll give you a week to turn it over or else?

GUILFOYLE: I think it was light pink.

BOLLING: OK. Well --

PERINO: I read somebody say it was the red eraser.

(CROSSTALK)

BOB BECKEL, CO-HOST: I had a friend of mine who was polling, put in a question that was not about going to war with Syria. The question was, if you were convinced that the evidence was there, that Syria had used chemical weapons against innocent men, women and children, would you support a U.S. effort to get rid of the delivery mechanism?

Now, I was shocked. It still was 50 percent against going into doing that. And something like, I don't know, 30 percent or something, 35 percent in favor of it. Now, you know, I could say this is people who are war weary and the rest of it. There's a dynamic along here I don't quite understand. Maybe they don't trust Obama.

But having said that, that does not change the reality. The reality is, they're not going to take the chemical weapons and turn them over to the international community. No matter what Kerry says or what Putin making that cheap offer at the end. The fact of the matter is, if Congress votes against it, we have a moral imperative to go and take these things out. If we don't, we're going to pay a terrible price for it down the road.

GUILFOYLE: Where? Where are we going to pay that price?

BECKEL: Every despot who has chemical weapons is going to use them with impunity.

GUILFOYLE: Greg?

GUTFELD: I disagree, because clearly the attack -- the invasion of Iraq didn't do anything to Assad. Obama has created a new kind of coalition. It's a consensus of nothing, or a non-sensus. So, you have all hands on deck while the ship is sinking. You've got eight people saying eight different things. It's not a government, it's the "Brady Bunch."

But the interesting here, when you bring up, the red line in my opinion was a red herring. This was never that important to Obama. Syria was never that important. The things that are outside our border were never important. For him, it's always been about the social change within our borders, including open borders, climate change, taxation, Obamacare.

His goal is a progressive society. The other stuff like Syria is essentially playing computer solitaire until his favorite show is on.

So, this is essentially just wasting time just so he can get to the things he wants to do. But there have been so many contradictory messages it's actually hurt them.

BECKEL: You don't believe he feels strongly that (INAUDIBLE) shouldn't use chemical weapons?

GUTFELD: I don't feel, I don't believe he feels strongly about anything. I believe --

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Maybe Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama feels strongly about children getting gassed.

BOLLING: What we really need to find out is whether or not this will help or not.

GUTFELD: I believe that he might be the most ambivalent leader we've ever had in the history of this country. He is too cool for school. So, it's like if this doesn't happen, if we don't like it, it's OK. It's why they use academic language whenever they're talking about something. Why he wants to unpack a question.

This is all about kind of like a lackadaisical way of looking at the world that doesn't actually project leadership.

BECKEL: I just -- I couldn't agree more. What are you saying?

BOLLING: My point is, what's the reason for going into Syria. You say there's a moral obligation I guess. You want to -- you want to fulfill your moral obligations, send them humanitarian aid. I've seen more videos.

The Muslim Brotherhood is posting on my Facebook page. Syrian people who are pro-Assad, they are posting stuff far more disturbing than anything that's leaking out of the White House. You want to help them, help them with humanitarian aid, because this isn't our conflict.

GUILFOYLE: You think we're on the wrong side of this?

BOLLING: If President Obama goes into Syria for one reason, to stabilize either Syria or the Middle East. That's the only reason to do it, and by doing so, I believe, and so do the American people believe, that by doing so he's going to have the opposite effect. He's going to destabilize the region.

BECKEL: You believe we do not act -- every other despot in the world will not feel they have impunity to use chemical weapons?

BOLLING: I do not believe that will be the case.

GUILFOYLE: Greg, you just moments ago on "The Five" --

GUTFELD: Yes?

GUILFOYLE: You said that it didn't seem -- Iraq, Afghanistan, they didn't seem to have any effect. It was a precedent that didn't matter to Bashar al Assad because he didn't seem in any way dissuaded from acting in the way he does.

BECKEL: Yes, what did you mean by that? There was no use of chemical weapons at that point.

GUTFELD: What are you talking? No, I'm just saying the threat of America doing something had no effect on Assad's dealing and, you know, perhaps 100,000 deaths in this country --

BOLLING: Can we take a step back? If the American people don't want it, why are we doing it? Why would we say, go ahead, President Obama, risk our money, risk our lives. What's the point?

GUILFOYLE: There's too much confusion behind it because no one has a clear answer.

