Former PM of Qatar on fate of Taliban 5; Gov. Scott Walker talks 2016 plans

This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," May 31, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARIA BARTIROMO, HOST: Good morning. We are hours away from an important deadline involving five terrorists in the hands of a Mideast ally. And we still don't know their fate.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Maria Bartiromo. Welcome to "Sunday Morning Futures."

The so-called Taliban 5 under virtual house arrest in Qatar for the past year, set to be released this week. So will they rejoin the terrorist army? I'll have a talk with the former prime minister of Qatar, shortly.

Plus, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker sitting down with me one on one, revealing his timetable for 2016 presidential announcement. His thoughts on negotiating with Iran and the stance on gay marriage.

Plus, the Senate working overtime to consider a bill that involves collecting your personal information. Our panel on the Patriot Act extension as we look ahead on Sunday Morning Futures.

And we begin this morning with discussions going on right now to keep five senior Taliban leaders from returning to the fight. The Obama administration released the so-called Taliban 5 from Gitmo last year, in exchange for Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. Bergdahl now faces desertion charges, and the U.S. and Qatar have agreed that the Taliban five would not travel with restrictions, but those restrictions expire tomorrow. A deal is now reportedly in the works to extend the restriction for another six months.

Joining me right now in an exclusive interview, the former prime minister of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor al-Thani. Good to see you, Sheikh Hamad, thank you so much for joining us this morning.


BARTIROMO: What is your stance? The U.S. nearing this deal with Qatar to extend that travel ban. What's your sense of these five former prisoners now still in Qatar and whether or not they will leave and go rejoin the fight?

AL-THANI: Well, first of all, I'm talking on my behalf, not on my government. As you know, I'm not in the government.

But I think this deal, when it's been reached, it's been reached in a mutual agreement between Qatar and the United States and the Taliban. And it was at that time trying to help both parties to reach an agreement on the prisoners. And also, as you know, there is political talks happened in Qatar between Taliban and the government, how they will find a way to sort the problem in Afghanistan, especially, as you know, United States, most of their troops are now outside Afghanistan.

What is a care to me, first of all, is the noise (ph) which (ph) it happens. This agreement being done with the United States, as you know, Qatar respects the agreement and put these people. And at that time, everybody thought this is a good deal for everybody and it's a win-win situation.

Right now I hear a lot of criticism about this deal. Criticism which we are surprised for in Qatar, as a normal person, as an ordinary person, that this deal is being done to help. And now it seems that if we did not help, it is better for me that we don't have that noise (ph).

I know there is a discussion happening at the moment as we hear from the news, and I think there will be an agreement between Qatar and the United States and Taliban how to extend or have a new arrangement for these five Taliban.

BARTIROMO: Is there a feeling within -- from the Qatari side that these five represent a big threat to the world? I mean, how much of a threat do you think these five represent?

AL-THANI: Well, from the beginning before we go to the threat, we went -- this problem is to solve a problem. And the problem is to get the prisoner back, your prisoner.

BARTIROMO: Bowe Bergdahl.

AL-THANI: Yes. And the second thing also is to keep them in a safe place, where you can guarantee that they will not behave or go back to what they are doing before. This has been done. This has been reached. Now the end of the one year is, after a few hours, as you mentioned --

BARTIROMO: Yes, tonight. Tonight.

AL-THANI: So in my opinion, agreement is important to reach. How they will behave or how after they leave, this is something which we don't know, how they will behave. Because you cannot guarantee somebody else after he leave a jail, even if in the United States, what he will go and do the same things back or not.

BARTIROMO: Of course, of course. Sheikh Hamad, I want to get your thoughts on the broader policy coming out of America, foreign policy as it relates to Yemen and Syria. So stay with us. We have got a lot to talk about with you, the former prime minister of Qatar. But first, let's take a look at the Taliban five. The renewed fear they will return to the battlefield and the questions of whether the prisoner swap was one of the biggest mistakes President Obama has made yet. Fox News' senior correspondent Eric Shawn joins me now live with that angle. Eric, good morning to you.

ERIC SHAWN, FOX NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Maria, and good morning, everyone. How will they behave? Well, they will be back killing Americans. That at least is what critics predict will happen if the so- called Taliban five are free to travel after their one-year travel ban expires just hours from now tomorrow. But reports say the ban may be extended for at least another six more months.


JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It is true that the United States has been in touch with our partners in Qatar about the kinds of steps we believe are important to protecting the national security of the American people.


SHAWN: They were described as high risk, hard core. The five former top- ranking Taliban officials. Among them, the chief of staff of the Taliban army, the head of communications, and the deputy of the Taliban intelligence service. They were held in Gitmo for 12 years, and it was predicted that they would return to the battlefield if ever released.

But then came Bowe Bergdahl. President Obama made that controversial and highly criticized decision to swap the five for Bergdahl one year ago. Bergdahl, of course, captured by the Taliban after walking away from his platoon, charged with desertion, and has been branded a traitor by some critics.

When they were swapped, the Taliban five were sent to Qatar, living there, says the government, under surveillance and monitoring. But despite that, at least one of the Taliban five was reported to have contacted al Qaeda, which of course was not part of the plan. We were told that the five had been living in a residential compound in Doha, joined by 70 family members from Afghanistan. For now, they may not be going anywhere, but the question remains, what happens when the day comes that they can? Maria?

BARTIROMO: And of course, that day is today. Eric, thank you very much. More now with former prime minister of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad. Joining me this morning in this exclusive. And Sheikh Hamad, I'd like to get your sense of really what's happening right now, with ISIS controlling 50 percent of Syria, with ISIS having taken down Ramadi in Iraq. Characterize the war against ISIS and what's been going on this last year in Yemen, as well as Syria.

AL-THANI: Well, I think there is turmoil in all the region, and I think this is still in the beginning. I don't think we reached the peak in the region. There is a mess, and this mess is because of 40 years of bad policy in the region. Most of the region have bad policy for 40 years. We have dictatorships, which has stayed 40 years there. They most think about themselves, how to stay in power. They did not talk about job, about development, and that's what we have.

If we are talking about ISIS, we have to talk why it happens. It happens because of bad policy of our ally and United States, in my opinion. You know, the control of the Iraqi government, the way how it's been done, I think it shows that there is -- the Sunnis have not fair treatment with other ethnics or with the Shia in Iraq, and all of them Iraq, they have to have the same opportunity. And I believe this happened after feeling that they've been insulted or they've been pressured or been kicked out of the power completely. And unfortunately, ISIS finds the right moment and the right, what you call it, atmosphere in the region, and it happens.

In my opinion, to fight ISIS, there's two or three elements. The first element, we have to know the problem, why it's being caused. ISIS will not be strong if we dealt with the problem in Syria in the first year or the first eight months. And at that time, Bashar almost done.

Now we are dealing -- we know that ISIS have some arrangement with Bashar al-Assad in certain times to create a new situation in Syria and to show you that the alternative of Bashar is terrorism. I think if we dealt with the problem more seriously, I mean the United States especially, dealt with us and the region more seriously, and Syria problem the first 10 or 12 months, I think we will not see ISIS.

And also, if we dealt more seriously in the problem in Iraq. Right now, to deal with the matter, the United States cannot deal alone. All the region have to work on this. And to work on this, that means there should be an involvement to get (inaudible). Part of this involvement, how also to give the Syrian people their freedom from Bashar.

BARTIROMO: Should the U.S. have pulled out all of the troops in Iraq? I mean, it feels like that was one of the seminal moments that really empowered ISIS.

AL-THANI: I think it happens before you pull your troops. ISIS was there, not enough strong, but it was there because, in my opinion, during your stay, during your troop, yes, you can dealt with it militarily, but politically I think there was a lot of mistakes which bring ISIS to the picture.

BARTIROMO: Do you think at this point we will see a change in strategy? How does the Middle East right now, our allies in the Middle East, feel about America's foreign policy? What would you like to see done?

AL-THANI: I think there's a shock and surprise from the policy, to be frank. You know, I consider myself friend of United States. And I think there is a shock among even the friends of United States how they dealt with the matter, how they are trying to find solution after solution, mistakes after mistakes, I call it. And even when you are talking with Iran, for example, for the nuclear, I support to have a deal with Iran on the nuclear. But to support Iran and the nuclear, you have to have all the region with you before Camp David. You have to have them with you from day one to support this deal.

BARTIROMO: Sheikh Hamad, before we go, I have to have ask you about this soccer corruption and FIFA. Let me switch gears, insisting that the Qatar 2022 World Cup will go ahead. Can you give us a sense of how the process has gone on in term of Qatar getting the World Cup? There's all this talk about FIFA and these under-the-table deals.

