House OKs stricter security plan for refugees entering US
Rep. Ed Royce discusses future of bill, national security concerns
This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," November 22, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS HOST: Good Sunday morning.
Brand new Fox polls this morning putting a spotlight on how Americans feel about President Obama's Syrian refugee plan.
Hi, everyone. I'm Maria Bartiromo. Welcome to "Sunday Morning Futures."
So what will come of the president's plan to accept at least 10,000 refugees into the country after news of at least one Paris attacker posing as a refugee? And the House approving a plan to tighten the refugee system. House Foreign affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce with me in moments.
Plus, the president with strong words for Russian President Vladimir Putin on who his forces are targeting in the fight against ISIS in Syria. Retired four star General Jack Keane with me on the military and diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and Russia, coming up.
And the GOP's top donor not handing over any money to any presidential campaign yet. Charles Koch explains why. He will join me in my exclusive sit-down as we look ahead this morning on "Sunday Morning Futures."
The House passing a bill which would tighten the screening of Syrian refugees trying to enter the United States. Forty-seven Democrats breaking from President Obama in voting for the stricter security plan. The bill would require three high-ranking administration officials to sign off on each refugee entering the country.
And the concerns of the House also being shared by the American public. Take a look at this breaking poll. A Fox News poll showing that 67 percent of voters now oppose the president's plan to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees into the country.
Joining me right now is California Congressman Ed Royce, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Congressman, thanks very much for joining us this morning.
REP. ED ROYCE, R-CALI., CHAIRMAN, HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: First, I want to ask you about the -- the threats to America. We saw the video from ISIS on the Internet showing Times Square. How credible are these videos? Should we be worried?
ROYCE: Well, remember, we, in New York City, have been able to knock down 12 potential attacks, planned attacks, after 9/11, successfully. So the United States has a history post 9/11 of being able to prevent attacks. At the same time, clearly, ISIS is trying to carry out those attacks and now they have a safe haven, a safe haven with their caliphate where they plan and train people. And that's what's so dangerous here.
BARTIROMO: And they have clearly begun to infiltrate the flow of refugees?
ROYCE: Well, they did. Obviously the bomber who blew himself up outside of the stadium in Paris, he himself was carrying a Syrian passport, had come in through Greece with that refugee population.
BARTIROMO: So what's the answer here? Talk to us about the bill that is in the House right now, to make it stricter and tougher for refugees to get into the country. The president said already he will veto that.
ROYCE: Yes, but that bill passed by better than a two to one margin with large bipartisan support. And what that bill does is try to have a vetting process where right now the FBI have indicated to us that they don't have the data to really vet. They don't have the intelligence on many of these individuals. And, remember, even in the case of some of the Iraqi refugees, we later found out four of them had been terrorists. So what we're saying here is that we need that in place and we need the director of the FBI and Homeland Security to sign off by attesting that we have got the -- the capability to vet and we want to see that in place so that we can protect American citizens.
BARTIROMO: Can the president prove that the -- that the vetting process can, in fact, be done effectively? I mean when you think -- talk to us about the vetting process. We all know that America has a huge heart, that we want to keep our borders open. However, when you consider the fact that ISIS has infiltrated the flow of refugees, how -- how do you vet, how do you get the information you need?
ROYCE: Well, two points here. One is, having the president assert this is not to us as the solution. The solution is to have the director of Homeland Security, of the FBI, they need to attest to us that -- because they're -- they're the agencies that are raising the concerns with Congress about not having the background on these specific individuals. Second, if the president is really concerned about this situation, Maria, why didn't the president, in the first place, authorize the use of the air strikes to stop ISIS from taking this territory and helping to create this refugee flow. And why won't he sign off, for example, on today, the type of robust air campaign against ISIS or why doesn't he sign off on arming the Kurds and the Yazidis and the tribesmen, Sunni tribesmen? I mean can you imagine the frustration of having 190,000 Kurdish soldiers, 30 percent of them female, not having access to the type of weaponry that ISIS has. They don't have the mortars, the artillery, the long range -- or the anti-tank guns. And so we really need to have a reversal of his policies.
BARTIROMO: So why is the president pushing back on this? I -- I -- I mean, I just don't understand it.
ROYCE: We don't --
BARTIROMO: He said he wants to defeat ISIS.
ROYCE: If he wants to defeat ISIS, then why not support the suggestions that have been made -- been made all along to have not -- not just a robust air campaign, we've got 3,500 U.S. trainers and special ops and forces in the region trying to help the Kurds and the -- and the Sunni tribes that are fighting ISIS. Why not allow them to have the weapons? Why not -- why not authorize our pilots to be able to hit these targets? Three-quarters of these pilots come back without dropping any ordinance because they can't get authorization from the White House. So under this kind of circumstance, he's tied our hands with our -- with the containment strategy where he keeps claiming, despite all the evidence that ISIS is carrying out attacks now and recruiting from all over the world because people think they can't be defeated --
BARTIROMO: Right.
