Rep. Michael McCaul on Iran deal flaws, immigration policy
Rep. Michael McCaul supports Trump's decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal and discusses lawmakers' push to force a House vote on immigration bills on 'Sunday Morning Futures.'
This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," May 12, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS HOST: Welcome and good Sunday morning everybody. Happy Mother's Day to all my heroes, mothers everywhere. President Trump takes charge of foreign policy dumping one nuclear deal with Iran while looking to craft another with North Korea. Two powerful GOP Congressman with us this morning coming face to face with officials at the Justice Department. Then some red-state Democrats are feeling the heat to support the President ahead of the midterms. Good morning everyone, thanks for joining us. This is 'Sunday Morning Futures.' President Trump pulls out of the Iran Nuclear Deal ahead of a historic summit with Kim Jong Un. This as many tension flare up and terror strikes again in Paris. What are the biggest threats to U.S. national security right now? We will hear from former Vice President Dick Cheney in my exclusive interview this morning. Plus House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and Israel's ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon is with us this morning. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes meanwhile and Trey Gowdy headed to the Department of Justice for information about a top secret intelligence source involved in the Mueller probe. They didn't necessarily get what they wanted but still called the discussion productive. Congressman Darrell Issa will react. And Senator Joe Donnelly becomes the second Democrat to support Gina Haspel's nomination to be CIA director. But did he really have a choice in a state Trump won by a landslide? Our panel will discuss that as we look ahead this morning on 'Sunday Morning Futures.'
President Trump calling out Tehran over its military budget and pointing to it as proof it never meant to hold up its end of the bargain regarding the Iran nuclear deal. The president yesterday tweeted that Iran has boosted its military budget by more than 40 percent since signing the deal which he says is an indication the country never intended to curve its nuclear ambitions. The president withdrew from the 2015 agreement last week but says that he wants to make a new and improved deal that will benefit both sides. Meanwhile, the decision is sparking outrage in Iran with one official saying that the country will prepare for industrial-scale production of nuclear fuel now. Joining me right now is the House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul. He's also member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. And Mr. Chairman, it's good to have you on the program this morning.
REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL, R—TEXAS, CHAIRMAN, HOUSE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much for joining us. You're reaction to the president pulling out and also what we could see as retaliation from Iran? Should we be worried?
MCCAUL: If I could first say Happy Mother's Day to my 90-year-old mother and wife, mother of five beautiful kids.
BARTIROMO: Beautiful.
MCCAUL: And so, now, this is a very intense time. I think the president made a very bold foreign policy move here. The deal with John Kerry was flawed from the beginning. It did not deal with inspections particularly military side. They had ballistic missile capability and sunset provisions so essentially guaranty the nuclear Iran. These are the three issues that the president tried to initiate with France, Germany, and Britain. I think France came along when Macron spoke at the state of the union and then I think the Brits were with us. This deal, by pulling out puts marginal pressure on Iran but also Europe within the 90 to 180 day timeframe window to cut that deal so we have a bitter deal to ensure that we never have nuclear Iran ever. The whole point of these sanctions by Congress was to get to the point where we would insure they would never have nuclear weapon capability.
BARTIROMO: And you know, Dick Cheney told me as well that the Iranians have increased their military budget by40 percent. This is what the president has tweeted out this morning basically saying, look, look what they've done with the money. We've already given them all of this money. Are you expecting any retaliation, anything that we should be worried about in the homeland given that they're not happy, they're chanting death to America?
MCCAUL: Death to America, death to Israel. $150 billion went to buy the sanctions, 40 percent ramping up their military. When I was in Israel with Prime Minister Netanyahu, he talked about the Shia crescent of Iran going Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. We know they fired missiles into to Golden Heights, a very intense situation. I do anticipate there'll probably some sort of retaliation by Iran, also in cyberspace. We saw after the sanctions in 2011, major cyber-attacks on the financial sector. But again, I think the president is doing something very unconventional and bold. At the end of the day just like what's happening with North Korea, could produce very positive result.
BARTIROMO: Yes, connect the dots. Do North and -- North Korea and Iran work together on nuclear ambitions? This is pretty significant what has taken place in terms of North Korea and the president was able to put the pressure campaign even on China to get involved and help North Korea come to the table.
