Trump v. Clinton: Who is more likely to defeat ISIS?; Congressman lashes out at TSA over inefficiencies

Defense experts debate on 'The Kelly File'


This is a rush transcript from "The Kelly File," May 20, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TRISH REGAN, FOX NEWS HOST:  Breaking tonight, search crews are ramping up the efforts to locate the black boxes from EgyptAir flight 804 in hopes of determining once and for all what brought that plane down.  

Welcome, everyone to "The Kelly File," I'm Trish Regan in tonight for Megyn Kelly.  Right now a navy ship is on its way to the crash scene.  It will search the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea for the flight data recorders.  So far, no terror group has claimed responsibility for the plane's destruction.  But there is a new clue tonight.  Reports now suggest smoke was detected in a lavatory near the cockpit.  Still it's unclear what and it's unclear who might have caused the crash.  

Back here at home the fear of a potential terror attack on a U.S. passenger plane is bringing the issue of national security and foreign policy right to the forefront of this presidential race.  And it's leading to an ugly back and forth between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  Mrs. Clinton striking first.  


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Trump this morning was out hot and early on Twitter when this happened saying, looks like another act of terror.  More proof that we're weak.  

HILLARY CLINTON, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  He says a lot of things that are provocative that actually make the important task of building this coalition, bringing everybody to the table and defeating terrorism, more difficult.   

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Let me ask you, do you think that Donald Trump is qualified to be president?

CLINTON:  No, I do not.   


REGAN:  Hours later, Mr. Trump responding saying, Hillary Clinton is the one who is unfit to be president.  Take a look.  


TRUMP:  So today we had a terrible tragedy, and she came up and she said that Donald Trump talked about radical Islamic terrorism.  He essentially shouldn't be running for office.  He doesn't have the right to run for office.  And I'm saying to myself, what just happened about 12 hours ago? A plane got blown out of the sky.  And if anything -- if anybody thinks it wasn't blown out of the sky, you are 100 percent wrong, folks, okay?


REGAN:  All right.  Trace Gallagher reporting for us from our West Coast Newsroom tonight.  Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT:  Trish, if there was ever a question about the polar opposite political instincts of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the crash of EgyptAir Flight 804 certainly settled it before any major details were known about the crash, Donald Trump, in a move many called impulsive, took to Twitter and declared that it was a deliberate act quoting here, looks like yet another terrorist attack.  

Airplane departed from Paris.  When will we get tough?  Smart, and vigilant.  Great hate and sickness.  Hillary Clinton's response was much more cautious saying we should wait for more information.  But Clinton was very quick to go after Trump, calling his comments irresponsible, dangerous, and reckless.  Watch.  


CLINTON:  I know how hard this job is.  And I know that we need steadiness as well as strength and smarts in it.  And I have concluded he is not qualified to be president of the United States.  


GALLAGHER:  Trump, who calls himself a counter-puncher hit back again and again saying, quote, "By the way, ask Hillary who blew up the plane last night.  Another terrible but preventable tragedy."  Trump went on to say, she's the one who is unfit to serve.  Watch.  


DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE:  So we're going to have to get very tough and very smart.  And Hillary Clinton can never get you there.  It's four more years of Obama, and this country can't take it.  


GALLAGHER:  Political experts believe this back and forth will be a key part of the campaign's narrative going forward with the Clinton camp citing her experience and temperament while accusing the Trump camp of being -- or Trump of being intemperate.  The Trump camp will then respond by hammering away at the Republican belief that Democrats are loathe to call any attack terrorism to avoid offending Muslims.  And according to a new Quinnipiac poll, this clash of temperaments has benefits for both sides.  Voters in the swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania say when it comes to handling terrorism, they prefer Trump over Clinton, albeit by a small margin.  But when it comes to handling international crises, they prefer Hillary by a lot.  Just one more facet of what's already shaping up as a
pretty personal campaign -- Trish.   

REGAN:  Indeed.  Right.  Thank you so much, Trace.  You know just days before the Egyptian airline crashed, voters told Fox News they trust Donald Trump to do a better job on terrorism than Hillary Clinton by a margin of 52 to 40 percent.  

Joining us now, Boris Epshteyn, a Trump supporter and former communications aid at the McCain campaign.  Richard Fowler a nationally syndicated radio host and senior fellow with the New Leaders Council.  And Charles Hurt, a political columnist for The Washington Times.  