ROYCE: He keeps asserting, well, they're contained. No, they're not.
BARTIROMO: The -- the -- the -- the issue that he keeps bringing forward is that he doesn't want any civilian casualties. I mean if -- if we've got so many of our air strikes that are actually at the end of the day not working because they're not actually hitting the targets because there are civilian casualties, is that the answer, is that what he keeps saying?
ROYCE: Well, it's -- it's not civilian casualties. He's saying -- I mean, look at what the French just did to hit -- I think it was four of the training camps of -- of ISIS. They said, well, those are training camps.
We're going to take those out after the Paris bombings. We must allow our pilots and those on the ground, our spotters with the U.S. military, and we must allow the Kurds and Yazidis and others that want to do the fighting to take the fight to the enemy. And this idea that you're going to not only avoid casualties, but you're not even going to offer a safe zone, which in both political parties people have said, protect, protect the Sunnis, Yazidis and Kurds up in the north by offering a safe zone so that -- so that the refugees have a place where they can be safe. If he's not even willing to do that deminimis (ph) action, how are we going to defeat ISIS? No, we have to have a reversal of this strategy.
BARTIROMO: Do you have any backing to say why the president is taking this stance? I mean what -- what does your gut tell you? Why -- why does he keep saying no to the things that you and so many other military men have been saying, this is not working, this is a failure?
ROYCE: I think he has underestimated the danger of ISIS from the beginning. It was the JV team. It was never going to be a threat to the United States. But we have found that because of the Internet and their ability to exploit their victories on the battlefield, that now they have become very much a recruiting problem, not just in Europe, but in the United States. So he should go back to his basic premise and rethink that thought that this is not a big problem.
Second, I think he's -- he's averse to taking on the attitudes in the Shia capital of Baghdad and in -- in Iran by actually helping the Kurds, the -- helping the -- the Sunni tribesmen fighting ISIS, helping the Yazidis. Why? Because that's in the -- not in the interests of those Shia-led governments. But he needs to -- he needs to re-evaluate --
BARTIROMO: Unbelievable.
ROYCE: That position as well. He should not be trying with this relationship with Iran and the Shia-led government in Baghdad at the expense --
BARTIROMO: Yes.
ROYCE: At the expense of the stability in the region to keep pushing this.
BARTIROMO: We got to get to Eric, because we want to look at the impending Senate vote. But what are you going to do?
ROYCE: We're going to move legislation through my committee, not just on arming the Kurds, but also on the issue of a safe zone. And we're also going to try to push this administration to use air power effectively and hit these ISIS targets.
BARTIROMO: Mr. Chairman, thank you.
ROYCE: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Thanks very much for joining us. Chairman Ed Royce here.
We want to get Fox News senior correspondent Eric Shawn. He's going to give us some context on this impending bill right now in the Senate.
Good morning, Eric.
ERIC SHAWN, FOX NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Maria, congressman, and good morning, everyone.
So, how do we respond to this human catastrophe? Well, the choice seems to be balancing a humanitarian welcome with the fears of terrorism.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If you layer it with more and more bureaucracy that at -- doesn't actually make us safer because it doesn't do a better job of screening but simply makes it almost impossible to have process individuals who are coming in, then you're effectively ending the refugee program for people who desperately need it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHAWN: We have been here before. Millions desperately fleeing turmoil for the safety of our American shores. During the Holocaust, this ship, the MS St. Louis was packed with 908 German Jewish refugees and was tragically turned back. Many of its passengers later died in Auschwitz and other concentration camps.
But now the looming specter of terrorism is aimed at stopping or slowing the flow from Syria. Democratic minority leader, Senator Harry Reid, predicts Senate Democrats will block the new stricter measures, even as the president has promised that veto.
But one of the lucky few who has made it is Hussam al Roustom. He fled with his wife and two young children from Homs, Syria, and was resettled in June in Jersey City, New Jersey, by the group, Church World Service.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HUSSAM AL ROUSTOM, SYRIAN REFUGEE (through translator): The individuals that putting their four or five children on boats through the -- through the sea and risking their lives, and death, this person can't be a terrorist.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHAWN: Al Roustom now works a 12 hour overnight shift in a Jersey bakery and he says he thankfully has a new start and a new life in our country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AL ROUSTOM: In my mind, and I made up my mind that that's it, I'm here now and I'm going to get acclimated here. I'm going to start my life from new here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHAWN: Well, despite some successes, as you mentioned, Maria, polls show 67 percent of Americans oppose the resettling of Syrian refugees here and 1,682 have already arrived this year. The administration still plans to take that 10,000 next year.