HAMAD: Unfortunately, it's not fair talks. Even if you see how they talk about Russia and they talk about Qatar. I support, of course, Russia to have their turn in 2018. But if you see the talks, it's all about Qatar. Is it because an Arab Islamic small country? That's the people in the region feel.

I think if you think about the opportunities and to bring the Middle East and to bring the Arabs closer to you, I don't think this attack will help, because my knowledge that we dealt with this in a fair competition and there was no corruption and these things.

But the problem is the media insisting, as there is somebody trying to flare this between time to time, and we know why they flare this. We know -- even we know how to distinguish this flare. But I believe that shows the ugly face of the other party when they did not win a fair competition.

BARTIROMO: Sheikh Hamad, it's really terrific having you on the program today. Thanks so much for talking about so many important subjects of the day.

AL-THANI: My pleasure.

BARTIROMO: We will see you soon.

Sheikh Hamad is the former prime minister of Qatar.

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, meanwhile, eyeing a launch date for his 2016 campaign. When is the big day? What are his thoughts on Iran and gay marriage? He'll join me next.

I hope you'll follow us on Twitter @MariaBartiromo @SundayFutures. Stay with us as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures" this morning.


BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

The IRS revealing this week that identity thieves stole sensitive tax information through its website. The agency says it affected about 100,000 U.S. households.

Now, cyber intelligence sources telling Fox News the attack originated in Russia.

We bring in an online security expert. Right now Hemu Nigam joining he. He's the founder of SSP Blue and co-founder of very as well as a former federal sex crimes prosecutor.

Hemu, good to have you on the program. Thanks very much for joining us.


BARTIROMO: Hemu, I guess the one question to start out with is how is it that they did break the IRS website to get all of that personal information from 100,000 taxpayers? Can you talk to us about the security in place and how that was breached?

NIGAM: Well, it's really interesting, Maria, because the IRS is guarding some of the most sensitive information, and yet their security protocols were not designed to protect that information.

So for example, they didn't have what appears to be what I would call triggers for anomalous behavior. In other words, if somebody in Russia in an IP address that comes out of Russia is coming into your system and asking for an account that belongs in, say, Pennsylvania, that should immediately alert a trigger that says take a look, why is this Pennsylvania resident all the sudden in Russia asking for their taxpayer file?

So, that's one basic failure in the system that I can see right away.

BARTIROMO: What should the IRS be doing in terms of its system and protecting it? And what can people at home do in terms of having a comfort feeling that their information is secure?

NIGAM: Well, one thing the IRS can do is do what's called -- and this is basic security -- it's called something you have and something you know. If I'm a citizen asking for my information and let's say it's a hacker in my place stealing my identity, they might know all my security information, which is exactly what these hackers did, but they don't have my phone number at home, my land line. They don't have my cell phone. So the IRS could basically, or very simply trigger a phone call to me that says, are you right now trying to get on and get your information?

Something I have, I have my cell phone. A hacker doesn't have that. That would have prevented many of these requests.

And it also would have said to the IRS, something is going on, better take a look. So if you're watching at home, think about this, put a credit lock on your credit now, even if you think you had your e-mail password stolen somewhere else. Go to the IRS website. I know this is not something we want to do right now, but go to the IRS website and fill out that form that says you may have been a victim of identity theft, even if it was somewhere else.

And then more important than anything else, use the latest anti-virus, anti-phishing software and keep it updated, do not hit that remind me later button, that is what gets you in trouble.

BARTIROMO: The remind me later button gets you in trouble. Why, because you're not cleaning things up right away?

NIGAM: Well, if you're doing a security update when it comes on, what happens is you're telling the hackers out there there's a security hole, there's a fix for it, I just decided I'm not going to do anything about it right now. And it's so easy for us to do that.

BARTIROMO: Interesting.

Were you surprised that we're learning now that the breach or the hack originated in Russia?

NIGAM: Well, that's what it appears to be. What hackers often do is they jump from place to place. They may want to pretend they're in Russia. As far as we know, they could be sitting in China, they could be sitting in London. We don't know. But it's something that appears to be true.

So was I surprised?

Not really, because hackers do that a lot. But what I am more surprised about is how could an IP address or a hacker coming in from Russia asking for American citizen trust -- tax information not be triggered by the IRS? That says something unusual, something funny is going on here, let me take a look. That's what I am surprised by.