Gentlemen, all good to see you.  I'll start with you Boris.  And Donald Trump is a man with no classical training in foreign affairs.  A man who has never held office.  And yet Boris he is resonating with American voters on this very issue of terror.  Why?

BORIS EPSHTEYN, TRUMP SUPPORTER:  Because he is able to get to the point. He doesn't pars his words.  And he speaks what he believes.  He doesn't wait.  If you look at the clock when Hillary Clinton was making those comments, it was 12:52 Central.  About 2:00 Eastern.  Donald Trump was out six hours before then talking about what actually happen.  Same thing happened in Brussels.  As soon as the Brussels terror attack happened, Donald Trump was on the phone to the radio shows, to the morning shows, giving his view, speaking to the American people.  What did Hillary Clinton do?  She had a conference call with about 30 of her advisors and then gave a speech at Stanford.  That difference is exactly why Donald Trump is leading in the polls as a whole and on terrorism specifically.   

REGAN:  You know, Charles, a lot of people say it just feels like he has some common sense.  I mean, when people heard about  that crash of course everyone's mind went straight to where Donald Trump went, with the assumption that this very likely could be a terrorism event.  But we still do not know that for sure.  But he came out as Boris says, hours before anyone else.  Is that not a risky thing to do?

CHARLES HURT, WASHINGTON TIMES POLITICAL COLUMNIST:  Yes.  But he's willing to take risks.  And I think that they have paid off very well for him.  You know?  And it may turn out that his, you know, his declaration that this is terrorism winds up being premature.  But I think what we're seeing in polling, especially on the issue of terrorism is that people would far rather have somebody who is a bit premature about something like this than to have someone who for seven and a half years refused to even utter the name of our enemy.  And I think that for as long as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump clash on an issue like this, she can win all the polls she wants to on international -- handling international crises.  Nobody cares about them.  All they care about in terms of this is terrorism.   

REGAN:  Richard Fowler, does she need to be a little more forthcoming when she's up against the likes of Donald Trump?  Does she need to be able to say, this is radical Islamic terror?  Does she need to at least identify the enemy if she wants to be seen as tough on terror?

RICHARD FOWLER, NATIONALLY SYNDICATED RADIO HOST:  Well, Hillary is tough on terror.  She has been, and she has been in the State Department four years.  She led this country's foreign policy and quite effectively at that.  Here's the real question we should be asking ourselves, Trish, do we want someone like Donald Trump who is completely unhinged who has no self- control running our foreign policy?  And the answer to that question is no. You want somebody who is tempered, you want somebody who is strong, you want somebody who is going to hear all the voices, to get all the information before --  

REGAN:  I think you're bring out an interesting point.  

BORIS:  I happened to disagree though.

REGAN:  Hang on, Boris.  He is bringing up a very interesting point. Donald Trump is willing to spout off, but -- but let's face it.  He's not president yet.  Is this part of his political tactic, Boris, because it resonates with voters?  They want someone who seems tough.  If he were president, would it be -- would it be different?

EPSHTEYN:  It's both a tactic and it is who he really is.  This is an authentic candidate.  Just like Ronald Reagan was an authentic candidate.  
Let's talk about what Richard just said.  Hillary Clinton was a terrible secretary of state.  Just because she was one doesn't give her any credit whatsoever.  Benghazi, China, Libya, Egypt, Russia, all fronts where this country is worse off.  Now, after she had been secretary of state.  And our country here under Obama and Hillary, we had San Bernardino happen here. And who knows what else could have happened.   

REGAN:  Richard, I mean, they may not have been her policies.  They may not have been her policies.  However, Richard, she was there, she was secretary of state, and we have seen an incredible rise in ISIS terrorism in the last eight years.  Will she be tarnished by this?

FOWLER:  Not at all.  And here's the thing where Boris is wrong.  Right?  

REGAN:  Whoa, whoa, I back up, Richard.  How can she not -- no, no, no, no! How can she not be tarnished by that?  She was part of that administration.  

FOWLER:  And here's the thing.  What we've seen under President Obama is a roll back on the war in Iraq, a roll back in the war in Afghanistan.  Both irresponsible wars taken to task by people who were irresponsible just like Donald Trump.  Right?  Vietnam another example of irresponsible war because we didn't have all the facts.  So, if we are going to go into war again in a country that's war weary, we don't want the likes of Donald Trump being at the nuclear --   


REGAN:  She voted for the war in Iraq.  And she also was part of an administration that got out of there.  They hightailed it out as fast as they possibly could which many believe has led to this rise in ISIS terrorism.  