Maria.
BARTIROMO: All right, Eric, thanks very much. Eric Shawn with the latest there.
Taking the fight directly to ISIS and destroying the terrorist group once and for all. General Jack Keane is on deck next. Why the U.S. needs to wrap up its efforts and demonstrate real leadership.
Follow us on Twitter @mariabartiromo, @sundayfutures. Let us know what you'd like to hear from General Jack Keane. He's coming up live next. Stay with us. We're looking ahead this morning on "Sunday Morning Futures."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
My next guest testified before Congress this week, advocating for a new strategy to destroy ISIS, arguing that air strikes can work, but not at the rate our military is conducting them.
Joining us right now is General Jack Keane, retired four star general, chairman of the Institute for the Study of War, and former vice chief of staff of the Army and a Fox News military analyst.
General, good to see you. Thanks so much for joining us.
GEN. JACK KEANE (RET.) FOUR STAR GENERAL: Good to be here, Maria.
BARTIROMO: We just heard from Ed Royce, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, who said the strategy must be reversed and begun again to defeat ISIS. Tell us what the strategy should look like, general.
KEANE: Yes, sure. Real quickly, I testified before Chairman Royce's committee this week and it was an honor to do that, along with the Homeland Security Committee. I mean, quite frankly, what we have to do is the president, when he said defeat ISIS, give him a check for that. When he said, we're going to rely on local indigenous forces as the ground force supported by air power, give them another check. But then, when we saw the execution, Maria, the execution of that was nothing near what it should be.
We have to unleash America's air power, remove the restrictions we have on what we call the rules of engagement. It looks like Secretary Carter is beginning to take steps in that direction. That's good news.
Secondly, once and for all, provide all the trainers, advisers and air controllers that those local indigenous forces require, that would take us from about 3,000 plus to about 10,000 plus. So we're going to triple down on -- on that capability.
We have to mission the special forces so that they can conduct large scale in and out raids of critical nodes and infrastructure. This is combat. At night, using the element of surprise to do it. We also have to get all the equipment in that Chairman Royce was talking about. This is UAVs, Apaches, mine breaching equipment, Humvees, et cetera, that those local indigenous forces need, all in on that equipment once and for all. Safe zones in Syria, north and south, to be able to put the refugees there. We can protect them on (ph) international forces, on the ground and in the air.
And then identify some units for eventual combat deployment, part of the Arab nation, NATO, U.S., down the road. If this strategy fails, then we have to go in the ground with those kind of combat units. And we have to get a political settlement in Syria if we're going to be able to defeat ISIS in Syria.
BARTIROMO: Why is all of the above not being done right now, sir?
KEANE: I think Chairman Royce was correct when he said that the president underestimated ISIS. I think he did this. And we can only speculate. I think he put a bet down that they would be able to contain ISIS, not destroy it, certainly not defeat it, and pass this problem to the next administration. The problem is, ISIS is not being contained, as we are all been talking about for a week plus now. They now have a global strategy that's unfolding right before their eyes, and they're expanding, not being contained, and they have to be defeated.
So the president lost that bet. And now he's trying to scramble around to come up with something that is short of what's necessary. I suspect it will be another incremental step. Will -- it will remain to be seen what he's going to do.
BARTIROMO: And it feels like the American people realize that, but the president seems out of touch with how the American people are feeling right now. Let me move on to Russia because in a world where you don't have U.S. leadership in front, there's a vacuum and that vacuum is filled. Right now it is being filled by Russia and Vladimir Putin. Explain to us the relationship between the U.S. and Russia and how you see it.
KEANE: Well, right now, we have an -- obviously, a very strained relationship with Crimea, the Ukraine, his military intervention into Syria. We have a cooperative relationship in terms of our pilots. They have a common frequency to use so we can stay out of each other's way.
But we should not enter into a cooperative agreement with Russia to attack Syria -- I mean to attack ISIS in Syria. And here's why. He's in there -- Putin is in there propping up the Alawite regime. This is Assad. We are never going to be able to defeat ISIS until there's a -- that war comes to an end because all the Sunnis that are fighting Assad, we need them to fight ISIS. That war has got to stop. That war is never going to stop as long as there are Alawites in charge of that regime. Those Sunnis will continue to fight.
We cannot enter into a cooperative relation to go after ISIS with Russia because the payoff of that will be to sustain the Alawite regime in Syria.
BARTIROMO: Right.
KEANE: That's a trap we should not walk into.