MCCAUL: It -- I think it was a great act of diplomacy by Mike Pompeo. He's a good friend of mine. We traveled overseas quite a bit. You know, AQ and Pakistan pull for aide to Iran and then North Korea in Iran exchange technology. So you know, that's a pure fact. And I think you know, the fact is these prisoners came home from North Korea after maximum pressure was applied as you mentioned by China as well. We didn't see that happen when the Obama administration was trying to negotiate with Iran. In fact, I introduced a bill last week to provide sanctions on Iran because they have still have five American hostages that have never been released.
BARTIROMO: Wow. And we know that the last time we saw any hostages coming home, there was an exchange of money to Iran.
MCCAUL: Yes, cash on --
BARTIROMO: Exactly.
BARTIROMO: So what should we think about the Europeans right now. Will they follow -- and during this 180 day period, people and companies and countries have to decide if I'll do business with the United States or with Iran.
MCCAUL: I think that is fundamental choice. Do I do business with the United States or Iran, they're going to pick the United States. That's why we have the ultimate leverage on Iran.
BARTIROMO: So you think the Europeans change course. You think for example Macron, Angela Merkel say we have to pull out of this deal as well. I mean, will we see new information coming out of this?
MCCAUL: I think Macron was willing to negotiate on those three points there can be inspections. Remember we can't inspect their military sites. Where else are they going to build their nuclear capability, right? The ICBM ballistic missile capability and then the sunset which means we're guaranteeing a nuclear Iran. So we have to get those three issues resolved. I think what the President has done as a good deal maker has put maximum pressure now on Europe and Iran to get this done so we get a better deal. This was not a good deal that was negotiated by John Kerry and President Obama.
BARTIROMO: Yes, meanwhile John Kerry is running around trying to salvage this deal somehow in the last month which was incredible. Let me move on to immigration Mr. Chairman because a lot of frustration obviously on the part of the president recently that were are not clamping down more. What can Congress do? Apparently, there was a meeting last week where the president was upset with his Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. Where you at that meeting?
MCCAUL: No, I was not. That was a cabinet meeting. I've heard about the meeting. Quite honestly, I see the frustration on both the president and secretary's part. This is Congress' role to act. Congress has the authority under the Constitution. I have a border security bill that will secure the border. We have to close the legal loopholes so when that caravan comes in that we saw, we can't just detain them and let them go, catch and release.
BARTIROMO: That's catch and release. Exactly.
MCCAUL: We have to deport them.
BARTIROMO: So -- because what stops anybody from taking another caravan in just bringing hundreds of people right in knowing that we have to catch and release.
MCCAUL: Yes, if you have a criminal come in your house and break in and yet, you can't -- you can't arrest them or report them, absolutely insane. The American people don't understand this. Congress can change this.
BARTIROMO: Can Congress change this over the near term?
MCCAUL: If we have my border security bill, the slim version of interior that really focuses on closing legal loopholes. That being you know, asylum changing the 2008 laws that allows them to stay in the country. Change those two things and then deal with the DACA issue. But Maria, it's paramount we do this soon because the longer we wait, the longer -- if go into July, we have to get them by July because after that it's about campaign. I worry that the Democrats wouldn't prefer to make DACA a campaign issue and not a legitimate policy issue.
BARTIROMO: Yes, you are right. And it feels like that's where they're going with this, by the way, take it all the way to the midterms. Before you go, any thoughts on NAFTA and whether or not we're going to see a deal sooner rather than later. The president apparently is putting a soft deadline of May 18th and May 19th to try and get a deal done so that Congress can deal with it before the Mexican elections and then, of course, we've got the midterm elections.
MCCAUL: Well, I always have (INAUDIBLE) U.S.-Mexico congressional delegations, but we have to fix it and update it not scrap it. My home state of Texas, Mexico is our largest trading partner. So this is economic for us. I think the administration is getting there to modernize the agreement, bring energy under the umbrella and also the country of words and principles that are so important. But I -- I'm optimistic. I believe we have to do this. I think to scrap NAFTA altogether would be a serious mistake.
BARTIROMO: Yes, exactly. And that's why -- is it even realistic to think we could have something on the table this upcoming week? I mean, this is the soft deadline he put in place.
MCCAUL: No -- he's been you know, he's been dealing with this right now. He's -- I think they are getting close.
BARTIROMO: OK.
MCCAUL: And I know Congress will take a look at it. We've been urging them again not to kill it but make it better and modernize it.