HURT:  And of course earlier this week we just passed the -- Barack Obama broke the record for being at war longer than any president in history, including George W. Bush.  But one thing that you can't blame Barack Obama for.  You can only accept that maybe he picked Hillary for Secretary of State completely in her wheel house is, the day after the Benghazi attacks, a coordinated terrorist attack, she had information, and knew that, or should have known that.  And instead she lied about and it said that it was-- cited some internet movie which of course then brought that to the forefront and sparked rise around the world.   

REGAN:  I mean, so at the end of the day, you're coming back to this polls, I cited in the beginning of this segment where Americans see Donald Trump, a man who has no political experience, as the guy who can keep them safe.   

HURT:  He sounds like he knows what he is talking about.   

EPSHTEYN:  And the reason is, Trish, because Hillary Clinton --  


REGAN:  All right.  Okay.  We're going to have to save this for another day.  Gentlemen, wonderful to see you all.  Richard, we'll talk again soon. I promise.  All right.  Thank you so much.  

Coming up, everyone.  The latest details on the search that's underway right now for that debris in the Mediterranean.  As some sources still think this was terror.  So, which 2016 contender would handle terror, handle ISIS best with a fair and balanced debate, we're going to have Sebastian Gorka and Larry Korb next.   

Plus, as investigators recover debris, we are getting new details about the final minutes of that fateful flight, details that may help solve the question of what or who might have actually brought that plane down.  Don't go anywhere.  


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  I would say that it's probably an explosive that was brought onto the plane not by a passenger, but by an insider, by somebody who worked either at that airport --


REGAN:  Breaking tonight, harrowing new details beginning to shed light on what may have transpired during those final minutes of EgyptAir Flight 804. Debris from that flight was found near the location where it sent out its final signal as the frantic search for the plane's black boxes begin. Slowly but surely investigators are beginning to piece together what happened.  

Greg Palkot joins us right now from Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris where this doomed flight took off.   

GREG PALKOT, FOX NEWS SENIOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT:  Trish, we just have gotten important new information about the harrowing last minutes on board the doomed EgyptAir Flight 804.  According to a respected aviation website backed up by our own aviation expert, smoke alarms went off in the forward bathroom.  And the avionics compartment just before the crash. That information relayed via satellite monitoring system.  

Our source says that this affected computers and controls on the plane and could have led to its deadly dive.  A possible sign of a critical malfunction or a plane's system recoiling from a terror attack.  This as the air and sea search for debris from the plane continues in the Mediterranean where it went down.  Plane parts, personal belongings and human remains were found some 200 miles off of the Egyptian coast.  As more information emerges about who was on the plane, the pilot identified as 36- year-old Mohammed Saeed Shakir.  The co-pilot a young man, 24-year-old, Mohamed Mamdouh Assem.  Both from Cairo, Egypt.  Both said to have past periodic security test ran by the airline.  

Here at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris from where the doomed plane left, with the terror options still out there, and officials say today, security has been tightened.  Islamist leaning staffers already have been identified.  Finally in Cairo, where many families of the victims are or have traveled to, prayers were said on this Muslim holy day.  For those lost, for those just beginning to be recovered.  For whatever reason -- Trish.   

REGAN:  Thank you, Greg.  Also tonight, questions swirling around this flight and whether a terror group could have possibly brought this plane down.  When a Russian passenger jet was taken down by a bomb over Egypt last fall, it took an ISIS affiliate weeks to claim responsibility.  With terror, the second most important issue to American voters, they are looking to presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump and likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton for some answers.  Both think they are the ones best equipped to do it.  Listen to this.   


TRUMP:  We are going to beat ISIS very quickly, very quickly, folks, very, very quickly, going to be fast.  Going be fast.  We're going to be fast.  I have a great plan.  It's going to be great.  What is it?  I'd rather not say.  I want to be unpredictable.  Why would you announce that?  Why do you announce that?  Why do you tell the enemy that you are sending people over there, and they now have a target on their back?

CLINTON:  His idea that he quote has a secret plan to get rid of ISIS that he is not going to tell anybody, I found it disturbing because I -- you know, as senator from New York for eight years, as secretary of state for four years, I know that the stakes are high, that we face some real challenges and dangers in the world.  