BECKEL: The American people in polling didn't want Medicare either.

BOLLING: Did he not raise his right hand to take the oath to protect, preserve and defend the United States Constitution? That would be including answering to the American people.

BECKEL: Where is it in the Constitution that says you have to have a majority of American people in polling you need to do --

GUILFOYLE: We need to do something. I want to talk about Congress.

What's he going to do there? Will he convince them what kind of support?

I think there's an interesting piece of sound we can listen to.

Representative Adam Kinzinger on the White House offering his help.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R), ILLINOIS: You can't begin to build a relationship with Congress to the first time when you need their support on something like this. I mean, look, a week and a half ago, my office actually reached out to the White House and said, we support the strike on Syria, we're going to help you round up support if you need it. I haven't heard back from the White House yet. I don't know who my White House -- I haven't heard back from anyone. I don't even know who my White House liaison is which is supposed to be creating this relationship.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: That doesn't sound --

PERINO: This has been a year's long problem for the president. He has terrible congressional relations. I don't know whether -- why they wouldn't have taken the congressman up on his offer. There are probably others.

But this does go back to I think just to pull all these points together. In 2011, there was an IAEA board of governor's report on chemical weapons in Syria. President Obama year later made the remarks about the red line in Syria.

Then, it seems to me, unless they can show me differently, there was no planning, no outreach, no work of -- to build up congressional relations in the last year. Six months ago, there is reports out of France and Britain that Syria used chemical weapons.

It does beg a question of whether or not President Obama had his eye on the ball, on the whole Middle East region in general. They've got huge problems in Egypt. They've had Benghazi on their plate for a year.

If -- but I think by staging a congressional vote, President Obama has weakened future presidents, whoever they might be.

BECKEL: I couldn't agree with that more. Why they ever asked for this vote in the first place makes no sense to me whatsoever. There was no reason, no constitutional reason. No any other reason --

GUILFOYLE: And the reason he thought he might have gotten it because there is no reason to put yourself out there and strike out.

BECKEL: I didn't know it was going to be this bad but I think it would have been very tough to get through the House. And, by the way, congressional relations, he has tried from day one --

GUILFOYLE: Oh, here we go.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: Yes, he has. And they've turned them down left and right for purely political and, in my view, in many cases, un-American --

PERINO: I think that that will be proven false, Bob. When you look back -- the Dan Balz report I think it was on the Obamacare vote where they looked at any members of Congress for weeks leading up to the first vote.

They never even heard anything from the White House. It was an arrogant way to treat them.

They've been the most partisan White House. Even from the White House podium, the president himself. And so they've basically -- they're reaping what they sow.

GUIFOYLE: They begrudgingly even accepting to work with McCain.

Yes, Greg?

GUTFELD: I think the funniest thing we've overlooked here is John Kerry's stipulation that the attack would be unbelievably small. Does that mean we're going to be bombing them with confetti poppers?

GUILFOYLE: Right.

GUTFELD: Imagine post-9/11 if George Bush said, OK, they flew planes in our buildings, we're going to respond with something unbelievably small.

It doesn't strike fear in your enemies to tell them how small your response. This is something that a surgeon says to a patient or a dentist says. This won't hurt a bit.

But Assad is not our patient. Assad is our enemy at this point.

Apparently --

BECKEL: That's a very good point. What do you think was his thinking behind that?

GUTFELD: He was trying to reassure the American public that it wouldn't be a commitment like Iraq. But that re-assurement to the American public actually reassured Assad that they can actually endure, perhaps tolerate lightly even a small pinprick.

GUILFOYLE: Eric, what's the takeaway from this?

BOLLING: The takeaway is, when you have the U.N. that says don't go.

BECKEL: The U.N. doesn't say don't go.

BOLLING: They absolutely did say don't go. They say -- a lot of the international community say don't go. Congress will likely say don't go.

The American people overwhelmingly say don't go.

There's only one reason for President Obama to do it. He's taking it upon himself. He's an egotistical move for whatever. He's going to protect his legacy as -- I don't know.

Really? Nobel Peace Prize winner? Avoiding all the indications that say don't go, he's going to go.

BECKEL: You think he's trying to protect his legacy? Wouldn't that the opposite? That it's going to be a bad thing --

BOLLING: Bob, I have no idea why this man wants to kill a bunch of Syrians.