BARTIROMO: Right. Sure. And of course, Texas is right there with the Mexico trade. Let me your thoughts on what took place this morning overnight in Paris, another terrorist attack. Obviously poorest borders there. What's your take on this and how do you stop something like that in America?
MCCAUL: They're in a far worse position than the United States. They have so many foreign fighters from the battlefield in Europe. They have neighborhoods in Paris before the Brussels attack. We warned them about these enclaves of radicalized Muslims but they can't do anything about it. I would argues United States is very different. I bet with the NYPD pretty much all weekend talking about this. Sheikh Adnani, the ISIS spokesman says kill wherever you are by any means necessary. And this is what their relegated too, this knife attacks and vehicle assaults. They've been a bit demoralized since the cause of the caliphate, the aviation sector is still a concern mine. But this particular attack, you get to see more and more of this. You'll probably see this in the United States, but it's not below the lines of a 9/11 style attack.
BARTIROMO: It's pretty incredible how vulnerable Paris has been, really. Mr. Chairman, it's always a pleasure to see you.
MCCAUL: Thanks, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much, Chairman Michael McCaul joining us there. Up next, former Vice President Dick Cheney sits down for an exclusive interview with me. What he had to say on a wide range of issues including our biggest foreign policy threat and what America's should be on the Middle East. Follow me on Twitter @MariaBartiromo, @SundayFutures, let us know what you'd like to hear from the rest of the program as we continue right here on 'Sunday Morning Futures.' Back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. This week on "Mornings with Maria" on the Fox Business Network, I had an exclusive sit down interview with former Vice President Dick Cheney. We talked about a wide range of issues on the domestic and international front. And I begin by asking the Vice President what the number one foreign policy concern is today for the United States. Watch his answer.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES: I think the Chinese long-term are the most serious and have the most capability and made some phenomenal gains economically which they're now converting to better military capability and so forth. The Russians are still governed by Putin, makes a big difference whether Gorbachev is in town on Putin. Putin obviously is I think looking for opportunities to create more problems in Eastern Europe. He's currently acting now in the Middle East.
BARTIROMO: And you've studied the Middle East more so and watched the developments more closely than most people. Is Iran the most significant perpetrator because even when I was speaking with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, he said it's Iran who is trying to overtake the Middle East. What is the right move to pull out of the Iran deal?
CHENEY: Well, I think the Iranians have moved to that posture. Part of it I can remember the debate in Saudi Arabia back during Desert Storm and that period dealing with the senior Saudi leaders, they were very concern about Iran. There was partly a religious proposition between the Shias in Iran and the Sunni in Saudi Arabia. And I actually had the King of Saudi Arabia at one point tell me that he was absolutely convinced the Iranians had their eye on coming to Saudi Arabia and taking control of the two holy mosques. It was a big, huge deal in that part of the world and with respect to the Sunni and Shia. They have been troublesome but now when they clearly are actively involved in Syria with Russians, when they're trying to promote and finance the spread of nuclear technology from South Korea to Syria --
BARTIROMO: But you're comfortable what has taken place coming out of this deal?
CHENEY: I think that I fundamentally opposed it when it was entered into. I didn't like all that crash that was going to back to Iran. And I really felt based in part on my relationships with go back many, many years with the Saudi's and the Emirates and the Egyptians, that the United States is turning its back on our traditional friends and choosing that of the Iranians and that's not a course of action we could sustain overtime.
BARTIROMO: That's exactly right. And when I interviewed MBS, the Crown Prince, he told me last November, look, the hijackers of 9/11 were trained by Iran. And he was trying to say we want to live like normal people. We want a relationship with the United States. Do you believe in this corruption crackdown that is taking place in Saudi Arabia?
CHENEY: I do. When he was in Washington recently, I had dinner with him. I sat right next to the Crown Price.
BARTIROMO: I saw the picture.
CHENEY: On my left was Bandar, an old friend when he was the Ambassador from Saudi Arabia. He worked very closely with the Desert Storm and so on. It's a great to spend time with both of them. And one of the things that's struck me about it, we were talking about the reforms the Crown Prince was pursuing and the way he's I think asserted himself trying to make some fundamental changes in which I wholeheartedly endorsed.
BARTIROMO: A lot of people saying if were to pull out of Syria, then that just strengthen ISIS, that much more. It creates a vacuum that we saw created in Iraq.