REGAN:  Joining me right now, we have Dr. Sebastian Gorka, he is the Chair of the Military Theory at Marine Corps University, and author of "Defeating Jihad."  And Larry Korb, he is a senior fellow at the center for American progress and a former assistant defense secretary.  Welcome to you both.  

Dr. Gorka, starting with you, what do you think Donald Trump's plan is to get rid of ISIS?

DR. SEBASTIAN GORKA, CHAIR OF MILITARY THEORY, MARINE CORPS UNIVERSITY: Well, I'm not on his campaign staff.  I did advise Mr. Trump last year on some national security issues.  He's being a little bit cagey.  He gave his first very big foreign speech just a couple of weeks ago, and there's this one big difference about Mr. Trump.  He actually believes we are at war and he wants to win and destroy the enemy.  And that would be very, very refreshing Trish after the last seven disastrous years.

REGAN:  Yes.  But at the same time Larry, he'd strikes at times a very isolationist type of tone.  In other words saying, we shouldn't be involved in this battle overseas and the Middle East.  Certainly not battles that we're not going to see through.  How do you reconcile that with he's saying he's going to destroy ISIS?  

LARRY KORB, FELLOW, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS:  Well, I think that's the problem, he'll say one thing and then do something else, he's very impulsive.  He came out right after the plane went down and said, we know it's terrorist, you just had a report on that.  He said it could have been a critical malfunction.  He said he wants to defeat ISIS but he doesn't want to get involved in places overseas.  I mean, one of the reasons where you have ISIS is because the Syrian civil war.  He said, he wants to get involved in it.  So, I think he's got -- now he's the presumptive nominee, he can't keep playing this games where he says, well, I'm not going to tell you.  No, he needs to tell the American people and the world, because around the world listens to him, he's now the nominee of one of our major political parties.  

REGAN:  Well, Dr. Gorka, he's promised that he would get rid of ISIS.  That he would bomb ISIS, is that -- is that enough in an environment such as we're living in right now politically speaking where people are hungry for details and they do want answers, and this is something Hillary Clinton is going to continue to harp on as we see this race play out.  

GORKA:  Well, he did give some answers, and they are very important ones. He said in his foreign policy speech that the Muslim Brotherhood is inimical to democracy and is a threat to the United States.  And he is prepared to put it on the foreign terrorist organization list just as Egypt, where it was created, has already done, and the Muslim Brotherhood is the grandfather of all Jihadi groups, al Qaeda, ISIS, Al-Nusra, you name it.  So, he has made some statements that are very reassuring.  And things that simply after the last seven years are a breath of fresh air.  It's disastrous, whether it's Benghazi, whether it's betraying the Iranian people in the green revolution, whether it's the events of Libya.  You couldn't -- you couldn't imagine a worse foreign policy than the last seven years.  

REGAN:  Well --    

GORKA:  So whatever he does, I think it would be an improvement.   

REGAN:  Larry, I mean that's the big challenge right now for Hillary Clinton.  She has to live down being secretary of state at a time when ISIS came to power.  You look at the last eight years, and I don't think anyone could say, we are in a good state as far as our foreign affairs go.  How does she campaign when American voters know there is a good chance they could get another four years of exactly what they have had for the last eight?

KORB:  Well, I think it's important to keep in mind, ISIS came into being because when Bush's mind, he was senseless invasion of Iraq, which he was not honest about.  And basically then, that's why ISIS came into being. And everybody is blaming Obama for getting out of Iraq in 2011.  Bush signed an agreement with them in 2008 that said, we had to get out.  I remember asking Maliki this.  And he said, you sign an agreement.  And basically, that's what created this situation.  Had we not done that, we wouldn't be having these problems today.   

REGAN:  You know, the challenges, you get into something, you have got to see it through.  You can't just run out and leave chaos behind.  Because otherwise you are going the see exactly what we are seeing right now.   

KORB:  Well, I agree.  Bush shouldn't have signed that agreement.  If he hadn't done it, we wouldn't have this situation.  But remember when he signed it, Maliki said, we have repelled the invaders when Bush signed the agreement.   

REGAN:  I'll give you the last word.  Go ahead.  Dr. Gorka, go ahead.   

GORKA:  I think we have to stop blaming Bush.  I mean, that is just hackneyed.  Let's talk about the future.  Let's talk about San Bernardino, Brussels, and Paris.  Let's talk about the fact ISIS is the most powerful Jihadi organization the world has ever seen and it was facilitated by our withdrawal in 2011 when Secretary Clinton was the secretary of state.  