BARTIROMO: It is quite extraordinary. Hemu, good to have you on the program. Thanks very much for weighing in.

NIGAM: Thanks, Maria.

BARTIROMO: We'll see you soon, Hemu Nigam, joining us there.

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker topping some polls in the race to the White House. When will he make his campaign official?

I'll talk with him next as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures."


BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Wisconsin governor Scott Walker topping a new poll among Republican voters in Iowa, the site of the first 2016 presidential caucus. Walker gained 17 percent of the vote in a Des Moines Register poll, followed Kentucky senator Rand Paul and Dr. Ben Carson.

I spoke with Governor Walker to learn when he will announce that run.


BARTIROMO: Governor, thanks for joining us.

GOV. SCOTT WALKER, R-WIS.: Thanks for having me on.

BARTIROMO: You have been traveling throughout the country. Back in January you filed what's called a 527. You launched a website. And your 527 was -- is called The American Revival. But you've yet to throw your hat officially in the ring for the presidential election.

What's taking you so long?

Why haven't you announced yet?

WALKER: Yes. Well, as governor of Wisconsin, at least in our state, our budget comes out every two years. State budget will be done at the end of June. It's still my obligation to see through a positive budget that hopefully for the fifth and sixth year in a row will actually lower property taxes in our state even from where they were before I took office in 2010.

But I want to have a good budget that continues to provide reform in our state. Shortly after, we'll be announcing our intentions to the people of this great country.

BARTIROMO: So that's in the next month.


BARTIROMO: This past week we got another dismal GDP number. The first quarter, in fact, actually contracted. It was negative. We've got the jobs number coming out this upcoming Friday.

How do you move the needle on growth and jobs in America?

WALKER: Well, I think you need to act quickly. I think the next president can't just be -- it's not enough just to have a Republican. Hopefully we have a Republican House should be sustained. Hopefully we'll have a Republican United States Senate. But it's not enough just to have Republicans in charge.

You need to have someone who's ready to reform on day one, something we did four years ago. We took on the reforms right away, I think in the first 45 to 100 days.

We have to push a big, bold, aggressive agenda when it comes to growth there. It's not just about austerity but really about growth, about understanding the people of this country create jobs, not the government.

This president and people like Hillary Clinton, they tend to think you grow the economy by growing Washington. Last year six of the top 10 wealthiest counties in America were in or around Washington, D.C. I think we ought to grow the county and cities and towns and villages all across the U.S.

The way to do it is lower tax burden, lower marginal tax rates, make American employers job creators competitive again with a rate that's competitive around the world so that more American jobs can come back from overseas.

Repeal ObamaCare and put patients back in charge again. Dramatically rein in regulations, sending many of those responsibilities back to the states and ultimately to the people.

Using the abundance of all the energy supplies we have here in this country and on this continent and having a level playing field when it comes to trade globally. I think all of those things could get us from the very stagnant growth we've been seeing in the last few months to a growth pattern I think is realistic to get us to 4 percent, almost 4.5 percent growth.

BARTIROMO: All right. Let me move on to foreign policy because this is an area where your skeptics out there will say you're not up to the job in terms of foreign policy, in terms of your knowledge, your leadership, when it comes to some of these big issues out there.

I'll start with the question of the day that everyone is asking and that is the Iraq war.

If you knew what you know today, would you have gone in to Iraq the way President Bush did?

WALKER: Well, just one thing, a qualifier to begin with. I'd point out that in the overall issue of foreign policy, I'd say in my lifetime, the most impressive president when it came to foreign policy was a governor from California.

In my lifetime, the worst president of foreign policy was a freshman senator from Illinois.

So being a senator or a governor isn't as important as leadership. In this case, when it comes to leadership, I'll just flat out tell you, I think that any president, regardless of party, would have made a similar decision to what the president did at the time with the information that was available.

Hillary Clinton, a member the United States Senate at the time, voted for an authorizing resolution because she and other members of both parties had the same levels or the same type of information that President Bush had at the time.

So I can't fault them for that decision, knowing what they thought they knew at the time.

Where I do think he deserves credit is a few years later when the surge took place, I think that was the right move and got us on the right track. I think the ultimate important question today is to ask people like Hillary Clinton and President Obama, why, when you knew years ago the same thing you know today, and that is that there are serious military concerns about leaving Iraq too soon, particularly after we had achieved victory and had we had peace sustained there in the region, why did they pull out?