Secondly, it's a moral absurdity, Maria, because Russia and Iran have propped up Assad's killing machine. This problem we have in Europe in terms of migration and have 10,000 coming to the United States is a result of this killing machine for four years, 250,000 dead, 11 million people displaced, seven inside the country, four outside the country. Russia propped up all of that. We can't go down that road with Russia.
BARTIROMO: Real quick, should we be letting in refugees? Is the vetting process credible? Really quickly, sir.
KEANE: I think we can do both, let the refugees in and put together a -- a comprehensive vetting process that the Congress is suggesting. We can do both.
BARTIROMO: General, thanks so much for your insights this morning. We so appreciate your time.
KEANE: Good talking to you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: We'll see you soon. General Jack Keane.
Coming up next, he started at $20 million. Now Charles Koch is operating a $100 billion company and has had a big impact on the GOP money race. He'll explain why he has not yet supported a candidate. My exclusive interview with Charles Koch, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
At the most recent GOP debate, GOP presidential candidates told me spending cuts and tax reform are among the biggest priorities to improve the economy. Voters sharing similar feelings in this past Pew Research poll and 59 percent say they want Congress to completely change the federal tax system. Here now, billionaire industrialist Charles Koch reacting when he sat down with me last week in Palm Springs.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHARLES KOCH, CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF KOCH INDUSTRIES: That's one of the biggest problems in the country. We have debt and unfunded liabilities of over $100 trillion. We're headed for a financial cliff. And people want these programs, but they're not sustainable at this level. So -- so we -- it needs to be dealt with. And this isn't one party, this is both parties contributing to this irresponsible spending and waste.
BARTIROMO: And -- and the big kahuna in all of this is the entitlements, Social Security --
KOCH: Right.
BARTIROMO: In particular. How do you think we actually move the needle on this? I mean what kind of changes do you think make sense?
KOCH: Well, I think it -- we need to consider that -- that people are living longer and will live longer. And then we need to -- to allow innovation to occur, rather than all these regulations and other things that are stifling it, because if we do that, if we allow innovation, medicine can be practiced much more efficiently. Everything through economy can. But -- but we need to get rid of these misguided policies that are stifling these opportunities to make these fabulous improvements in everybody's life.
BARTIROMO: I've got to ask you about, you know, you being enemy number one for -- for the Democratic Party. I mean, you know, money in -- your critics will say money in politics has really changed and made the system ugly. What do you say to people who are upset about money in politics?
KOCH: Well, I -- I think that's a straw man. I think they're really upset about is that people are opposing their idea, which -- which I call the fatal concede and William Easterly (ph) called the tourney of the experts, is their -- their idea is a few of those philosopher kings and queens know better how people should live their lives than -- than people do, because people are either too evil or too stupid to run their own lives. But they have the wisdom to tell them how to live them, force them to -- to live that way. So I oppose that.
So when -- when they say, we're trying to rig the system -- you know, we're trying to unrig the system. I'm putting the money in to change the system, to get the money out of the system. Like we -- we're hoping to raise $250 million for the elections, not just the presidential, but all the elections next year. You say, boy, that's a lot of money. And it is a tremendous amount. But you look at the hundreds of billions, maybe trillions that are going to support the -- the current system, like the corporate welfare, including the way the tax code works all the exemptions and privileges in that are estimated to be over $5 trillion.
BARTIROMO: Charles, you -- you recently made an acquisition. You -- you -- you have been investing in biotech. Is this where you think the growth in the economy is in the next 10 years?
KOCH: Well, I -- once again, I believe in the division of labor by comparative advantage (ph). Everybody needs to understand what their capabilities are and do that, not what's harder (ph) choice. But -- but -- but -- but we're investing heavily in -- in two new areas. One is biotechnology. That's biofuels. That's making chemicals with biological processes. That's better utilizing fertilizer and stimulating plant genes so they use less water and can withstand temperature changes better. So we're working all that (ph). The problem is to get approval to implement these things that -- that help everybody is so difficult now.
BARTIROMO: Well, I think the regulatory environment has been one issue and the reason that businesses are not hiring more jobs and -- and creating more jobs rather.
KOCH: And it's why the -- the median wage over the last eight years has actually declined. That's shocking because with all this technology, if it were allowed to be applied, the productivity of labor would go up and -- but we have this two-tiered system that the cronyists are making more money than ever and the -- the -- the disadvantaged people who have nothing and no say are being held down. And the worst thing is being unemployed because, as I said, is you don't learn these skills that you learn from taking any job. And -- and -- and the studies show, if you get a job and keep it, you won't stay in poverty long because if you apply yourself and you learn, you will advance.
BARTIROMO: Why haven't you endorsed a candidate yet?