CHENEY: I am a firm believer and it's not a popular position to take, everybody thinks we've been there everybody thinks we've been there 17 years we need to get out kind of thing. That's not the way I look at it. I think we have to be president in that part of the world. You look at 9/11, 9/11 coming on well. You had Osama bin Laden operating in that part of the world ultimately putting his team together in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is important to us who controls Afghanistan. It's important to us how those other nations fall out there and we can't afford to turn our back and walk away and say well it's a nasty business we're not going to be involved anymore. I think that's a dead end for us and I think we cannot afford given the importance of the United States the importance of that part of the world. We have to be engaged, we have to be involved. We have to know who our friends and allies are
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BARTIROMO: Much more of my exclusive interview with former vice president Dick Cheney. Next up he gives us his take on Gina Haspel, the Nominee for CIA Director and waterboarding. Just as another Democratic Senator announces his support for Haspel. We're looking ahead right now on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES. Back in one minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Now to the nomination of the first woman to head the CIA Gina Haspel faced some pretty tough questioning last -- this last week during her confirmation hearings but now a second Democrat breaking ranks and saying that he will support Haspel. Indiana Senator Joe Donnelly joining West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin in backing the nominee which means she will likely get confirmed. In my exclusive interview with Dick Cheney, I asked the former vice president about his opinion on Haspel.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHENEY: I think she'd be a great CIA Director. I don't know her personally. I hear good things about her and the people at the agency and I think she's done a great job in terms of the career she's built and people I know at the agency are very enthusiastic about having one of their own so to speak in the in the driver's seat at CIA. Aside from that, she's got a distinguished career in the clandestine service. She's done difficult jobs and done them very well. I think the Democrats are trying to find some way to vote against her but it's hard. And in the end, I think she'll be confirmed.
BARTIROMO: We've had 17 years now to digest what took place after 9/11 and of course much has been made about the torture programs and the interrogation programs. You've been vocal about this that at the time this was the right thing to do, correct?
CHENEY: Yes. I've been very vocal about it I believed in it. I was heavily involved in getting it set up and getting the opinion out of the Justice Department on how far we could go. I'm not one of those people who calls it torture and awful lot of people do but it wasn't. It was set up in a way that what we did was, in fact, consistent with our fundamental statutes and agreements that were in place and it worked. We were able -- waterboarding was applied actually to only three individuals. One of those was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed the mastermind of 9/11 and later on the agency produced a study and the title of it, I think the study itself is still classified but the title was KSM Khalid Sheikh Mohammed preeminent source on Al Qaeda. He's the guy who got waterboarded more than anybody else. I think what we did to help ultimately produce the intelligence we needed to be able to get bin Laden and so I supported it wholeheartedly. I still do to this day prepared to defend it and debate it and argue it. This was a period of time when we had been attacked, lost 3,000 people. We lost more people on 9/11 than we lost at Pearl Harbor.
BARTIROMO: Is it the right move to discontinue those programs today?
CHENEY: If it were my call, I would not discontinue those programs. I'd have them active and ready to go and I'd go back and study them and learn. The agencies in a difficult position, the Congress has acted, they have changed the law and the agency has to and will operate by that statute. But you know there are a lot of Monday morning quarterbacks in the terrorism business and people who they really had to make the decision if it was their call if you know Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the mastermind behind all of this, if you know he is number two to bin Laden in terms of the attack, if you know he's probably the guy who knows more than anybody else except bin Laden, what's next? What's their next target? How many people are they going to kill and how are they going to do it? And then you tell me that the only a method we have is please, please, pretty please tell us what you know. Well, I don't buy that and I think the techniques were used were not tortured. It's -- a lot of people try to call it that but it wasn't deemed torture at the time. The techniques we use are techniques we used on our own people in training. We didn't go out and make them up some place. The president signed off, I signed off and after Security Council signed off, they did a good job. They got the intelligence they needed and we were safe from any further mass casualty attacks on the seven and a half years on our watch. So now people might have go back and try to rewrite history but if it were my call, I'd do it again.
BARTIROMO: Scooter Libby, of course, was pardoned, your reaction.