BARTIROMO: Why are we having these discussions?

What should be done in terms of the potential of a deal with Iran?

WALKER: On day one, January 20th, 2017, I'd pull back from that faulty deal. I think it's a big error. I'd be willing to negotiate with Iran, but on our terms, not on their terms.

To me it's real simple. Our terms would be you need to dismantle your illicit nuclear infrastructure.

Secondly, you need to disclose fully and provide full transparency including immediate ability to inspect, particularly at their underground fortified facilities.

Then they need to deal with others in the region. That means recognizing that Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state. And that they're going to pull out of what you alluded to, I mean, Iran has got their hands involved, whether it's with the Houthis in Yemen or what we see in Syria or elsewhere around the world in terrorist or terrorist-related activities. They need to get out of that.

And they need to get rid of the intercontinental ballistic missiles, not only those targeted at Israel, but those potentially targeted at the United States.

Those are the terms of our deal. If they don't, we need to pull back on that deal, put sanctions back in place from America and encourage our allies around the world to do the same.

BARTIROMO: I feel like in some corners of the country, people are feeling like the GOP or the extreme right of the GOP does not understand how America has changed. You've talked about how you've gone to a friend's gay reception but you didn't go to the wedding.

Do you think that the GOP in general or certainly all the way to the Right are missing how America has changed and what America feels about as far as their freedoms?

Do you think America has changed in the last 10 years?

WALKER: I still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. I voted for that and the legislature for it in the constitution, defend it in our state. As you mentioned, I had a family member on my wife's side, one of our great cousins that we love, and we went there even though we have a belief of what legally constitutes marriage, we were there because we love her. We love her and we love the whole family. And so of course we're going to be there.

In terms of this issue, though, it's one of those where it's interesting. Going forward, the next president is going to have very limited impact on this. If the courts rule in the coming days, they're going to rule one of two ways, they're either going to say either that marriage amongst -- marriage is defined as something the state should be doing, or they're going to say that marriage amongst same-sex couples is legal. The only other alternative to that is a constitutional amendment, which is something that doesn't go through the legislative process, it's something the states and congress has to act on.

So, it's really not going to be an issue in the next presidential election.

But I don't shy away -- I think even if people disagree with me, even if some people have changed in that regard, people deserve to know what my opinion is on that, the same way I'm pro-life.

But I think in the end, what they want to know is what are you going to do to lead America forward, not to pit one group of Americans versus another. And I think we have got a pretty good story to tell.

BARTIROMO: Governor, good to have you on the show today.

WALKER: Thank you.

BARTIROMO: Thank you so much. Governor Scott Walker.


Meanwhile, the Senate meeting today in a special session in a last-ditch effort to maintain the counterterrorism powers of the Patriot Act. Now, the White House warning there is no plan B to keep the programs running without new legislation. Our panel begins right there as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures." We'll be right back.


BARTIROMO: Thank you, Eric.

And we add our condolences to the Biden family after that tragedy of his son. We want to bring in our panel. Ed Rollins is the former principal White House adviser to President Reagan. He has been a long-time strategist to business and political leaders. He's a Fox news political analyst.

Mary Kissel is a Wall Street Journal editorial board member.

And Hank Sheinkopf is the president of Sheinkopf limited, a Democratic strategist, who also worked on the Clinton/Gore campaign.

Good to see everybody. Thanks very much for joining us.

And of course we knew that Beau Biden was sick, but I don't know that there was such expectations that he would pass at 46, Ed.

ED ROLLINS, FRM. REAGAN ADVISER: It's very unfortunate. He's a fine young man. He was a two-term governor -- two-term attorney general. He was going to run for governor in the future. He certainly would have had a great career in politics if this tragedy hadn't occurred.

And unfortunately, the Biden family has had a series of disasters like this. I certainly disagree with his politics, but I certainly admire him as a man and send my condolences to his son.

BARTIROMO: Of course.

MARY KISSEL, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Thoughts and prayers are with his family, Maria.


HANK SHEINKOPF, PRESIDENT SHEINKOPF LIMITED: A tragedy by any measure. 46. No words can describe it.

BARTIROMO: 46 years old, brain cancer. Really, so sad. We send our thoughts this morning.