KOCH: My view is the -- the -- the Democrats are taking us down the road to serfdom at 100 miles an hour and the Republicans are taking us there at 70 miles an hour. So they're both complicit in where we are and where we're headed. I don't support Democrats now because they're trying to destroy free speech in the market place of ideas, which is foundational to a free society. So whatever else they stand for, anybody who's going to do that, I can't support it in any way.
But what I'm really looking for is -- is a -- a presidential candidate who will try to reverse that direction, rather than, OK, maybe they'd rather go
70 miles. They'll take us there at 60. We need somebody like a Calvin Coolidge or a William Gladstone in Great Britain who will change the trajectory of the country.
And -- and both of them created marvelous prosperity, improved the welfare system, helped the poor, made government more efficient. I mean they -- they had to do radical things, like fire non-performers, get rid of the waste and corruption.
I mean this is -- this is heavy lifting, because you've got a lot of vested interests that want to keep it that way.
BARTIROMO: Charles, thanks so much for joining us.
KOCH: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Charles Koch's new book, "Good Profit," on store shelves now.
President Obama says it would be shameful for the U.S. to vet refugees based on their religion.
And now new Fox polling shows voters have a very strong opinion on the matter, as well.
We'll tell you about it next.
And when our panel joins us and we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
In the wake of the Paris terrorist attacks, some GOP candidates taking major heat for their stance on Syrian refugees, some of them floating the idea that the U.S. should give preference to Christians over Muslims.
President Obama calls that idea "shameful." And according to a new Fox Poll, a solid majority of voters agree with him.
Let's bring in our panel. As you can see, this latest poll numbers.
Ed Rollins is with me, former principal White House adviser to President Reagan. He has been a long-time strategist to business and political leaders. And he is a Fox News political analyst.
Judith Miller, adjunct fellow at The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. She's a Pulitzer-Prize winning author and journalist and a Fox News contributor.
And, "The Wall Street Journal's" editorial board member.
Good to see everybody.
Thanks very much for joining us.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi.
BARTIROMO: Your thoughts on this past week. Mary Kissel, let me kick it off with you.
MARY KISSEL, EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, Donald Trump, I think he is -- he effectively emotes, he doesn't articulate a strategy. But he does say what a lot of people think, which I thought we have eyes, we saw what happened in Paris, we're afraid that it's going to happen here. The polls reflect that.
BARTIROMO: Yes, the polls reflect that, but also, you have President Obama having been traveling all over the world, Ed Rollins. And when he first made the comment that, you know, he basically, you know, like sort of pushed back at Republicans, it was a political response to an issue that Americans are really afraid of.
ED ROLLINS, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: The president who is going to be above politics has been probably the most political president I've seen in my 50 years of politics. He totally misses where the country is on this issue. I think at the end of the day, we're all shocked and saddened by the Paris situation, but we also know it could help here.
And I think the concern about the Syrian refugees and certainly I -- I think we have to have a humanitarian side to this. But at the same time, 26 people were all basically came here and planned 9/11 and 19 of them got in the country and they knocked down to towers and tried to knock down the White House. So...
KISSEL: But they did not come as refugees, Ed. That's...
ROLLINS: But the issue...
KISSEL: -- to remember.
ROLLINS: -- the issue is how do we basically safeguard the people that are coming in here?
We have no system and it's this -- the FBI and the CIA and Homeland Security cannot, at this point in time, guarantee who these people are going to be.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We've...
ROLLINS: So you invite them to come in and you bring 10,000 people into this country, knowing full well the Syrians are sending -- the terrorists are saying we want to get America next.
MILLER: We have a system. It has worked. We've had 2,174 Syrians come into this country since 9/11. Not one of them has been arrested or deported because of terror-related activities.
However, I agree with you, Ed, we have to be sure, now that ISIS is clearly targeting us and clearly trying to sneak people into the country, we have to be sure that our system is up to the test.
And that's why...
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: Well, I don't understand...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- part of the problem.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We could be...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't understand...
KISSEL: We could be welcoming of refugees
MILLER: Exactly.
KISSEL: -- and yet prudent and reasonable about how we vet them. I think that's what Paul Ryan tried to do with his House bill. And I think it's simply unfair to characterize Americans, who are rightly worried about their security, as somehow bigots.
Maria, very briefly, on the Christian issue, Christians are being targeted for genocide right now. This isn't about prefencing Christians over other religious groups. It's about doing what America has always done, which is to give shelter to those who are targets.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: But I don't think we can have a religious test. But what I don't understand why the president just didn't embrace the legislation to tighten the standards and make sure that everyone...
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: You know why?
Because he's trying to use...
MILLER: It's a no-brainer.