BECKEL: He wants to kill people who are delivering these weapons of mass destruction. And if he doesn't do that, it would go down --

BOLLING: You want to talk War Powers Act? He has to go to Congress to declare war. If he doesn't do that --

BECKEL: He's not declaring war.

BOLLING: -- there has to be an imminent threat against the American people. Where is it?

BECKEL: There will be. If you allow this guy to get --

BOLLING: At that point, then you go.

BECKEL: By allowing him to go ahead and do this, you pose an imminent threat to the American people.

PERINO: I think what Bob's talking about is the argument of preemption and can President Obama convince the American people, tonight in the interviews and in his prime-time speech tomorrow night, that he has a plan that will actually be a deterrent. That the military effort that he's proposing will be so disproportionate that Assad will then change his plans or his -- here's the worst -- this is the worst outcome.

Say that President Obama does it, it's unbelievably small, and then chemical weapons are used again.

GUILFOYLE: Sure.

PERINO: It's the plans A, B and C that they haven't laid out. Even to people like Dianne Feinstein who was out this weekend. The video of the innocent women and children suffering, can't get a breath and die from the chemical weapons used.

I think there should be a price for that. But the administration continues to unravel its case. It's like when you pick -- you're not supposed to pull a thread on a sweater. They've been putting it all day long and there's nothing left of the sweater.

BECKEL: They should have played that video over and over again. And say, look, you vote against this, take a look at this. Take a look at these people dying, the first women and children we know of. Except for Assad and Hitler who did this.

BOLLING: But you're not trying to remove Assad.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: The goal is not to remove Assad. You're still going to keep the same regime.

BECKEL: I repeat myself. The last two people who used these things were Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein.

GUTFELD: You were for that war?

BECKEL: No, we went in and did something about it. (INAUDIBLE) nothing about this.

GUTFELD: Even if Obama has --

BECKEL: We ought to be ashamed of ourselves.

GUTFELD: If President Obama has a message tomorrow, will anybody be listening? He's gone from a forceful leader to a tree in the forest. As he falls, no one's even hearing it anymore.

GUILFOYLE: Directly ahead, what will Syria do if the United States attacks? Here's Bashar Assad's response today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASHAR AL-ASSAD, SYRIAN PRESIDENT: Everything expect. Expect everything.

CHARLIE ROSE, CBS: Tell me what you mean by "expect everything."

AL-ASSAD: Expect every action.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: That and much more from the Syrian despot when "The Five" returns.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLLING: Welcome back, everybody.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad spoke to CBS today. We got a glimpse into the mind of the man President Obama and his supporters believe to be a monster of epic proportions.

Let's break down a couple of sound bites from Assad.

First up, Charlie Rose asked him what will happen if the U.S. attacks.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL-ASSAD: You expect everything. Expect everything. Not necessarily through the government.

The governments are not the only player in this region. You have different parties. You have different factions. You have different ideology. You have everything in this region now. So, you have to expect that.

ROSE: Expect -- tell me what you mean by "expect everything."

AL-ASSAD: Expect every action.

ROSE: Including chemical warfare?

AL-ASSAD: That depends. If the -- if the rebels or the terrorists in this region or any other group have it, it could happen. I don't know.

We don't -- I'm not a fortune teller to tell you what's going to happen. This area, where everything is on the brink of explosion, you have to expect everything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: All right. We'll go around the table. Ladies first, alphabetically.

Dana, you're up.

PERINO: So, a general in the United States military once told me beware dictators who speak very good English, because behind that -- all the obfuscation that he was trying to use there, it was a wink and a nod to say, and, you know, you're not completely safe in America either.

I thought that the interview was a great get for Charlie Rose.

Interesting to hear from Assad, because nobody had heard or seen from him in quite a while. But also probably one of the most helpful things for President Obama to be a contrast to Assad tonight.

BOLLING: Beware dictators who speak -- President Obama fit in that category? I won't go there.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my gosh.

BOLLING: He speaks very good English.

GUILFOYLE: Look, he's not afraid to go forward. Like Dana said, I thought he made a great choice to kind of make his case. But he also made it very clear, well-spoken or not, that he is a man of means and resources, and he will be unafraid to use them. That everything's on the table.

Beware of that.

That was definitely a direct threat to the United States. So take it seriously.

GUTFELD: Two things. One, never trust a man with a see-through mustache.

And number two, did you notice what his response was? He didn't say, we will respond with an unbelievably small attack. You talked about the difference between the two people.