With the PATRIOT Act, meanwhile, set to expire at midnight tonight, the senate will hold a rare Sunday session today in a last-ditch effort to replace or extend a number of anti-terror programs, including the NSA's controversial collection of Americans' phone records.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul vowing to block any vote to extend the legislation despite warnings from the White House that letting it die would put Americans at risk.

Your thoughts this morning on the Patriot Act, Mary?

KISSEL: I think this is a reckless, reckless posturing at a time of rising global disorder. Let's remember that the Patriot Act was put in place after 9/11 to ensure that we never had another 9/11, and we have a former CIA director that said the metadata collection program would have prevented it had it been in place.

I think Senator Paul postulates a lot of hypothetical impingements on our liberties, but would Senator Paul like to take responsibility if we have another 9/11? He's put the House in a very, very difficult position and also politically, Maria, it allows the White House to say to the GOP, well, if there's another terror attack, it's your fault, never mind that the president has stopped interrogations, that he sent GITMO prisoners back, and the rest.

This is a terrible day for America. And I think it puts us at a lot of risk.

BARTIROMO: Ed, do you agree with that?

ROLLINS: I disagree a little bit. Another 9/11 is not going to occur because we don't have the Patriot Act. I mean, we have very due diligence, our guard is up. I think if this bill is getting killed today, I think Paul is going to kill it. But I think there will be some compromise that'll come forth this week, you know, another variant of the House, or something like that.

A lot of the provisions that we think are important are going to be re- evaluated and reimplemented.

This is really Snowden's greatest reward. This was he who brought this all to the attention of the American public. And there's a lot of Americans who didn't like having their phones listened to, what have you. And I think Paul's arguments, that we can all still with warrants, go to courts, live by the constitution, I think a lot of people adhere to that.


SHEINKOPF: Raw, gut politics, big loser here, Mitch McConnell. He doesn't look like he's in charge of his own chamber. He looks like he's not able to get things done, Republicans running around on different parts of the spectrum, Rand Paul making him look foolish. And the other guy who's hoping this doesn't work out is Boehner. He doesn't want to deal with this in his chamber. He may be the lucky guy.

KISSEL: Yeah, let's be -- let's be clear for everyone listening. The NSA is not listening to your phone calls. They're looking at call records and who's calling whom. So the way that Senator Paul and others have characterized this program is absolutely inaccurate. The Supreme Court has said, since the 1970s, you don't need a warrant to look at this stuff. You've got to blame the president here for not explaining to the American public what the NSA program was all about and why we needed it.

SHEINKOPF: Nancy is right about one thing. The big winner here is Barack Obama. He's on the television. He's giving sound bites to people, saying, "Look, these guys can't get it together. I want to protect America." And he looks like the man who's trying to put this together to protect American citizens.


ROLLINS: Well, Hank, no offense, you're a long-time friend, but, I mean, if anybody is going to think Barack Obama is protecting America when the weakness of his administration has created chaos throughout the world, I think...

SHEINKOPF: On this issue, he looks like he's doing the best he can and the right thing for the country.

ROLLINS: Well, the best -- I think he tries to do the best he can every day, but it's just not good enough, and there's going to be a whole campaign about that in the very near future.

BARTIROMO: You make a point, though, in terms of what it shows about the Republicans, though, constantly arguing -- and the granularity of every subject, in terms of, you know, the divisions.

ROLLINS: Well, there's three divisions, and they're very significant. I think the point that Hank made about Mitch McConnell -- here's the senior senator, majority leader from Kentucky. This is the junior senator from Kentucky that's leading the charge against him. It's all about presidential politics. Paul is one of the leaders of the Tea Party. It's an important element. The (inaudible) agenda is part of our -- our coalition and the old business establishment Republican. We have three elements of our party that are all basically at -- at war with each other...


KISSEL: And we're going to give the victory to Edward Snowden. Remember that those revelations came out in 2013. Well, since then, what have we had? We've had the rise of ISIS. This is a period where the world is a far more dangerous place, where we need our intelligence agencies to have the ability to connect dots.

What we're doing is we're taking away the dots from the NSA. This is a terrible day for America. We need these programs, and we need the White House to explain why we need these programs.

BARTIROMO: Yeah, it certainly is a much different world today than even just 2013.

Take a short break. The 2016 field expanding on both sides of the aisle. Our panel will take a look at the latest former politicians looking to get back into the political fray, as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures."


BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Top of the hour is "MediaBuzz." Let's check in with Howard Kurtz, see what's going on, on his program.

Good morning to you, Howie.

HOWARD KURTZ, HOST, "MEDIABUZZ": Hello, Maria. We're going to look at the stunning indictment and the coverage of -- against -- these charges against former House Speaker Denny Hastert, look at some of the presidential candidates who got into the race this week on both sides, how they're getting very little coverage, maybe the media just, kind of, prematurely writing them off.

And as he steps down after a half a century at CBS, final conversation with Bob Schieffer.

BARTIROMO: All right. We'll see you in about 10 minutes, Howie. We will be there. And as you just mentioned, Hillary Clinton has a new challenger, and the Republican field expanded last week. Former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley taking the plunge for the Democrats, throwing his hat in the ring for president yesterday. Former New York Governor George Pataki and the man who came in second behind Mitt Romney last time around, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, also making their bids for the GOP.

Your thoughts on the new field, Ed Rollins?

ROLLINS: They had their highlight this week. Santorum, who was the runner- up last time because he was a conservative alternative, will be crowded out by other conservatives who are new faces this time. Pataki's going absolutely nowhere. He'll be one of the first ones out of the race. And I think that O'Malley would be a legitimate candidate in another year, but this isn't another year for the Democrats. Hillary is going to take this thing and take it pretty easy.

BARTIROMO: Will the Dems support Martin O'Malley, Hank?

SHEINKOPF: Not likely. They'll probably try to get rid of him quickly because the Clintons will not want him there and they'll try to -- they've been not successful doing that with Bernie Sanders, but, you know, they just don't want any competition, to spend money they don't have spend.

KISSEL: You know, two of these candidates say interesting things about their respective parties. Rick Santorum is running as a right-wing populist, had some anti-immigration notes there. I think that's interesting and worrying about what it says about the GOP, the focus on growth.

In terms of O'Malley, he's basically running the campaign that Senator Elizabeth Warren was running. He's running an anti-bank, populist campaign on the far, far left of the party.

BARTIROMO: He says Wall Street needs to be reined in even further.

KISSEL: Right. Well, essentially, he's running to the party that President Obama wanted to create. Obama has pulled the party way far to the left. That is not who Hillary Clinton is. It's who she's trying to be because she senses that. So, to my mind, that was what was interesting about the announcements this week.

BARTIROMO: What's going on behind the scenes, Hank, between the president -- President Obama and Hillary -- and the Hillary camp? Is he working against her?

SHEINKOPF: I've always believed that he is not a great fan. And I've always believed that he is doing whatever he can to block her. And I wouldn't be surprised if Obama operatives show up in the O'Malley operation in some fashion.

But it's too late. She's got that dough. She's got the speed. She's got the institutional players. Unfortunately, Vice President Biden would have been the institutional guy, but he's not going to be there. She's the one. And the -- she can only -- she'll get elected if the Republicans don't have a real horse to knock her off.

ROLLINS: Or she defeats herself.


But the truth of the matter is, there is no Obama campaign left. Unlike when Bush won the third term of Reagan, there was a campaign in place that he was able to pick up and run with. The Obama people have deliberately not put it into the DNC, not handed it off to her. Some of the operatives have gone on to set up a contract.

She has to re-create her own campaign, her own campaign mechanism, which she will do, but it will take more time and more money.

KISSEL: There's no love lost because they don't like what the Clintons were in the '90s and what they represented. So Obama/Clinton, you could characterize them as "frenemies."


Obama also did nothing to cultivate younger talent within the party. And so I think, you know, again, when you saw O'Malley's announcement, that's a lot of excitement among the Democratic base and the progressives in the party because it is a progressive party today. They have pushed out every moderate that was left in the Democratic Party.

ROLLINS: He also made a very deliberate choice not to pick someone that could succeed him as his vice president, and certainly not to cast any aspersions on Joe Biden, but Joe Biden was too old, couldn't basically become a viable candidate.

We did the same thing when we nominated Sarah Palin. There was no -- there was no "there" there in the future. So my sense is she now has control of the party and the mechanism and she's going to be very hard to beat in the Democratic side.

BARTIROMO: On the Democratic side. I want to talk about the general election next. We'll take a short break. A revised GDP number weighed down on Wall Street at the end of the week. We'll take a look at the first- quarter fallout, what it means for the recovery and the election, as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures." Back in a minute.