There would be no ISIS and no caliphate if we still had American troops in Iraq and President Obama hadn't pulled them out and Secretary Clinton hadn't supported that decision.  That's the truth.  Let's stop blaming Bush.   

REGAN:  Gentlemen, goo to see you.  Thank you so much.  I appreciate you being here.

KORB:  But Bush signed the agreement.  You still haven't --  

REGAN:  Larry Korb, thank you.  I've got to go.  I'm coming up against a hard break.   

New details coming into us tonight about the final moments aboard that EgyptAir Flight that may help explain what caused the deadly crash.  Up next we'll going to hear what the experts are saying may have brought that plane down.  Ambassador James Woolsey is here.  

Plus, we'll speak with Colonel Tony Schaeffer and aviation expert Robby Mark.  Passengers aren't the only ones frustrated meanwhile with the TSA. The agency is now feeling the wrath of politicians.  Florida Congressman John Mica is fed up.  And he's telling us why.   


REP. JOHN MICA, R-FLORIDA:  Last night, I had the night from hell.  I had three people who I invited to Washington who came to Washington, spent most of the day with me -- all of them missed their flight standing in a TSA line.  



REGAN:  Tonight, we're learning more about the final minutes of the EgyptAir Flight.  It left Paris for Cairo but suddenly, and without warning fell from the sky, killing all 66 people aboard.  News this evening that there was smoke in the bathroom and in the communication system minutes before the crash.  

Catherine Herridge has more.  Catherine.

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT:  An official confirmed to Fox News tonight that smoke was detected on Flight 804 before it disappeared. The plane's reporting network called ACARS sends information to ground stations about the -- of the jet systems and status of on board sensors. One aviation expert says smoke is consistent with a number of events including a small bomb as well as mechanical and electrical failure which could explain Flight 804's erratic flight path, that sudden 90 degree turn to the left and then the 360 spin to the right before it dropped off radar.   


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  In other words, it was out of control.  Something had happened that caused the plane to do then -- something other than the pilot actually telling it do those things.  


HERRIDGE:  As a second U.S. Navy plane joins the search for submerged wreckage, a counter-terrorism source who tracks al Qaeda and ISIS, social media accounts for the U.S. government said there has been no credible or even semi-credible claim of responsibility.  In fact, the Islamic State terror group put out new propaganda that made no mention of Egypt, France or the flight.  Fox News is told that U.S. investigators are doing a deep dive on the two Egyptian pilots identified today and a review of their social media profiles who determine their state of minds before the flight and extremist ties -- Trish.   

REGAN:  Thank you so much, Catherine.  

HERRIDGE:  You're welcome.

REGAN:  All right.  Joining me now with his assessment of what have or who took down the jetliner, former CIA Director Ambassador James Woolsey. Ambassador, welcome.   


REGAN:  Do you believe this was terrorism?

WOOLSEY: I think it's more likely than not, although this new information about the smoke in the cockpit could suggest some kind of malfunction or it could suggest a small bomb that went off. But let me say that I don't think that's the main point. Because whether or not this particular event was terrorism or not, there is a lot of terrorism in that part of the world, and people are focusing on aircraft.

They have since the beginning of this crazy business and 9/11. And we need to figure out how to make our airports and facilities that aircraft use safer for people to use.

REGAN: Are you concerned about us here in the U.S.? In other words, what kind of vulnerabilities do we have here right now?

WOOLSEY: Well, those large international corporations, some $80 billion company that operates all over the world, some 70-plus countries with maintenance facilities and facilities for essentially caring for all of the logistics dealing with aircraft.

And those companies -- that big company has been moving away from America -- in the United States from American-based companies with largely American workers and moving toward companies -- subcontracting to companies that hire a great many foreign workers some of them from the Mideast.

REGAN: Foreign workers here in the United States?

WOOLSEY: Yes, some from Mideast.

REGAN: Foreign workers here in the United States many of whom you say are from the Middle East are actually the ones responsible for some of the airlines that we have here in the U.S. whether that be cargo.

WOOLSEY: We don't know, what we do know is that we have to vet them very, very carefully. And vetting people from that part of the word is really hard because passports going for $100 that are really extremely good copies-- all of that is the way things are in Lebanon and...

REGAN: Ambassador, I just want to articulate this, basically what you're saying is you're concerned about companies that are active in airports here in the United States hiring Islamic sympathist -- Islamic extremist sympathist that are coming in contact with airlines here, thus making all of us vulnerable?