GUILFOYLE: Right.

GUTFELD: This is the issues. You've got kind of a widespread response, convoluted response from the Obama administration, an unbelievably small attack. Here you have a guy who says we will destroy you, which is what they always say.

BOLLING: Bob, there's some reports that Hezbollah and Hamas may be on the side of the Assad regime. It sounded to me like he said it may not be just the Syrian government responding. It might be one of those groups.

BECKEL: Well, first of all, I'm not sure there are on the side of him.

But leaving that aside, we're allowing somebody who has broken international law and law of morality by killing people and children and women and noncombatant men with chemical weapons, who has now just threatened the United States of America. We're going to let a dictator threaten us by saying no matter what happens? His English is not bad. It doesn't matter.

Who does he think he is?

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: Does he scare you? Does he scare you? Are you frightened?

BOLLING: Next, Assad on whether or not he approves of chemical warfare. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROSE: Do you approve of the use of chemical warfare?

AL-ASSAD: What do you mean?

ROSE: The use of chemicals, deadly chemicals?

AL-ASSAD: Do I think we have to use them --

ROSE: Do you think it is an appropriate tour of war to use chemicals?

AL-ASSAD: Chemicals?

ROSE: Yes.

AL-ASSAD: We are against any WMD, any weapons of mass destruction, weather chemical or nuclear.

ROSE: So, you're against the use of chemical warfare?

AL-ASSAD: Yes. Not only me, as a state, as a government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLLING: OK, do it again. Dana, first.

PERINO: OK, in 2006 or '07 I believe it was, Israel, in a covert strike, took out a nuclear weapons plant that Assad was building with the help of the North Koreans. And Assad didn't say boo. And the international community just stood back and said, that was the right thing to do. And they secretly praised Israel for it.

And nobody would have thought that Assad -- at that point -- would have been the monster that he has proven to be. If you look at Senator John Kerry, having dinner with him just two years ago.

GUILFOYLE: A reformer.

PERINO: I remember when Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, she decided to go over because she wanted to have diplomatic relations with him. I think we have to realize that conservativism, when it comes to foreign policy, is a little bit more realistic, because humans can be very evil. And he is.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, yes, I mean, he's been grossly underestimated by the exact people that are now faced with the task to deal with him. I think he's much more of a match, you know, then -- and they're not equipped to deal with it. They have shown that from the beginning with their poor messaging, their indecisiveness. Their waffling. All of it is bad. It looks bad for the U.S.

BECKEL: Underestimated by who?

GUILFOYLE: By this administration.

BECKEL: Oh, ridiculous.

GUILFOYLE: Kerry said he's a reformer. They want to go out --

BECKEL: This administration wants to take his chemical weapons out and you wusses don't want to do anything about it.

(CROSSTALK)

GUIFOYLE: Now, big talk.

BECKEL: OK. Good. And you let more children die, go ahead.

GUTFELD: We are all wusses.

Most of America are a bunch of wusses for not wanting to bomb Syria, you heard it from Bob.

I have advice for Assad if he wants to get out of this. He should explain what happened. He should blame the chemical attack on rebels who are upset over the anti-Islam video. The White House would just have to say, well, you know what, we felt the same way about Benghazi. Maybe that's what happened here, just the perfect way to get out of it.

GUILFOYLE: That's fine, filmmaker jailed in Hollywood.

BOLLING: We're going to leave it there.

Speaking of Hollywood, coming up: anti-war Hollywood celebrities never missed an opportunity to attack President Bush for Iraq and Afghanistan but they've been silent about Syria. And the reason why is going to blow your mind. Greg's got it next on "The Five".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: American activists want to go to Syria to act as human shields. They're going to camp out in targets and probably sing bad renditions of kumbaya. This happened after more appearances by Code Pink who for some reason can get into places where I'd be kicked out instantly.

If there's a heaven, Code Pink would be at the pearly gates screaming that St. Peter be tried for war crimes.

But lump a reluctance about bombing Syria with these peace puppets.

For then, any potential conflict is met with an anguished no. There's no right or wrong, only a universal need for peace which ignores the atrocities of human history.

So, what are pass visits? They will not fight under any circumstance.

It seems principled but not when you realize that they can only exist if non-Pacifist. The hordes of incoming non-pacifists, Nazis, Imperial Japan, radical Islamists, cling ons, they all would have killed this.