BARTIROMO: Welcome back with our panel, Ed, Mary, Hank.

I want to get back to this issue of the Obama administration, Hank, working against Hillary. What do you know?

SHEINKOPF: Well, look, it's simple. They don't -- it's clear to see that the Obama people do not want the Clintons in charge of that Democratic Party apparatus again. Because, if they are, there won't be an Obama legacy. And that bad blood continues to boil.

BARTIROMO: So Hillary will likely get the nomination in her party, Ed, but what about the general election? A Florida judge setting a date for a racketeering charge against the Clintons?

ROLLINS: This is very serious. This came out on Friday. The language is all bad. I don't know what the details of it are, but the basic thing, look at the fund-raising that's gone on in the Clinton Foundation. One of the arguments is that they need to have a special envoy to take charge of all the -- there's just a whole variety of things that can happen. And this was supposed to set for trial in January.

So it's a bad time for them. A lot can happen outside of court, but when you say the word "RICO," you think of the Mafia; you think of -- and it is about racketeering, criminal things, and the charges that they used this to get money from foreign clients and what have you while she was secretary of state, and it was a quid pro quo. And that's not going to be very pretty when the court has...

BARTIROMO: And of course the courts have ruled that we will get to see Hillary Clinton's e-mails every month, every 60 days. That has to mean that there's going to be constant scrutiny about what's in those e-mails.

KISSEL: You mean the e-mails that she didn't delete, Maria?

BARTIROMO: That's right.

KISSEL: Right. Well...

BARTIROMO: The ones she did not delete.


KISSEL: Well, it's extraordinary that she continues as a candidate, given all the scandals that have come out. It's a testimony to the tenacity of Hillary. I mean, she's just clawing on there. If you think about what we've already learned, without knowing what's in those e-mails...

BARTIROMO: And without her answering any questions.

KISSEL: Answering any questions. I mean, we know that she was taking informal intelligence from Sidney Blumenthal, who was at the same time employed by the Clinton Foundation and trying to start a business in Libya at the same time he was advising the secretary.

There's the private e-mail server that she did not disclose. We have the Clinton Foundation and all of those links to foreign governments. We've got Bill's speaking fees and the potential quid pro quo there.

I mean, just pick one. You know, when she does have to start answering questions from the press, it's going to be very interesting.

ROLLINS: She's still the nominee, though.

SHEINKOPF: The punditry and the press corps will think about this in big pieces. In order to make the public get it, it has to be in small bites. Small bites are "What did you get," "When did you get it." And the person who's going to figure this out for whomever on the Web is going to be the most important person in this political season.

BARTIROMO: Let's take a quick break and then get the one thing to watch for the week ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures" from our panel. Stay with us.


BARTIROMO: And we're back with our panel with the one thing to watch for the upcoming week. Mary Kissel, what are you watching?

KISSEL: I'm watching the Export-Import Bank fight in Congress. This is the crony-est taxpayer-backed bank. Congress has to do exactly nothing to let its charter expire. They should. It's a test of the GOP and the direction that the party wants to take. Are they going to be the party of free markets or are they going to be the party of the Chamber of Commerce, the Fortune 500 and of crony-ism?

BARTIROMO: Ed Rollins?

ROLLINS: I'm going to watch Governor Walker. You had a great interview with him, and people saw a lot of the appeal that he has. He's a guy who's moved to the forefront. He, for all practical purposes, is the front- runner. Can he stay there? Can he maintain it? And his budget, as you talked about -- it's very, very important to get a balanced budget.

BARTIROMO: Hank Sheinkopf?

SHEINKOPF: It's the Patriot Act; it's Mitch McConnell falling apart, simple.

BARTIROMO: All right. We will be watching all of that. Thanks very much. Thank you to our panel.

That'll do it for "Sunday Morning Futures." I'm Maria Bartiromo. I'll be back tomorrow morning for the premiere of my new morning show. "Mornings With Maria" kicks off tomorrow at 6 a.m. Eastern on the Fox Business Network. We've got three big guests tomorrow. I hope you'll join us. Take a look at where you can find FBN on your cable network or satellite provider. Click on "Channel Finder" to find Fox Business.

"MediaBuzz" with Howie Kurtz begins right now. Have a great Sunday, everybody. See you 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.