CHENEY: Scooter was my chief of staff and worked for me in the Pentagon as well as at the White House, a great guy, fantastic attorney, just all- around prince. He was charged under phony circumstances by a special prosecutor who was brought in by James Comey and charged with having leaked the identity of a CIA employee and the fact of the matter was he didn't. That in fact, Rich Armitage at State was the leaker of the identity of Valerie Plame. And Valerie Plame was not covered by the statute that made it unlawful to reveal the name of the CIA employee. And that was the situation. Then the special prosecutor wasn't willing to stand up and say there's no crime here. They went to work trying to drum up charge finally brought charges against Scooter. Ultimately they went to Scooter's attorneys and told them that if Scooter would testify against me, they'd drop all charges against Scooter. Was that bad a deal?
BARTIROMO: That's incredible.
CHENEY: In the end, Scooter was convicted unlawfully so. A total trumped up charge. He's now been pardoned by President Bush community sentence and President Trump now has pardoned him. He was a totally innocent man and I want to thank the President for having done that. It's a good move and a lot of us who from over the case who know on love Scooter Libby really appreciate the fact that he's now been deemed innocent and that's what should have happened. It was all a phony deal from the very beginning.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BARTIROMO: My thanks to Vice President Dick Cheney. Could there be a possible truce between the Justice Department and House Intel Chairman Devin Nunez over requested documents in the Robert Muller investigation? We're talking about that next. Plus, why one Senator is calling out Jim Comey over comments former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn made to the FBI? Congressman Darrell Issa sits on the House Oversight Committee, he joins me next as we look ahead on 'Sunday Morning Futures' back in a moment
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. New developments this morning in a request by Republicans for classified information about Special Counsel Robert Muller's Russia investigation. In a joint statement, House Intel Chairman Devin Nunez and House Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy said that they had a productive discussion with Senior Justice FBI and intelligence officials last week following the subpoena that was issued by Nunez for documents that would reportedly reveal a top-secret intelligence source for the investigation. The two Congressmen also say that they plan to hold further discussions this week. I want to bring in California Republican Congressman Darrell Issa right now, former Chairman and now Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He also sits on both the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committee. Sir, it's good to see you, Congressman. Thanks so much for joining us.
REP. DARRELL ISSA, R—CALIF., HOUSE OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE: Good to see you Maria and --
BARTIROMO: Where -- yes --
ISSA: Go ahead.
BARTIROMO: Please.
ISSA: I was just saying that you know I've been in their shoes of having to sit at the table and have those good meetings with justice and then trying to turn it into actual production of documents.
BARTIROMO: And it's not so. It's easier said than done I think is your point there right?
ISSA: Well, I once sat in the Capitol with Eric Holder as he told me there were only 200 and some documents and he would give us those documents in an unprecedented way if we would agree that that would end the investigation of Fast and Furious, tens of thousands of additional documents, some of them showing his actual interference with the discovery process and we're still not done with all of it so it is very, very, very much a tradition at Department of Justice to come in, tell Congress what they need to hear, lie to them if necessary and then hope they don't get caught on their watch. Well maybe, but there was an op-ed in the journal on Friday maybe you saw it about the history of the FBI and the DOJ and that when for example Louis Freeh was running the FBI, Congress was respected. And when Congress came in and said we need these documents, we want this in terms of our oversight, it was delivered. But here you have a lot of stonewalling going on. I don't think that's even a question anymore. You know, these chairmen that we're talking about Goodlatte, Gowdy, and Nunez, have asked for specific documents a year ago, 1.2 million documents to be exact and what number are we up to? I mean, there was $3,000.
ISSA: 9,000.
BARTIROMO: Now we're at 9,000 according to you and Jim Jordan. So --
ISSA: And the best ones come last.
BARTIROMO: Well, that's another thing because so much of this is rejected and oftentimes when we unredacted the redactions we see well it wasn't actually national security at all. It was something that would have been an embarrassment to the FBI. So it's hard to trust that this is actually going forward in an honest way. Do you think you are getting honest answers from the FBI and the DOJ?
ISSA: No I don't. I believe they're lying through their teeth. Look, if you want to tell the truth, you -- what you do is the same thing you do in front of a federal judge which by the way is another branch just as Congress is and you allow a full in camera review. You know I'm not there at the negotiating table. This is now Trey Gowdy's watch, but when I was there, we would most often say if you say it's too voluminous and you say it's going to take too long, great. We'll sit side by side with your people, we'll search, we'll look and then we'll narrow down things we don't need. But to do that we need to see them completely unredacted. If they want to get to the truth that's what they do is they make all the documents available unredacted, give our investigators who have clearances the opportunity to sift through but this is exactly what they didn't do in Fast and Furious. They didn't do it in the Benghazi. They didn't do it in the IRS and it took I.G.'s and subpoenas and FOIA and judges and we still don't have the whole truth in each of those cases particularly Benghazi and Fast and Furious.