WOOLSEY: In a sense, yes. The French had to fire a large number and review a might even larger number of foreign workers, and we need to pay attention to it. It's not that we want to tell everybody from Syria that gets into the United States that they can't work here. No. But what we do need to do is...

REGAN: But maybe not at the airport?

WOOLSEY: What we need to do is vet them very thoroughly and maybe not at the airport if they are marginal on the vetting.

REGAN: I mean, it's the reality of the world we live in. However, Ambassador Woolsey, a lot of people would say that's racial profiling. I mean you can't just say, okay, anybody from the Middle East is, you know, not able to get a job at the airport because we're suspect of them.

WOOLSEY: If we don't profile, we lose a really important tool. In New York City, there was a period of time in which there were -- in organized crime, you wanted to check first in Jewish neighborhoods and then later it was Sicilian neighborhoods. People who commit crimes, including terror often come from similar backgrounds, they work together, they know one another, and sometimes they are even family members. And we need to understand that and get on top of it and not force...

REGAN: How do we understand that when our president won't even acknowledge the threat that we face?

WOOLSEY: Get a new president.

REGAN: All right. Ambassador James Woolsey. Thank you very much.

WOOLSEY: Thank you.

REGAN: No terrorist group has yet to take responsibility for the crash. Is that an indication of anything? Joining me now with their thoughts, Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer. He was a CIA trained intel-ops. He's now with the London Center for Policy Research and Robert Mark, a commercial pilot and publisher of Good to see both of you. Colonel Shaffer, do you find it at all significant that this plane went down immediately after crossing into Egyptian air space?

TONY SHAFFER, CIA TRAINED INTEL OPERATIVE: It could mean something. It could not. It's one of those unknowns at this point. One of the points I think is important to recognize, is that our airbus is a completely automated system. A Boeing has a different way of flying their aircraft -- basically designed aircraft. This was a catastrophic loss of control. That means something happened to destroy the ability of the pilots the take command of the flight.

Now, when that automated system crashes in the Airbus it just goes down. Boeing has a way of actually giving control back to the pilots. So, there's a precedence for this and I think we're may be looking not broadly enough at the usual suspects. Ramszi Yousef actually did a bombing like this -- Ramzi is actually in a federal prison right now by the way -- Al Qaeda did a bombing of a Philippine airliner in December of `94 where they actually had a device go off with the intended design of taking the aircraft down by hitting the fuel tank. Missed it, but it took out the flight controls.

So, we've seen this before and we have to recognize that Al Qaeda in the Arabic peninsula has been pretty silent but has been desirous of using some sort of a bomb on an airplane for a while. So, I think based on -- if you look at the patterns of the past, it may be repeating to the future.

REGAN: Do you then think that Al Qaeda is a group that we should be honing in on? You've also got Isis, you've got Boko Haram. There are many different terrorist groups out there right now when you think of potentially who could have done this? Al Qaeda is at the top of your list?

SHAFFER: Well, Al Qaeda because they have both had the attempt. They've been seeking targets. The shoe bomber, Reed was trained in Yemen. Yemen has been the place where Al Qaeda has been rapidly able to expand again.

And frankly, you know, this is more of a pattern I would recognize coming out of Al Qaeda who by the way, is probably wanting to compete with Isis, you know, and no one is taking credit yet. So, I'm just saying it is. I'm just saying it's a possibility.

REGAN: That's one perplexing thing, right. Nobody has come forward and taken credit. That said, it did take weeks for Isis to come forward to claim responsibility for the Russian passenger jet that went down in Egypt recently.

Robert, turning to you, when you heard tonight's news that there was smoke in the bathroom, did that make you question at all the terrorism theories that are out there right now?

WOOLSEY: Oh, it did to me, certainly. It almost seemed like a game changer to me because the first thing I wanted to know after I heard about the smoke in the cockpit, which of course is an awful thing because it would cause the crew to lose control of the airplane because you can't even see the instruments. But what I wanted to know is what caused the heat sensors to go off in the bay below the cockpit.

What was the cargo this aircraft was carrying? I mean, you know, this could also be a catastrophic failure in the sense that if it was carrying lithium ion batteries and one of them started to short circuit -- it's had this kind a reaction. So to me, I'm not completely, you know, focused on this terrorism. I'm not saying it's not. It could be. But I think we have other options.