But at least they aren't hypocrites. Last week, I asked, where are the Hollywood peaceniks? In one giant underground rehab? I guess bashing Obama is like disagreeing with your favorite hippie professor.

You can't protest a protester. But wacko leftist Ed Asner thinks stars aren't coming out because -- against the war, because of this, quote, "a lot of people don't want to feel anti-black by being opposed to Obama."

Wow. So, A, you're telling me that celebrities are abandoning a principle stand in order to preserve their social standing among their own cowardly circles? In Hollywood, that's called Monday.

Kimberly, do --

GUILFOYLE: You're going to say this?

GUTFELD: What?

GUILFOYLE: Just a sitting duck here. Go ahead.

GUTFELD: We haven't heard from a lot of people. But now, we heard from Ed Asner. Is he right? Did he admit what a lot of people are scared of doing?

GUILFOYLE: Well, you know, I do know Ed personally.

GUTFELD: You know everybody.

GUILFOYLE: Well, he's my uncle from my first marriage so I guess --

GUTFELD: Ed Asner?

GUILFOYLE: Yes. No, really. I've stayed at his house. Yes.

GUTFELD: Lou Grant.

GUILFOYLE: Very nice man. Very talented actor. As you can imagine, we had some serious discussions at all the dinner tables, holidays, differing viewpoints. But, at least he's speaking out about what he believes is the real reason behind it. Go ahead.

GUTFELD: But he validated everything that a lot of conservatives felt.

BOLLING: What he did is he provided cover --

GUILFOYLE: He should come on the conservative side.

BOLLING: He provided cover for the rest of the liberal Hollywood anti-war -- principled anti-war people.

"BuzzFeed" put up -- in response probably to your question, Greg.

"BuzzFeed" put up 14 principled anti-war activists who they feared being kidnapped because we haven't from them yet. Sheryl Crow, Springsteen, Martin Sheen, Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Clooney, Janeane Garofalo, Neil Young, et cetera, et cetera. I'm wondering, Madonna.

And I'm thinking one of your good friends, Jane Fonda, Hanoi Jane, where are all these people?

BECKEL: These are supporters of Obama. Supporters of any president are not going to go out there and stand against him. Why would they do that?

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: Obama goes here and a bunch of Syrians in war dying here, that's where they go.

BECKEL: You keep saying a bunch of Syrians are dying. You have no idea what you're talking about when you say that. If we're going to attack military installations --

BOLLING: No one's going to die.

BECKEL: Don't you want military people, Assad's army, to die?

BOLLING: Not our war.

GUTFELD: Dana, I want to bring you in here, let's go to this moveon.org ad which actually I haven't watched because I was busy getting my nails done.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AD NARRATOR: We never set out to spend eight years at war in Iraq or to be mired down for more than a decade of fighting in Afghanistan. So what should America expect if we rush into Syria alone with no real plan for the consequences?

We already know. It gets worse.

Congress, most Americans oppose missile strikes in Syria. Don't lead us down this road again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: Dana, do you think a lot of this is always just going to be the same answer, which is don't go to war, even if there is a war that you're meant to go into? They're never -- it's just -- it's an assumption they always land on.

PERINO: Possibly, and maybe that -- you could just say that's principled in a way. I remember, moveon.org was the same group that right before the testimony in regards to the surge in Iraq, put out the full page ad and named General Petraeus -- General Betray-us, remember that?

GUTFELD: Very clever.

PERINO: I remember at the time, this sinking feeling, how disgusting it is.

On the Hollywood piece, President Obama has worked harder and built better relations with people in Hollywood than he has members of Congress.

Unfortunately for him, people in Hollywood don't get a chance to make a vote. You have moveon.org plus AIPAC which is the organization that works on Israel relations, they're both going to score this vote.

It means that for members of Congress, you have to figure out, are you going to go with the Move On people, that might be where your heart is, but you also might support Israel. They're betwixt and between.

GUTFELD: Betwixt and between. That's interesting.

GUILFOYLE: What a nice play on words.

GUTFELD: And also, President Obama had to cancel his fund-raising trip to Hollywood which sucks because the Weinsteins had just disinfected their hot tub.

GUILFOYLE: OK. Well, that's unfortunate. I really prefer a disinfected hot tub. I mean, you can barely keep me away from one.

But I think maybe he was thinking he wasn't going to get a very favorable -- controlled water --

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: (INAUDIBLE) this weekend.

GUTFELD: Oh, really?

GUILFOYLE: Yes. But he knows he's not that popular right now in Hollywood.

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: I'll tell you where you're going to find him. There is an upcoming state dinner for the president of Brazil. Hollywood will be there.

GUTFELD: Yes.

BECKEL: The one thing I would say is that the international community has been building over the weekend more and more support for President Obama's position. There have been some members of Congress like Barbara Murkowski who have seen the light, finally. They got now to their position, and maybe, just maybe, who knows? There's a possibility you could pull this off.

It's (INAUDIBLE) Eric Bolling.

BOLLING: Out of the 450 members of Congress, there's still only about

24 who are strongly in favor.

Bob could have -- that moveon.org commercial you played, that would have been Bob's "One More Thing" every single day for the last two years, up to --

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: -- chemical weapons and killing children, not at all.

GUTFELD: All right.

BECKEL: And I think moveon.org should be ashamed of themselves.

GUTFELD: All right. OK then.

Directly ahead, almost exactly one year since the attack on our consulate in Benghazi. Why hasn't anyone been brought to justice? That's disgraceful. Plus, new information from one of the Benghazi whistleblowers at the State Department -- next on "The Five".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: Did you pick that?

PERINO: I did not pick that. That was the producer.

All right. Wednesday will mark one year since four Americans were killed in Benghazi and Thursday will mark a year since President Obama said this --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Make no mistake: we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people. Make no mistake: justice will be done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: Nobody has been arrested since then. Charges have been filed against the suspected ringleader.

Chris Wallace asked the White House chief of staff about it yesterday on his show.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WALLACE, Fox NEWS ANCHOR: Why is it that reporters seem to be able to find this guy who the government is charging for involvement in Benghazi, but our law enforcement can't find him?

DENIS MCDONOUGH, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: Look, we've been very clear that we will hold those people who carried out this dastardly heinous attack against our people to account.

WALLACE: It's been a year, sir.

MCDONOUGH: It has been a year. And you know what the United States does, Chris, is we track every lead until we find and can accomplish what we say we will do.

WALLACE: Why can't we find --

(CROSSTALK)

MCDONOUGH: This president has demonstrated that and we will do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: All right. Greg, that was Denis McDonough, the White House chief of staff.

GUTFELD: He looks like the eagle from "The Muppets."

PERINO: Oh, really?

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: That's an original though.

GUTFELD: It is, looks like a very broad, like a very --

PERINO: Square face.

GUTFELD: Eagle face.

PERINO: Strong jaw.

OK, Benghazi, go.

GUTFELD: You cannot blame the administration for not finding these guys within a year. It took us a decade to get bin Laden. However, I don't think there's any effort in this at all. The reason why there is no effort in looking for these people is because the media colluded with the administration into a single conclusion that Benghazi didn't matter as much as anything else did.

And in a way to me, they were slow on Benghazi as a reaction to Fox News. The more we followed the story, the less they took it seriously. I call it Fox News avoidance syndrome. The more serious we took it, the more they were like, that's a Fox News thing.

PERINO: Yes, those people are crazy.

GUTFELD: Yes.

PERINO: But George Stephanopoulos of ABC, on his show "This Week", he interviewed a State Department employee, Greg Hicks, who testified earlier this year. Let's listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS: It appears that there have been something of a career limbo inside the State Department?

GREG HICKS, STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE: That's correct. That's true.

STEPHANOPOULOS: The State Department says this was an assignment you requested. You're getting the same pay as before, but do you feel you're being punished for speaking out?

HICKS: Yes, I feel that I have been punished. I don't know why I was punished. I don't know why I was shunted aside. Put in a closet, if you will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PERINO: Kimberly, when it comes to prosecuting this case, is -- does the trail just go cold and just hope it goes away? Or do you think that somebody like Gregory Hicks can keep it on the front burner to try to get some answers?

GUILFOYLE: I think he can if he's brave and he has enough recall and information to be able to, you know, keep it alive and put it forward. I think what he says is true. I mean, they were hoping this would be enough of a deterrence for anyone else to come forward. See how we punish? You see what we do if you try and go against us?

And the reason why he was cast aside and treated like this is because he wouldn't engage in the lies and deceptions that they had Susan Rice and others go out and do. If Obama wants to know why he's having a hard time, it's because he lost so much credibility with the lies, the dishonestly, the lack of justice and focus on the loss of American lives with Benghazi.