BARTIROMO: And now with the the investigation around the FBI's handling of the 2016 election, we're circling around this so-called FBI source. Kim Strassel at the Journal wrote about this last week and she asks did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign in her op-ed. You look at the Washington Post and they know all sorts of things about this FBI source that the FBI says we can't reveal. Well, how come the Washington Post knows all the details then? They're leaking it when it works for them but not when it doesn't.
ISSA: Well, this is this is -- this is very common in Washington, is each side has a tendency to not hold material the way they should when they need material to prove their point and the administration under -- particularly under President Obama did that regularly. They gave half stories, sometimes even giving it to Elijah Cummings and the Democrats before we even saw it on our subpoena. But Maria, I think the important thing is it is very clear that we are being asked to trust the Department of Justice who we know did, in fact, use a law that allows them to spy but lied to get the warrant, lied to a federal judge under the FISA Act. So this is one of the challenges. Make no bones about it. A FISA warrant is, in fact, a license to spy. Now the question is did you lie, cheat or steal in order to do that? And very clearly with the information presented, you know behind closed doors to the federal judge, the fact is they did mislead the judge, get a warrant multiple you know, ability to spy and now we're asked to believe that you can trust the very people not the management for a moment, but the very people who know this and are covering it up. Most of those people haven't retired, some of them knew about it when they broke the law or misled a federal judge and they don't want us to know it. And it's not about Republican or Democrat, it's about the fact we have another election coming up, why in the world would we think it's not happening again?
BARTIROMO: Right. And not only that, but we also know that they redid that FISA warrant three additional time. So four times they got the FISA warrant to spy on the Trump Campaign and they used it, and they got the FISA warrant by this dossier by saying that this dossier was actually some kind of important piece of work and it was all unverified. Rod Rosenstein signed off on the fourth time when they wanted that next FISA warrant and now Devin Nunez is saying, well, he's conflicted he should be nowhere near any of this since he signed off on the warrant. Do you agree with that?
ISSA: Well, exactly. This is where the Attorney General in an abundance of caution recused himself and now the very man he gave responsibilities who won't do the same thing when it's obvious that he has a conflict. You know, to be honest, the Deputy needs to recuse himself. We need to have a level of transparency. Probably not one person but multiple people who in fact oversee this to make sure that the American people get what they deserve. Let's remember the FBI has tremendous power and the Department of Justice hand-in-hand with them and whether it was the left or the right when they were going after Martin Luther King and bugging him and trying to get dirt on him or even all the way back with Goldwater, the FBI doesn't have clean hands, the Department of Justice as their partners don't have clean hands, and so we as the oversight if you will of that branch cannot and should not trust them. We should demand the transparency that we're entitled to and we need to be in front of a federal judge so that we have two against one because it's clear we're not getting where we need to go fast enough. And you know these chairmen are doing their job, Goodlatte, Nunez, and Gowdy but the reality is they're being slow-walked until after the election in the hopes that the Democrats will take over the House or the Senate and then the investigations will be covered up. No question in my mind that this would be something that would just go away if we lose the gavel.
BARTIROMO: You're absolutely right and I think the American people are on to this at this point. We've got a forthcoming I.G. report out. We are expecting Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General to come out with his report this month. What are you expecting there and if we were to see criminal charges recommended the way we saw that for Andrew McCabe, the number-two guy at the FBI, will we see actual accountability here? Are we going to see justice, sir?
ISSA: Well, I think you'll see justice. I want to lower everyone's expectations that look, Michael Horowitz, is a careful person, he's not going to ask for anything more than what he can fully prove and substantiate. So there won't be -- the best case, what there will be is someone who methodically goes through and takes on his bosses. You know, under Eric Holder, he testified before Congress about the way they were, in fact, covering up sexual harassment and other misconduct by Department of Justice lawyers in the name of it was off-limits. He came, he said it, he did not get what he wanted, but he's always been open and transparent with the Congress when it comes to doing his job and so he is probably the I.G.'s I.G. And if you were going to pick somebody that you weren't going to get the left or the right happy but you were going to get the truth, it's going to be Michael Horowitz.