REGAN: There are a lot of different options are there. They need to find this black box. They have a definite period of time that they need to find it in. What is the likelihood that they will find it given the depth of the sea?

WOOLSEY: Well, I think they'll find it. I mean -- although it took a while, two years as a matter of fact for them to find the ones from the Air France airplane, we're going to probably find the pingers, the little radio transmitters on these boxes are still emitting a signal that when they get into the right area, they're going to hear them. And they may not be able to grab them right away, but they're going to know pretty darn close where they are on the bottom of the Mediterranean.

REGAN: Thank you so much gentlemen. Good to have you here tonight.

WOOLSEY: You're welcome.

SHAFFER: Thank you.

REGAN: Security ramping up at airports across the country right now likely bringing no end in sight to those long lines TSA passengers -- TSA is dealing with their passengers. One Republican congressman credited with forming the agency says the TSA is destined the fail. He joins us next.

Plus, a looming deadline brings an onslaught of new regulations leading some to wonder if the president is making sure his legacy just doesn't get overturned.


REGAN: With major airports like Los Angeles International boosting counter- terrorism efforts in the wake of the downed EgyptAir flight, passengers around the U.S. can expect increasingly frustrating TSA experiences. Passengers subjected to long lines and missed flights are beginning to question whether the safety procedures are really worth it. And tonight, you will hear from this Republican congressman, credited with forming the TSA agency. Here he is.


MICA: And you can't get a hold of a damn person in TSA even as a member of Congress nor would they take your calls. I'll tell you what, it's just unbelievable. If you can fail, and you will fail, and your attempts on the training and recruiting and all will be a failure. I can tell you that and I told you that on my cell phone when you came in because you cannot recruit, you cannot train, you cannot retain, and you cannot administrate it. It's just a huge failing government program, and it will fail.


REGAN: Florida congressman John Mica joins me right now. Congressman Mica, welcome.

MICA: Oh, good to be with you, but under some tough circumstances.

REGAN: You sound pretty upset sir.

MICA: Well, I am. A lot depends on our getting it right and keeping the American public safe.

REGAN: You helped create this agency, the TSA, why is it such a disaster now?

MICA: Well, it spun out of control. We started out with 16,500 screeners. When government failed to put in regulations even to direct screeners or to limit things that could be taken aboard, we grew to 22,000, to 35,000, 45,000 screeners. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

Then we have 13,000 screeners -- non-screeners on top of that. We have the biggest bureaucracy created and government agencies -- it's bigger than seven cabinet offices and they can't get it right. They spend money on equipment that doesn't work. They can't train and retain personnel.

And now, because of their failure, which was disclosed by the media last fall, 95 percent failure rate with 45,000 screeners -- in 2008, the media uncovered 75 percent failure rate with 35,000 screeners so, they got more screeners and a higher failure rate. It's not good.

REGAN: I'll admit it I've gotten a few large bottles of shampoo through those lines myself without a TSA agent even blinking.

MICA: And that bottle of shampoo doesn't pose a risk. What does matter is they've let 17 known terrorists go through airports 24 times and failed on that account. These are the reports that I get.

REGAN: It is very scary and this is a reality that we need to be confronting right now. How do we change this? Do we need the private markets here? Do we need a company running the TSA as opposed to the government?

MICA: I'm trying to get them out of the personnel business because they can't manage the screeners. And screeners are not law enforcement or intelligence people. The most important role of government is the intelligence part, connecting the dots. That's what's failed every time. That's what's failed in Paris and Europe and some of these events. But we've got to get those terrorists before they get to the gate or if they get to the gate, we stop them before they board. They're not capable of doing it.

REGAN: Congressman, I think about Israel...

MICA: They're very good.

REGAN: ... and the security they have for example of El Al, very different than anything you see in the U.S. Nonetheless, Israel is a small country. The United States is not. Can we -- can we do something similar to what they're doing given that we are as large a country as we are?

MICA: Well we've got -- we've go to do it smart. You don't spend all your resources like they're doing now, shaking down 99 percent of the population that doesn't pose a risk. All these people that are waiting in line, they don't pose a risk. We're looking for specific people.

REGAN: Should we racial profile.

MICA: I would profile not on the basis of race or religion, ethnic background, but we can do some profiling, yes. But what we need to do is be targeting. We know in many cases who these individuals are that pose a risk. However, sometimes we don't even know who's working at the airports. We have thousands of people who are undocumented working behind secure areas in our airports.