KISSEL: -- the refugee issue as a political wedge issue against Republicans. We wouldn't have this refugee crisis if the president had gone into Syria, enforced the red line, targeted Assad's airfields.
But he doesn't...
MILLER: That's right.
KISSEL: -- and now we have hundreds of thousands of people fleeing.
MILLER: That's a great point.
ROLLINS: The danger, though, is Trump and Carson are basically saying outrageous things.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
ROLLINS: There's no filter there.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They are.
ROLLINS: And we're going to have to live with this. Jack Keane and both of your guests today, Chairman Royce and Jack Keane articulate exactly what the problem is and what we ought to seek as solutions.
And Carson and Trump, who are the front of the pack here, have to be very careful what they say.
BARTIROMO: Well, they both really went specifics on the airstrikes so far, the fact that we are missing targets because of this politically correctness, frankly.
ROLLINS: We put our handcuffs on our -- we go out and say you can't have civilian casualties. The whole premise -- and this goes back to my days in the Reagan administration -- we used to talk about we can't have civilian casualties.
These people live in these camps...
BARTIROMO: Right.
ROLLINS: -- and the bottom line, you give them warning, we're going to bomb these camps, get out of there...
MILLER: And there is no excuse for not bombing supply lines and trucks...
ROLLINS: That's right.
MILLER: -- that were carrying oil that finances these operations out of Raqqah. He has not been willing to do this. He must step up and do it now.
KISSEL: Why?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't understand.
MILLER: Because he does want to hand this over...
ROLLINS: The premise...
MILLER: -- to the next president.
ROLLINS: -- the premise that the truck drivers may be civilian drivers...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He wants to posture on this.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, he does.
ROLLINS: -- is absurd. Anybody that's -- that's driving those trucks is not part of the enemy forces.
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: This is like Bosnia. I'm sorry...
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: -- but you're not going to defeat ISIS with an air campaign.
MILLER: Yes, this is true.
KISSEL: We need to give protection to the Kurds. We need to give the Sunnis a reason to ally with us. And we need to dump the nuclear deal with Iran.
Why is this president not getting Assad out of power?
Because Assad is backed by Iran. The president is giving political leverage to Tehran, to Moscow. He hasn't -- he hasn't...
(CROSSTALK)
BARTIROMO: -- it's not one of his strategies, to win.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: Mary, if you get rid of Assad right now, you will have Damascus go the way of Libya. You will have no government there and no...
KISSEL: And you know what, this is...
MILLER: -- and no one to do a deal.
KISSEL: -- this is the reasoning...
MILLER: You need (INAUDIBLE)...
KISSEL: -- this is the reasoning of the Democrats all along. We can't go in there because we're only going to make it worse. We've been hearing it for three to four years now. It gets worse and worse and worse and now terror is on our doorstep.
MILLER: I -- I have been...
ROLLINS: Well, we're not getting rid of Assad as long as...
MILLER: -- I've been...
ROLLINS: -- as long as Putin is backing him. And that's...
MILLER: That's right, and the Iranians. It's not going to happen.
ROLLINS: Putin has to negotiate that out.
BARTIROMO: Let me check in with "MediaBuzz" and Howie Kurtz, who's standing by right now, on at the top of the hour.
Howie, good morning to you.
HOWARD KURTZ, FOX NEWS HOST, "MEDIABUZZ": Good morning, Maria.
We're going to drill down on how the Paris attacks have utterly transformed the coverage of the 2016 campaign, journalists speaking out in a more opinionated fashion, being much more aggressive toward President Obama, in a way we have rarely seen in this administration.
And then, in a very different vein, the editor of the National Enquirer on how his supermarket tabloid forced Charlie Sheen to go on the "Today" show and acknowledge that he's HIV positive and whether Charlie Sheen told the truth to Matt Laurer.
BARTIROMO: Wow. We will see you in 20 minutes, Howie. Great show, we will be there. Thanks so much, Howard Kurtz.
We've got brand-new polls showing how the GOP race is shaping up, how the candidates would fare against Hillary Clinton in a general election. We're going to bring those polls to you next. Back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. We've got these brand-new polls out this morning showing Donald Trump at the top of the GOP race once again. Take a look at these polls: Trump, 28 percent support, followed by Carson at 18 percent. Cruz and Rubio still doing well, 14 percent, even. Bush down there at 5 percent, Christie also at 3 percent.
These poll numbers say it all. And this is after the ISIS conversation had become that much -- that much harsher.
Ed Rollins?
ROLLINS: Trump clearly shows strength, and the country is looking desperately for strength, and they contrast it with a very weak president.
So my sense is the -- the Paris disaster helped him because he was the guy out there saying it wouldn't happen on my watch. You know, whether that's true or not, regardless.