BARTIROMO: All right, well, we'll we for that I.G. report out in the next couple of weeks. Anybody one either side of the aisle, Congressman, should be upset by oversight getting blown off. Let's face it. You're trying to get to the truth. Congressman, it's good to see you, sir. Thanks so much.
ISSA: See you again, Maria. Thank you so much for joining us, Darryl Issa there. President Trump accusing Iran of entering the nuclear agreement under false pretense and violent clashes intensify along the Israeli-Gaza border ahead of tomorrow's opening of the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem. Big day tomorrow, we'll talk with Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon coming up next about both topics. We're looking ahead on 'Sunday Morning Futures' right now
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back. President Trump speaking out on the Iran Nuclear Deal this weekend calling attention to Tehran's military budget as evidence that it never planned to abide by the 2015 accord because the military budget is up 40 percent. Joining me right now is the Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon, Israel's Ambassador to the U.N. It's great to see you, Ambassador. Thanks so much for joining us.
DANNY DANON, ISRAEL'S AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Thank you for having me.
BARTIROMO: First off, your reaction to the President pulling out of the Iran Deal.
DANON: Bold decision. Another bold, if you know the President. That was the right thing to do. It was a bad agreement for the beginning. We said it years ago. And let me tell you a few examples about why it is a bad agreement. You cannot inspect the facilities. You have to let them know in advance if you want to come to inspect the military facilities. It's a joke. They continue with a ballistic missile program. Prime Minister Netanyahu exposed documents that we found in Tehran and we showed it to the world that they're continuing with their ballistic missile program. Third, is the issue of the expiration date. What will happen in five, six, seven years and the most important the President has talk about it is the funding. Today they have a lot of funding and they put into their military and sponsoring their proxies in Syria, in Lebanon, in Yemen. They're using that money that they're getting from the Europeans to sponsor terrorism all over the world.
BARTIROMO: And let's not forget, ever since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, when hardliners came to power those leaders in Iran have called for Israel's elimination.
DANON: Even in the U.S.
BARTIROMO: And this weekend they were chanting death to America, death to Israel. Nothing changed. We have a small Satan, and then you see the Great Satan and they're calling for our destruction. Can you imagine if they will have a nuclear capability? What they will say then? What they will do then? We should take it very seriously especially when we see them building their presence in Syria next to our border, they're bringing weapons, funds, and militants. They are paying Afghans, Pakistanis to come to fight in Syria against Israel. That's why we are very worried. That why Prime Minister Netanyahu said we have a red line. We will not allow them to build up their forces next to our border.
BARTIROMO: Are things getting even more dangerous right now between Iran and Israel?
DANON: Because they are using their proxies, it's not a direct conflict. They're using their proxies in Lebanon which (INAUDIBLE) in Syria with the militants. That's what they are doing for us it is a challenge not to allow them to take over Syria. Look what happened to Lebanon. Today, thousand Lebanon died of the control of the Iranian regime. We cannot allow Syria to be the same.
BARTIROMO: Meanwhile, you've got the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia actually saying we want peace. We want to live the way we used to live before 1979. Are you seeing a new relationship between the Saudis and the Israelis?
DANON: Yes. I speak with many Arab ambassadors here at New York in the U.N. and they also welcome the bold decision of President Trump because we know Iran is a threat not to Israel it is a threat to the Middle East, is a threat to the world.
BARTIROMO: Yes. New friendships, that's for sure. It's quite extraordinary. Another bold move, the embassy is now moving to Jerusalem tomorrow will be the big move and of course a ceremony around it. How important was this for you?
DANON: That is a historic moment. We need to celebrate it and we intend to celebrate it. We are grateful for President Trump for finally, many presidents promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem. He's delivering, he's doing it and we will celebrate it. We will -- we'll do it tomorrow with a Jared and Ivanka Kushner with Secretary Mnuchin. For us, it's a great moment because many other countries will follow the U.S. The President of Guatemala will come this week to open his embassy. The president of Paraguay will follow him. We will see more countries moving their embassies to Jerusalem which has been our capital for 3,000 years from the date of King David. We are very proud of that moment.
BARTIROMO: Are you expecting any retaliation from the skeptics here, the Iranians for example?