REGAN: Exactly what Ambassador Woolsey was saying just earlier in the show, that we need to be cautious...

MICA: Well, he's right.

REGAN: ...about who is working in our airports.

MICA: They are vetting TSA employees or secure workers, and if these are inside jobs like we had in the Sinai Peninsula, we are in a lot of trouble.

REGAN: Congressman, thank you so much for joining us tonight.

MICA: Good to be with you, thank you.

REGAN: All right here we are, just eight months until his last day in office. A new report reveals how President Obama is laying the ground work to protect his legacy. Well, what do you know, loads and loads of business regulations. How an abuse of executive power could lead to more problems for our already bad economy. Guy Benson is here, he's going to explain.


REGAN: Well, a new report is shedding light on a mountain of new rules. Loads of regulations being pushed through at an alarming rate by the Obama administration. This sudden regulatory blitz is likely due to a fast- approaching deadline that would prevent the next administration from being able to strike down the rules and that has a whole lot of people wondering if the president is getting worried about a Trump presidency.


KEVIN CORKE, FOX WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT : Would you acknowledge that there is a bit of a race against the clock to try to beat the 23rd so that Donald Trump doesn't have a chance were he to be elected, sort of undo some of these regulations the president's sort of trying to push through?

JOHN EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, again, this is a rule that's been --

CORKE: I understand.

EARNEST: No, it's a revision, but it's also a rule that's been in the works for more than two years. Obviously the next president will also have executive authority that they can wield and presumably they can make changes to this threshold as well. We obviously hope that they won't, but this is an executive action and it is consistent with what the president believes is a smart strategy...  


REGAN: All right. Joining me now, Guy Benson, a political editor of and Fox News contributor. Guy, good to see you.


REGAN: You get all kinds of stuff going through these days, overtime rules, all kinds of regulations, new environmental regulations. I'll tell you, economists are saying this is not good for our economy. It's going to cost business a whole lot of money. Nonetheless, the president is a busy man these days. Why such the rush?

BENSON: Well, $70 billion worth of regulation, almost that amount since January 1st alone and the reason that he's doing this, and to be fair, president Bush executed a similar maneuver back in 2000 based on a law that was passed in the mid '90s that was intended to reign in the regulatory state by taking it out of the control of presidents late in their terms.

And so what did President Bush do? Well first, he canceled what Clinton had attempted to do, then he remembered that eight years later and beat the deadline before he left office. Obama's doing the same thing. And I think the question that we just heard put to Josh Earnest is interesting. Is this in some way an acknowledgement from the Obama administration that they're concerned that Donald Trump could win this election?

And what does that say about the president's agenda? Hillary Clinton's vulnerability in the election? I think it's an interesting political story behind that big, big price tag that I know you would focus on the "Fox Business."

REGAN: I know, a big economic one. Look, he's seen the polls and Hillary Clinton has seen the polls and this is not going to be a lay-up for her. It's not going to be as easy as she may have originally hoped in terms of beating Donald Trump. But you know, all this economic regulation, I'm always struck by the fact that, look, the president's trying to do the right thing.

He wants to help people. He wants people to earn more money. Everybody wants that. But sometimes, Guy, there's what you call the law of unintended consequences and if you regulate the heck out of everything, the reality is those people that you're trying to help, they're not going to have a job.

BENSON: That's right because there's such high cost for compliance. And I think another big story intrinsic in this particular report, Trish, is President Obama is -- in his entire eight-year term -- he has spent a lot of time especially when the Republicans took over Congress really governing by fiat with executive orders, challenging people saying, "I need to do what I want to do, you can sue me if you want, good luck."

And a lot of progressives or so-called progressives have cheered him on at every step because he's advancing their agenda -- his agenda. But if there's a President Trump or the next Republican president or conservative president, there's now the precedent set by Barack Obama that they can look back to and say, "Oh, no, I'm sorry, there's a new rule set in town that President Obama implemented during his time, we're going to do the same thing."

REGAN: All right, look, Guy, the reality is we're not a monarchy. News flash.

BENSON: We shouldn't be.

REGAN: We're going it be right back. I'll see you here.  


REGAN: I just want to thank Megyn for letting me sit in for her tonight and I want to thank all of you for watching. Megyn is going to be back with you on Monday and I'll be on the Fox Business Network hosting "The Intelligence Report" every day at 2:00 p.m. eastern. I hope to see you there. "Hannity"
is next.


Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 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.