And I think the guy who's really dropped off the charts is Carson, who clearly didn't know where the places were on the map, let alone who our allies were. And I think, to a certain extent, people are taking a second look at that.
BARTIROMO: This is interesting, you guys. This is how the candidates would fare against Hillary Clinton in this -- this most recent poll.
This is just brand-new. We're showing this, this morning, for the first time. This is how the candidates would fare against Hillary Clinton in a general election. Mary?
KISSEL: Well, I think those polls reflect the post-Paris, that Americans want someone who's strong, who is going to defeat the terrorist threat and really wage the war on terror, not these half measures that President Obama has taken.
Two things, Maria -- I think the next GOP debate is going to separate the professionals from the amateurs. I think Rand Paul should drop out of this race right now. I think Ted Cruz deserves to be scrutinized for voting against terrorist surveillance message and dumbing down and really restricting the information that the NSA has.
And then, secondly, on the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton -- you've seen her already start to move to the right. She went from "This is not America's fight" in the last Democratic debate...
BARTIROMO: That's right.
KISSEL: ... to a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations where she's calling for President Obama's approach, plus a little more.
Expect her to move farther to the right. It's important for Republicans to remind voters of what her record is of misjudging Putin, missing the Arab Spring, Benghazi, leading from behind in Libya, and all the other decisions that she's taken. But the Republicans have to remind the voters now before she moves to the center.
BARTIROMO: A lot of people, Judy, felt that her speech at the Council on Foreign Relations was a -- a third Obama term, that it was very much in step with what the president...
MILLER: I really disagree. When she talks about creating safe zones, those are Republican ideas now.
These have come from the Republican candidates. She is moving to the right.
BARTIROMO: OK.
MILLER: She is moving to where she naturally is. What was unnatural for Hillary Clinton was to be President Obama's very weak secretary of state.
BARTIROMO: So why didn't she resign?
(LAUGHTER)
MILLER: You don't resign when you're secretary of state.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: What is Hillary Clinton's natural position? I'd refer everybody to former defense secretary Bob Gates' book, where he says that she made her vote against the surge in Iraq based on politics. Politics is what Hillary Clinton is about. There is no principle there. And that's why she would be such a dangerous president.
ROLLINS: Let's -- let's not misunderstand. We've talked about her moving to the right. She is not moving to the right. She's moving a little bit to the center. She was out there with Bernie Sanders, who is...
(LAUGHTER)
... is a socialist.
(CROSSTALK)
ROLLINS: That's as far left as you can get.
KISSEL: No, right from all the way on the left, yeah.
ROLLINS: She's a little bit to the right of Obama, but she's certainly not to where her husband to was, and she's certainly not to where our defense people want her to be.
And I don't -- I think, at the end of the day, she sees -- she can read polls. Every one of these people are beating her, including Trump and Carson. So at the end of the day, she's got to basically do something to adjust that presents herself as a leader, not the third term.
MILLER: Ed, she was in favor of arming Syrian moderates -- quote, "moderates" -- pragmatists, whatever we want to call them, three years ago, and her president said, "No, I'm not going to do that," against the advice of his military.
ROLLINS: She's also running away from her vote on Iraq.
MILLER: Yes, she -- she...
ROLLINS: At the end of the day, you know, she basically is going to do whatever is political, and at the end of the day...
MILLER: Such a surprise...
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: Is she disavowing the Iran nuclear deal? No. she's not.
(CROSSTALK)
KISSEL: Yeah, and is she -- is she calling for a major troop presence on the ground to protect the Kurds and the Sunnis in Iraq? Is she calling for a comprehensive strategy like the one General Keane just outlined? No, she's not.
I'd look to Republicans like Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina. These are the people who are outlining the kind of combined political and military strategy that we need to defeat this threat.
This is an apocalyptic cult that stretches from North Africa to the Middle East to Afghanistan and into -- into parts of Asia. This is the fight of our time. And we need someone with a strategy...
MILLER: And are you going to fight that alone without the Russians and without the Iranians?
KISSEL: I don't think the Russians and the Iranians have our interests in mind. They're not our allies.
MILLER: We have one point of common interest, the need to defeat ISIS. Diplomacy is all about making coalition when your interests coincide.
(CROSSTALK)
ROLLINS: I don't want to give up all my objections to the Russians on Ukraine and everything else that they have done simply to have a soul mate in this battle against ISIS.
If the U.S. basically wants to do this and do this alone, we can do it. We have our other allies, France and other European allies who will join us with this. And I think, at the end of the day, we need to commit to what it is that it will take. Our people in the Pentagon have been telling this president over and over again what he needs to do.