DANON: Well, we expect the Palestinians there to demonstrate. They're already getting ready to do that. I hope they will not send their kids to the fence to use them as human shields. We want to have a peaceful ceremony to celebrate it but we're getting ready for scenarios.
BARTIROMO: All right, we will be there watching. Congratulations. It's good to see you, Ambassador.
DANON: Thank you very much, Maria. Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much, Ambassador Danny Danon, joining us there. A second Democratic Senator, one who is also facing re-election in the state President Trump overwhelmingly won now comes on board to support Gina Haspel as the CIA director. Will others follow suit? Our panel is on deck next as we look ahead on 'Sunday Morning Futures' back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: As you heard earlier in the program, former Vice President Dick Cheney in that exclusive interview told me his thoughts about the CIA director nominee Gina Haspel. Meanwhile, we're learning that a second Democrat Senator Joe Donnelly from Indiana will now support her nomination. Let's bring in the panel on that note. Ed Rollins is former Campaign Manager for Reagan-Bush '84 and Fox News Contributor. Lee Carter is the President and Partner at Maslansky Partners and it is good to see you both. Thank you so much for joining us. Does she get confirmed, Ed?
ED ROLLINS, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CONTRIBUTOR: I think she does. I think -- I think it depends breaking the tie. I mean, it'll be -- I think these two Democrats have come out are both trying to be Republicans because obviously they're challenged races and I think you may get one more and if not even if you don't, I think the Republicans at old and I think you get in there.
BARTIROMO: I was reading something earlier that all of this slow walking, Lee, it takes on average 84 days for any of the President's nominees to get confirmed. They are slow-walking this. What does this mean going into the midterm elections? Where do you stand now on November?
LEE CARTER, PRESIDENT, MASLANSKY PARTNERS: Well, I think that all of us talk about a blue wave with much ado about nothing because we're watching the poll numbers shrink. It was 16 points, the Democrat advantaged two months ago, six last month and only three today. And so you're looking at a very, very different landscape. I think this message have resist at all costs is one that has not worked and we're starting to see Democrats right now really start shift more to the middle. We've got in Indiana, the Democrat is talking about how he's voted with the President 62 percent of the time. We've got people who are now supporting the President's initiatives. We've got two Democrats now coming forward saying I'm going to support -- I'm going to support the CIA director and I think that this is a really important moment. And if the Democrats start to realize that they've got to move to the middle, that they've got to start focusing on the issues that matter most to the American people, then maybe they'll have a shot. But if they don't, I think the Republicans could still hold tight even though there are some reasons to be concerned.
BARTIROMO: I think so too, because look the president, Ed, is making some bold decisions and it's hard to resist when you've got the Embassy in Jerusalem, Iran deal he pulled out, in North Korea he's about to meet, first president to meet with the head of North Korea, and then there's the economic issues, economic growth. Atlanta feds talking about --
ROLLINS: I think the President has done a superb job of doing the things he said he would do. Promises, made promises kept. The dilemma we face is we have 40 Republicans who aren't running for re-election in the House. It's the largest number since 1930. So that basically puts a lot of seats in play that normally wouldn't be. We have about 65 seats that will be competitive out of the 435. 58, 59 of those are ours so we've got to win everywhere and we can win everywhere. The president's approval numbers are 45 percent now which what Reagan's were and what Obama's were. The critical thing here is the Senate and these two Democrats who obviously are the voting for these candidates because they're challenged, you don't want them to become too Republican. We have to win those two seats, plus a couple of more. We have about five seats in the Senate that are really in play.
BARTIROMO: Meanwhile Nancy Pelosi is out saying look, if the Democrats win the House, we will raise your taxes.
ROLLINS: Well, the --
BARTIROMO: She's actually saying that.
ROLLINS: There's not any Democrats running around saying that behind her though and I think the reality, she's in a very safe district and I think every Republican needs to make that the case. And the most telling thing is so far to date 71,000 of the commercials have been run -- have been positive. Trump, 28,000 of negative Trump. So the reality is it's not anti-Trump.
BARTIROMO: All right, great to see you both.
CARTER: Great to be with you.
BARTIROMO: Ed Rogers -- listen to me, Ed Rollins and Lee Carter, good to see you. Thank you so much I'll see you tomorrow at Fox Business Network, 6:00 a.m. on FBN. Have a good Sunday.
Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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