And now, they have the audacity to have Susan Rice, parade around this week, the same person that lied to the American people, to try and sell a war in Syria -- good luck.

PERINO: Well, that was well said. I have to say.

GUILFOYLE: Thank you.

PERINO: Eric, you want to weigh in on Benghazi?

BOLLING: Yes, look, I'm very much against a Syrian attack. The difference, people say what about Benghazi. There's a huge difference.

I'm not anti-war. I think we have the greatest, strongest military in the world. We should use it when American interests are attacked, like they were in Benghazi.

I've said it before. When we're attacked, we don't retreat, we reload. I would do the same thing here. I would really look to find these people, put to jail. It was a year ago. Enough time. We know who they are. Let's go get them.

Syria's a different thing for me, completely different animal. But Benghazi's important too.

PERINO: Bob, do you think the administration feels any obligation to answer some of these questions that have remained elusive?

BOLLING: I think -- I think as usual people are trying to guess what they're doing or not doing. Have no idea what they're doing on the ground there investigating the cases.

The other thing I like to point out with all this outrage about Benghazi around this table, 66 American diplomats were killed by terrorists since 1977. A handful were brought to justice. What do you say about them? Why don't you bring them forward?

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: I say --

BECKEL: Bring them forward and have 22 hearings --

GUTFELD: I say if you're against Benghazi, you're a coward and should be ashamed.

BECKEL: Fine, then I'm a coward and I should be ashamed of myself.

Sixty-six diplomats have died at the hands of terrorists. We haven't done anything. What happened with them?

GUILFOYLE: Guess what, one is too many. They should all matter.

BECKEL: Nobody ever mentioned it.

BOLLING: You think we should move on about Benghazi but attack Syria?

Do you know --

GUTFELD: You would be a coward if you didn't believe that.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: Why is that hypocritical? Those are apples and oranges.

What are you talking about?

BOLLING: Yes, because the apples are the ones we're supposed to protect. The American apples we're supposed to protect and go after.

BECKEL: It wasn't the Libyan government that killed the people in Benghazi.

BOLLING: Let's go after the people who did.

BECKEL: We are. How do you know tat we don't know?

GUILFOYLE: A year later, nothing.

BOLLING: I'm fairly sure, we know --

BECKEL: You're fairly sure?

BOLLING: -- who one of the masterminds was and he's not in custody.

PERINO: If I don't hit the eject button, we're not going to have time for Bob's block. We're going to talk about if there's anything President Obama can say tonight in his interviews that will change public opinion on Syria.

That discussion when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECKEL: Sorry, folks, little discussion back here.

Welcome back to "The Five".

We're just moments away from a brand new interview with President Obama on Syria. He just did a sit down, a rare one, with Fox News. You can see it all coming up on "Special Report." He's also sitting down with five other networks.

Let's talk about what he needs to say tomorrow to convince the American people to back his plans.

I think what he needs to say from my standpoint is he needs to have convincing evidence. I would use the video of the children being killed and dying from these chemical weapons, to show that there's no question that was done by Assad and his government, and that that cannot be allowed to happen in this world, this day and age. Otherwise, other people will use it and the United States has a responsibility to take it out, period.

And it's not a state of war.

BOLLING: I would -- I would agree with you, that, in fact, it wouldn't be a state of war. But I would also ask him where in the Constitution does sit say he can attack a sovereign nation that --

BECKEL: The War Powers Act.

BOLLING: -- is not posing any imminent threat to the United States?

BECKEL: War Powers Act.

BOLLING: I don't think it's in the War Powers Act. I think there has to be --

BECKEL: What was the imminent problem with Granada when Reagan --

BOLLING: I'm simply talking about this one, Bob. I'm talking about this one. It's not our war.

BECKEL: Yes, Dana?

PERINO: OK, I think he might need to say everything that you've heard from people who work for me and my government in the last 48 hours is inoperable. And here's where I stand and this is going to be the red line that I'm drawing for myself -- because I've been trying to be supportive of the administration. I'm so confused at this point, I don't know where they stand on anything.

BECKEL: I agree.

Greg?

GUTFELD: He needs to present a singular point of view. His own administration contradicts themselves constantly. That's an issue.

So, my advice for Obama, if you want to become the coolest president ever and the ultimate warrior, you declare you're moving forward on bombing Syria and then you don't. You go to Iran and you nuke those sites.

As the world watches, they'll go, my god, President Obama is nuts.

And then that's it and no one will mess with us. That's how it works.

But you go big or you go home. That's why we have a problem.

Unbelievably small is unbelievably embarrassing.

GUILFOYLE: Well, not when -- OK. There are small --

(LAUGHTER)

GUTFELD: What are you talking about?

GUILFOYLE: No -- I'm giving you two a compliment. Sometimes good things come in small packages.

(CROSSTALK)

BECKEL: OK, that's exactly what you meant.

GUILFOYLE: As for the president, he needs to convince the American people to support him to say, America is a country that cares deeply about human injustice, about humanity, about women and children. Help me show the Syrian people and the world at large that America will stand by you in your hour of need.

BECKEL: That was very well said.

"One More Thing" is up next!

GUILFOYLE: Why do you have to be mean to me?

BECKEL: I wasn't being mean.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUILFOYLE: All right. It's time now for "One More Thing." And at the very end, I'm going to tell you who's happy.

Greg?

GUTFELD: Banned phrase, reading tea leaves. Pundits always say this when they're trying to draw conclusions from other pundits. I've been reading the tea leaves and it looks like, blah, blah -- shut up!

It's called tatiography (ph), which is fortune-telling based on the pattern of tea leaves. I don't like it. Just say what you're going to say. Stop using this dumb phraseology.

PERINO: Or you can say, I predict --

GUTFELD: Very good, little lady.

GUILFOYLE: Can we be a little nicer on Monday? A little more cheerful perhaps?

GUTFELD: No, it's Monday.

PERINO: Yes, I can be cheerful. I'm going to be cheerful right now, because you've been waiting for this announcement.

You know Greg Gutfeld is going to have another book that's coming out.

BECKEL: Oh, no!

PERINO: The title of this book has been a major secret. But I found that it was today. It was -- I read the tea leaves from John Kerry and the title of Greg's new book is going to be "Unbelievably Small."

GUILFOYLE: Oh, see --

PERINO: Why is there not a picture? Where is the picture? It's obviously Monday.

GUTFELD: They were supposed to make a cover. I'm telling you, when you have a producer on Monday, he's always hung over. He's always hung over.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: There it is.

PERINO: "Unbelievably Small."

GUTFELD: Finally, what were you guys doing back there.

PERINO: It's going to be a bestseller.

GUILFOYLE: That was interesting.

PERINO: It was a brilliant idea, poorly executed, much like half this show.

GUILFOYLE: Didn't take away from your cues like, "you complete me"

thing. It's all good.

Bob?

BECKEL: The only problem is if Greg does come out with his book, we'll have to promote it for a year and a half.

Now, these are the cigars that I smoke before the show every day and these are the new e-cigarettes. You heard about this. This is --

PERINO: Oh, that was well-timed.

GUILFOYLE: You been doing that on set and driving me nuts.

BECKEL: This draws nicotine but all the other bad chemicals that are not in. They just did a study out of Oakland University and it said that people who use these have been getting as much relief from cigarette smoking as people that use the patch. Maybe the way of the future from people who do have cigarette smoke, you don't get anything smoke from this.

BOLLING: Do we get second-hand used nicotine breath?

GUILFOYLE: You've been doing it on the set. Bolling?

(CROSSTALK)

BOLLING: We have to move on. We've got to go quickly.

Very quickly, 2014 Super Bowl halftime act has been announced. Bruno Mars. Take a listen.

GUILFOYLE: He's awesome.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

BOLLING: Other notables, 1993, Michael Jackson, '02, U2, '04, Janet and JT's nip slip. But my favorite is Aerosmith in 2001. 2008, Tom Petty and Whitney Houston, and that amazing rendition --

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Well, we don't have much time left. But I just wanted to tell you, the United States -- I don't know why we're not happy. This is Bob really smoked in my face. But we rank 17th in happiness in the world.

Take a look at the list. Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, all blond and very thin.

PERINO: And socialist.

GUILFOYLE: Canada, number six -- I can't believe this. Actually Mexico is pretty high. They're 16th. I don't know why they want to come here and be -- right? Who knows?

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: That's it for us. Thanks for watching. Tomorrow night, special edition of "The Five" at 11 p.m. Eastern.

Content and Programming Copyright 2013 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2013 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.