BARTIROMO: Why is he not listening?
ROLLINS: Because he doesn't...
MILLER: He never has.
KISSEL: Look, it is not in Iran's interest to defeat ISIS in Iraq. It gives Iran an excuse to stay in Iraq. The idea that Putin is coming in and helping us in Syria is a fiction and a fantasy. He is bombing our few allies that we have left in Syria.
BARTIROMO: Because he's trying to support Assad, and...
MILLER: That's the negotiation you have with him. You say to him, you want to be part of this coalition, you stop bombing moderates...
BARTIROMO: How do we trust him when we distrust Putin?
MILLER: Trust has nothing to do with it, Maria, verification. This is where Russian and American interests coincide, one of the few areas.
And by the way, if they're involved in Syria, it's very hard to also be fighting at the same time in Ukraine.
KISSEL: Oh, is Putin going to get out of -- get out of Ukraine?
ROLLINS: No...
MILLER: He's not going to get out of Ukraine...
(CROSSTALK)
BARTIROMO: ... on conflict. Putin needs conflict in order to look like a tough guy.
MILLER: He's got enough.
ROLLINS: He is a tough guy.
(LAUGHTER)
BARTIROMO: He certainly is a tough guy. Good point.
We'll be right back. More from our panel, as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures," right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. French President Francois Hollande is coming to the United States this week, for a meeting at the White House on Tuesday. Then he heads to Moscow to meet with Russian President Putin.
How could this change things? Could the tragedy in Paris bring about better relations with Russia?
I want to bring back our panel, Ed Rollins, Judy Miller, Mary Kissel.
Are you guys expecting anything to come out of this meeting with Hollande and President Obama on Tuesday, Judy?
MILLER: I think they are going to say the obvious things. This is Hollande's 9/11 moment. He knows he has to appear strong to his own people. He will do a deal with Obama to work together to defeat ISIS, and then he will go to Moscow and do exactly the same thing.
BARTIROMO: What kind of deals? I'm so...
(LAUGHTER)
I mean, as a viewer, as someone on the outside looking in, I'm so tired of these deals being done. I just want to get and defeat ISIS. And I feel that Americans are afraid after what happened in Paris.
ROLLINS: We're not -- they are afraid and they should be afraid. And at the end of the day, Obama is not going to do what his own military wants to do or what his own CIA wants to do or what his Homeland Security wants to do.
So the French can come over here and have a nice meeting, drink tea and all the rest of it, but at the end of the day, we're not going to give him what he wants and we're not going to basically make a deal that -- that basically empowers the Russians.
So the Russians are going to basically get in bed with the French. It will enhance Putin, and I think we'll sit by the sidelines again, unless people like Jack Keane, the congressman who was on, the chairman here -- they're the ones that are going to push this thing, and at the same time that, overwhelmingly, the Congress passes, in the House, a bill; Harry Reid basically says, no way, I'm not going to take it up.
BARTIROMO: They're going to -- they're going to veto it? They're going to block it in the Senate?
ROLLINS: Well, not even take it up, not even take it up.
BARTIROMO: Mary?
KISSEL: This is the most detached, clinical, bloodless president I have ever seen. He was in Asia this week talking about how he's not afraid, and really attacking Republicans as if Republicans were the enemy and not ISIS.
I think it's notable that we didn't invoke Article V after the Paris attacks. I think that probably didn't happen because there was probably a phone call from the Obama administration to the French saying don't ask us for this.
There's no change in strategy out of the White House. I think this visit is a formality. And Francois Hollande is starting to look like George W. Bush...
(LAUGHTER)
... doing air strikes without asking permission, trying to gather together a coalition. But it says something profoundly disturbing that our ally, the French, feel that they have to go to Vladimir Putin to ask for assistance. That tells you how topsy-turvy and backyard U.S. policy has been under this president.
BARTIROMO: And you say go back to the speech in Cairo?
KISSEL: Back in June 2009, President Obama, recall, made his first major speech where he came apologizing for America to the heart of the Muslim world. And he said, quote, "So let me be clear. No system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other."
And that told you everything that you needed to know about this president and his view of the world, that there was a moral equivalence there, that somehow America wasn't -- was just like other nations; we weren't that shining nation on the hill. And you see the consequence of that now, of America's retreat from the world and the vacuum that it's created in the global disorder that we have today.
BARTIROMO: We're going to take a short break, and we've got more, coming back. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Big thank you to our panel today. Thank you so much for joining us. I'll see you tomorrow morning on the Fox Business Network. That will do it for us today on "Sunday Morning Futures." Have a great day, everybody. I'll be on FBN at 6 a.m. tomorrow.
Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 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.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox