Mick Mulvaney on impact of the shutdown, efforts to reopen

This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," January 21, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


The federal government partially shuts down as a bitterly divided Congress fails to reach a spending deal.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALI., MINORITY LEADER: Happy anniversary, Mr. President. Your wish came true. You wanted a shutdown, the Trump shutdown is all yours.

REP. STENY HOYER, D-MARYLAND: We will not back down because Republicans are unwilling to compromise.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, R-KY., MAJORITY LEADER: We believe that the issue of illegal immigration is more important than everything else.

MICK MULVANEY, WHITE HOUSE BUDGET DIRECTOR: It's still a Schumer budget. So, I got that nice little ring to it, doesn't it?

WALLACE: Partisan finger-pointing and uncertainty after a standoff in the Senate over immigration. We'll discuss the fallout for Americans and who will get the blame with White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney and Democratic Senator Chris Coons, part of a bipartisan group trying to work out a compromise.

Plus --

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear --

WALLACE: We'll ask our Sunday panel about the Trump presidency one year after his inauguration.

And our "Power Player of the Week," the story behind the first combat teams on the ground after the September 11th attacks.

How soon after 9/11 did you know you were going to work?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I knew the minute the second airplane hit the second tower.

WALLACE: All right now on "Fox News Sunday."


WALLACE: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.

Congress is still here this weekend, still trying to reach a deal to reopen the government after the clock ran out on funding midnight Friday. The shutdown coinciding with the one-year anniversary of the Trump presidency. The president cancelled a trip to Florida to stay in Washington until they reach a compromise. This hour, we'll discuss the way forward with White House Budget Chief Mick Mulvaney and Democratic Senator Chris, part of a small group trying to make a deal.

But let's bring in chief congressional correspondent Mike Emanuel live on Capitol Hill with the latest -- Mike.

MIKE EMANUEL, FOX NEWS CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Chris, there are no visible signs of progress in ending this government shutdown. In fact, things have gotten pretty personal with the Senate majority leader blasting his counterpart Chuck Schumer.


MCCONNELL: The president would not give him everything he wants on the issue of illegal immigration in one afternoon in the Oval Office.

EMANUEL: Republicans were quick to brand it the Schumer shutdown after Senate Democrats blocked a four-week government funding extension late Friday night. It also would have provided a six-year extension of health insurance to an estimated 9 million children. Democrats held out for a deal on the so-called Dreamers, young people brought to this country illegally by their parents and now sound like they are adding to their demands.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-NY, SENATE MINORITY LEADER: At this point we feel very, very strongly about the issues, not just Dreamers, but opioids, pensions, not funding the military on C.R. basis, and we feel the American people are on our side.

EMANUEL: House lawmakers aggravated after they passed a government funding extension and it was rejected by Senate Democrats. That led to this dustup on the House floor taking aim at Schumer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Majority in the House and majority in the Senate have voted to prevent the shutdown and keep the government open.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bring the poster to the chair for his observation.


EMANUEL: Soon, the shutdown will get real if by Monday morning, there is no deal and much of the federal workforce is on furlough -- Chris.

WALLACE: Not good if they are arguing over posters.

Mike Emanuel, reporting from Capitol Hill -- Mike, thank you.

Joining me now, the White House budget chief, Mick Mulvaney, the man in charge of implementing the government shutdown.

Director, welcome back to FOX NEWS SUNDAY.

MICK MULVANEY, WHITE HOUSE BUDGET DIRECTOR: Good morning. Thank you again for having me.

WALLACE: Describe the extent of the shutdown both in terms of personnel and programs.

MULVANEY: Sure. As of yesterday, federal agencies started setting up their furlough notices. There's really three categories of employees. Those who will come to work on Monday, those who will not come to work on Monday and is actually a small group that will come to work on Monday for about four hours to help shut things down and then they will leave as well. Those notices went out yesterday, and that over the course of the next couple days, we'll start to see agencies trying to implement their shutdown plans, which is going to be different, Chris, than it was in 2013 as we try to work to keep more agencies open.

In fact, I talked to the president late, I guess it was Friday night. He said, look, Mick, we need to work hard to keep as many of these folks at work and keep as many of these agencies open as we can. So, that's the shutdown plan that we're implementing right now.

WALLACE: Where will we see the effects first, regular American see the effects and where will we see the biggest effects?

MULVANEY: The effects actually won't be as visible as they were in 2013. Keep in mind, 2013, the only way I can describe it is the Obama administration shows to weaponize the shutdown. They want it to be very showy. They went out of their way to hurt more people and to be more visible.

You remember maybe the barricades up in front of the World War II Memorial to keep the vets away from their own memorial. You won't see that this year. The national parks will be open. The trash won't get picked up but --


WALLACE: But it's going to hurt. I mean, if you're talking about furloughing 800,000 people.

MULVANEY: It hurts, but you asked me question, is what will people see? The point of the matter is, if you work there, you will see a dramatic difference. But most Americans won't see a difference. You go to the airport on Monday, the TSA will still be there. The military is still at work.

Now, they're not getting paid, and that's wrong, but in terms of what you will see, it will not be as dramatic as what you saw in 2013.

WALLACE: Let's talk about how we get out of this mess. There are new reports that Senate Republicans are going to offer a deal, a three-week C.R., not a four-week C.R., which would last continuing resolution until February 8th with disaster relief funding and also money for CHIP, children's health insurance.

Is that true and what about DACA?

MULVANEY: I'm not -- a couple of different things. I'm not familiar with the specific deal. I know it's on the table right now, which is a four-week. I have heard what you just mentioned about three weeks. I know there's a separate disaster supplemental funding bill sitting over in the Senate. I have not heard about those two things getting married together. You may want to ask Senator Coons about that.

But the fact of the matter is, we probably need at least three weeks to try and negotiate DACA. Let's be clear, the president wants to resolve DACA. He could've taken it away entirely in six months ago and chose to give Congress six months that expires the first week of March to fix it. Unfortunately, Congress is waiting up until the very last day to do that. But we are very interested in getting DACA worked out.

WALLACE: You are calling this -- we heard it, saw it in the open, the Schumer shutdown. But the fact is you only have 46 Republicans willing to vote for this congressional, this continuing resolution. So, even if there hadn't been a Democratic filibuster, you didn't have the majority needed to pass the C.R. All the more reason, isn't this on Republicans and the White House and control of the House and the Senate?

MULVANEY: You got (ph) an interesting word, majority. They actually got the majority. This sheds light on one of the difficulties we face in Washington.

WALLACE: It's not just because of Democrats.

MULVANEY: Well, but you've got a majority, you just didn't get the 60 votes.

WALLACE: The point is, you do not have your own house in order. You only have 46 Republicans supporting this.

MULVANEY: If you had nine or 10 or 12 Democrats. Where are the Democrats, Chris, who say back home that they want to work in a bipartisan fashion, they want to work with Republicans, they want to reach across the aisle? Where were those folks last week?

Only five Democrats voted for a bill that they like. Let's not lose sight of that. The Democrats have voted, they like the CHIP program. They like delaying the ObamaCare Cadillac tax program. They like funding the government. They always have.

They do not oppose the bill. This is pure politics on their part. Where the Democrats who say one thing back home and do another? That's what we are focusing on.

WALLACE: But you only had 46 Republicans.

MULVANEY: And again, if you had 10 or 15 Democrats and it still failed, I think your point is fair. But right now, until you have at least nine Democrats, we cannot open the government.

WALLACE: Well, you don't have 46 Republicans either. I mean, you don't have 51 Republicans either.

MULVANEY: Right. But again, short of nine, what difference does it make? Without nine Democrats, this government is not opening.

WALLACE: Back in 2013, when Republicans insisted on shutting down the government because they wanted to remove all funding of ObamaCare and they did it for 16 days, private citizen Trump placed the responsibility squarely. Here he is.


DONALD TRUMP, BUSINESSMAN: Problems start from the top and have to get solved from the top, and the president is the leader and he's got to get everybody in a room and he's got to lead.


WALLACE: Question, if President Obama was responsible then, get everybody in the room and lead, isn't President Trump responsible now?

MULVANEY: Yes, a couple of different things. Actually, the shutdown in 2016 was not about getting rid of ObamaCare --

WALLACE: 2013.

MULVANEY: 2013, excuse me. It was about delaying the individual mandate, which we just got rid of on the tax deal. But compared 2013 and 2016 and how the two presidents have acted. I went through the middle of 2013. I think I was on your show during that shutdown.

And I will look you in the eye and tell you that President Obama wanted that shutdown, and he wanted to weaponize it. He wanted to use it politically to hurt Republicans because he thought Republicans will get blamed politically and he wanted that shutdown.

This president has worked really, really hard to prevent the shutdown. He had folks down to the White House several times over the last couple of days. I think Mr. Schumer was there as recently as the last day before the shutdown. He's actively engaged yesterday, calling people, trying to get the government open.

WALLACE: But why doesn't he -- I mean, he didn't have a meeting, a bipartisan meeting with congressional meetings yesterday. Does he have one on the schedule for today?

MULVANEY: Chris, he had one on Thursday, but not yesterday. I mean, we can split hairs on that all the time. The president --


WALLACE: Well, the shutdown happened on Friday night.

MULVANEY: But we knew it was also coming. We had a bipartisan meeting with senators several times. In fact, I think we had several of those meetings leading to the shutdown.

This president, I don't think anybody could say that this president wants the shutdown. You could not say the same thing about President Obama. In fact, I think he actually did want it.

WALLACE: You blame Democrats for holding the government hostage now, but back in 2013, you supported holding the government hostage on this question of ObamaCare. Take a look.


MULVANEY: We believe that what we did was right. We did for the right reasons. We did for these kids here. They may not recognize that right now, but we really do believe that this is worth having a fight.


CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS HOST: Why was that legitimate then, the right reason to have a fight, but it's not legitimate now?

MULVANEY: That's a fair question, but here's the answer. They were asking us to vote for something in 2013 that we didn't like, in fact, that we had a principled opposition to it. They were asking us to vote to fund ObamaCare, something that was very difficult for Republicans to do, and we wouldn't go for it.

Let me finish.

WALLACE: I wasn't saying a word.

MULVANEY: Here we are today -- this is a bill that Democrats support. They are opposing a bill that they don't oppose in order to make a political point. There's a significant difference, Chris.

WALLACE: I think that's a debating point. The fact is, there are budgetary implications to DACA. I mean, if you're going to deport 800,000 people, that's going to cost money. You shut down the government in 2013, you writ large, Republicans, because you didn't like ObamaCare. You wanted to shut down the government again in 2015 because you didn't like Planned Parenthood.

They are willing to shut down the government because they want a solution to DACA. You can say, well, one thing is what's in the bill, one thing is what's not in the bill, the point is that both you then and them now are willing to shut down the government because they oppose or support a policy. Same issue.

MULVANEY: Go back and look at 2013 and 2015, we can have a long discussion about it another day, but there were many, many times the House actually voted to open the government, that we voted many times on many different packages that would have opened the government. In fact, I remember voting for stuff that I didn't like very much so that the government could open. There was a breakdown in the Senate at that under Harry Reid that prevented the government from opening. So, I do think there's a major difference between now and 2013.

But importantly, the deal that's on the table right now in the Senate is the type of deal that would have worked in 2013 and would have worked -- in fact did work in 2013 and 2015. It's a bipartisan measure. The bill that the House passed is the old-fashioned typical bipartisan bill that does keep the government open.

But for some reason, the dysfunction specifically with the Senate and Democrats is so dramatic now, it's not working. It's almost as if they are so beholden to their left wing that they can't give the president even a victory on keeping the government open.

WALLACE: I want to take you -- because I want to talk about this, I want to take you back to the big meeting that was held on Friday in the White House between President Trump and Chuck Schumer. Senate Democratic sources tell me this -- let's put it up on the screen: Schumer raised full funding of a wall, more than $18 billion and a full increase in defense spending, around $80 billion. But they say the White House Chief of Staff John Kelly later called back and said to Schumer that it was, quote, too liberal.

Is that true?

MULVANEY: Can you put that list back up? Because I can respond to each of those in turn.

WALLACE: Well, I -- we can remember it, but go ahead.

MULVANEY: Full funding --

WALLACE: Full funding.

MULVANEY: Full funding for the wall, no. What Mr. Schumer offered the president was an authorization for funding, not an appropriation. I know that's deep down in the weeds for folks who don't live in Washington, D.C., but the difference between authorization and appropriation is like night and day. There was already authorization to build wall on the southern border that Chuck Schumer voted for in 2006. It hasn't been built because the money was never appropriated, it was never funded.

And that's the same deal that Chuck Schumer offered on Saturday.

WALLACE: Let's focus on that because I think that's important. Yesterday, you went after Schumer hard on this issue. Take a look.


MULVANEY: Chuck Schumer actually have the gall to look at the president and said, I'm giving you everything you asked for the wall and then when pressed admitted that he wasn't doing it. That's the type of negotiation that Mr. Schumer has been engaging with the president. You have to ask yourself: at one point, doesn't it even become profitable to continue to work with somebody like that?


WALLACE: Now, this is going to get complicated, because you've raised a new issue here. Schumer's staff says, specifically in response to that, that you are not telling the truth. They say -- they say that he offered, not one year funding, which was suggested yesterday, but full funding, $18 billion to 20 billion in year one that they were going to put that on the table, not offer, I should say, that they were willing to discuss that and that you guys walked away from that.

I mean, if you got full funding for the wall, that would be the deal of the century. Why not take yes for an answer?

MULVANEY: It would be the deal of the century because that was not the offer. The offer, again, I don't want to split hairs --

WALLACE: No, I understand the difference between authorization and appropriation.


MULVANEY: Asked Mr. Schumer's office if they offer to appropriate $20 billion.

Go to the next thing that was on your list, about full funding for defense. Not true. He was offering something that was in the budget request from FY '18, I know because I happen to write that budget. What the request is right now and the discussion is about the NDAA levels, which is slightly higher, and that Mr. Schumer not only voted for, but is taking credit for back home for fully funding the military. He won't give the president that higher figure. He gives him a lower figure as part of the negotiation.

WALLACE: I don't play a role as the negotiator here, but let me do it just for a moment.


WALLACE: If Senator Schumer comes back and says, no, I'm not talking about authorization, I'm talking about appropriation, $18 billion to $20 billion right now, you can build your wall and there are more Democrats saying that, including Congressman Gutierrez. Would the president accept that and would you make a deal?

MULVANEY: And again, I'm not going to negotiate you with either. But let's go back to what the request was from the very beginning, that we're happy to talk about DACA, want to resolve DACA -- what is part of DACA deal look like from the administration's perspective.

Number one, the southern border defense, the southern border security gets fully funded. That means the wall, that means the $20 billion. We also deal with chain migration. We deal with the visa lottery system. And we deal with interior enforcement.


WALLACE: You seem to be suggesting that even if you got the $20 billion, that wouldn't be enough?

MULVANEY: Well, again, those are the four things, the four principles we've asked for in the discussion. Mr. Schumer comes in and offers us none of that. That's not the basis for an agreement.

WALLACE: Final question in that regard, if you got $20 billion, would you make the deal?

MULVANEY: Again, I'm not going to negotiate on behalf of the president. That would certainly cover one of the four things we've asked for.

WALLACE: Final question, this is NFL championship weekend come over under, how long is this going to last?

MULVANEY: A couple of different things. I think, two different answers, I think there's a chance it get solved before Monday, I really do believe that at heart here, there was an interest by some folks in the Democrat Party to deny the president sort of a victory lap of the anniversary of his inauguration, the chance to talk about the success of the tax bill, success of the economy and jobs.

And I think if they get over that, there's a chance this thing gets done before 9:00 on Monday morning and folks would come to work.

WALLACE: And if not?

MULVANEY: If that doesn't happen, it could go several days because I think there's other Democrats who want to see the president give the State of the Union during a shutdown.

WALLACE: Well, that is more than several days. That's January 30th.

MULVANEY: That's nine or 10 days, yes.

WALLACE: It could go that far?

MULVANEY: You have to ask the Senate Democrats, Chris. They could open this today if they wanted to.

WALLACE: Well, you know what? That's a perfect segue to our next segment.

Director Mulvaney, thank you. Thanks for your time on this very difficult weekend. Obviously, we'll follow the negotiations.

MULVANEY: Thank you for having me.

WALLACE: Thank you.

Up next, Democratic Senator Chris Coons on what it will take to break the stalemate in Congress and end the shutdown.


WALLACE: Republicans including President Trump say Democrats are holding the government hostage over their demands for Dreamers, the young immigrants brought to this country as children who face possible deportation when their protection runs out in March.

Joining us now, Democratic Senator Chris Coons is part of a bipartisan group trying to find a way out of the shutdown.

Senator, welcome back to "Fox News Sunday."

SEN. CHRIS COONS, D-DELAWARE: Thanks, Chris. Good morning.

WALLACE: Well, let's start with the president's tweets. He has sent one this morning. Put it up on the screen.

WALLACE: Well, let's start with the president's tweets. He has sent one this morning. Put it up on the screen.

Great to see how hard Republicans are fighting for our military and safety at the border. The Dems just want illegal immigrants to pour into our nation unchecked. If stalemate continues, Republicans should go to 51 percent nuclear option and vote on real long-term budget, no C.R., continuing revolutions.

Your reaction to that?

COONS: Well, this is another example of President Trump growing a tweet in the middle of bipartisan negotiations that are making progress. I think Senator McConnell, the Republican majority leader, in the end will have much more to say about how the Senate is run than the president should.

I think in the last segment, you ran a clip from then-private sector leader Donald Trump in 2013 who said, during a shutdown, the president should lead. It's the president's responsibility. And I think he should, instead of throwing tweets from the White House, pull together the four leaders of the House and the Senate on a bipartisan basis today and negotiate.

I spent all day yesterday not going to the floor, not going on cable news, not denouncing Republicans, but meeting with them, listening to them, with a small group that grew and grew, and by the end of the day, we had 20 Republican and Democratic senators listening to each other, trying to not just get out of the shutdown, but address and fix some of the underlying problems that have left us with so many of the priorities that have stacked up over the last couple of months.

I'm hopeful we can get through this.

WALLACE: Let's talk about meetings, because they had a meeting, the president and Chuck Schumer on Friday, and it ended up may be making things worse, not better.

Now, I want to ask you about a point that I pressed with Director Mulvaney. Did Schumer put on the table $20 billion, full funding for the wall in year one, not over installments, and if so, to Mulvaney's point, was it an authorization or was it real money, and appropriation?

COONS: Well, I wasn't in the meeting and I don't know exactly, but from talking to leaders Schumer, my impression is reluctantly he offered the two things the president really wanted, full funding of the military and full funding to build the wall, or the wall system. We're never really going to build a 2,000-mile concrete wall.


WALLACE: But you're saying it wasn't authorization, it was in appropriation. He was willing to give, say, real money, we'll give you the money to build the wall?

COONS: Well, I think he had to explain that difference to the president about full appropriation year one versus authorization and a commitment to appropriation. But the reality was the president campaigned on full funding for the military and a border wall and said -- remember, two weeks ago, the president brought in a bipartisan group and said I want to solve this, I want us to have a DACA deal, I think you call that a bill of love, and put out a menu and said we need a bipartisan solution. I'll take the heat, you all come back on Thursday, present me with a solution.

Six senators, Republican and Democrat, came back on Thursday, presented a bipartisan solution and he fairly famously blew it up in an expletive-laden exchange with senators. So, at the end of the day, part of our challenge here is negotiating with the president who struggles to hear yes. I believe Senator Schumer on Friday put a lot on the table and the president accepted it, and then two hours later, after hearing from folks who oppose any reasonable resolution to this DACA challenge, he walked it back.

So, I have a lot of sympathy for Senator Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Republican caucus, who sat on the floor Friday night, how am I supposed to negotiate on this issue when we still don't know what President Trump will really accept?

WALLACE: Let me ask you, though. Apparently, what Republicans are going to offer, what Mitch McConnell is going to offer today or tonight or 1:00 a.m. tomorrow morning is a three-week continuing resolution, not four weeks to February 16th, three weeks to February 8th, during which time you can negotiate DACA. Why not accept that?

COONS: Well, I'm not going to negotiate for our leadership. It is my hope that we will have an agreement that all of our unfinished business, disaster relief, opioid funding, coming to an agreement on budget caps that will fully fund the military and our domestic priorities and addressing DACA, that all of this will be negotiated in good faith over the next, let's say three weeks and voted on, that we will have a date certain for a vote to move forward.

WALLACE: So, is that -- and so, in DACA, is that the point is that you want to commitment, a guaranty of a specific date for a vote, not just we'll agree to talk to you about DACA over the next three weeks?

COONS: Well, let's play tape here on what happened Friday, where you got Senator McConnell on the floor saying there's no rush, there's no hurry, we don't need to be addressing this, this is an unrelated issue.

For me, it would be a big step forward to have the majority leaders say this is an urgent issue, it's on the list of things that we must addressed and we will vote on the Senate if we can't get clarity from the president about what he will embrace. Then, the Senate will be the Senate and we will move forward. I think that will be a good step forward.

WALLACE: Democrats like to say when Republicans shut down the government that real people are going to get hurt.

Here is Secretary of Defense James Mattis on the real effect of the shutdown.


GEN. JAMES MATTIS, DEFENSE SECRETARY: I would just tell you that we do a lot of intelligence operations around the world and they cost money. Those obviously would stop.


WALLACE: As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator, are you willing to see that and other vital programs shutdown?

COONS: The government should not be shut down. That's why I spent all day yesterday listening to, working with Republicans.

WALLACE: But you voted to shut it down. You voted against the C.R.

COONS: I voted against a 30-day C.R. and to be clear on Friday, an assistant to that secretary of defense, Secretary Mattis, put out a statement saying, we shouldn't have another 30-day C.R. That's why there were Republicans and Democrats who voted on Friday against a 30-day deal.

So, we offer one day --


WALLACE: So, a three-week C.R., you're going to go for it?

COONS: It depends on what's on the table.


COONS: Will turn out what we're going to move forward on.

What matters less is 30-day, 25-day, 20-day, although we have spent a lot of time on that. What matters more is ending the hostage-taking and moving forward. I've got tens of thousands of Delawareans who depend on community health care centers. We're months overdue in addressing that. I've got tens of thousands of families relying on community health insurance program, the Children's Health Insurance Program.

Remember those hurricanes that tore through Texas and Puerto Rico and Florida? We haven't funded the relief for those hurricanes. Remember the opioid crisis?

We have this long list of homework unfinished. We need to address them all.

WALLACE: I want to pick up on this, though, because you just said, boy, we don't want the hostage-taking that's going on. That's exactly what Democrat said back in 2013 when Republicans shut down the government over ObamaCare. Take a look.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIFORNIA: I call them legislative arsonists. They are there to burn down what we should be building up.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-NEW YORK: Someone goes into your house, takes your wife and children hostage and then says, let's negotiate over the price of your house. We can say we're shutting down the government, we're not going to raise the debt ceiling until you pass immigration reform. It would be governmental chaos.


WALLACE: Senator, right now, aren't you the legislative arsonists? Aren't you right now taking the government hostage?

COONS: Well, Chris, just because a bipartisan group of Democrats and Republicans voted Friday night, including me, against a 30-day C.R., doesn't mean I'm an arsonist. I supported continuing the government. I supported keeping the government open.


WALLACE: You say you wouldn't support a three week C.R. either unless
there's certain conditions met.

COONS: Right.

WALLACE: I mean, it's the same point. They shut on the government because they didn't like ObamaCare. You are shutting down the government because there are certain things you were insisting on.

COONS: Right. And notice, I'm spending very little time pointing fingers and saying it's Trump's fault versus it's this person's fault. That's not my priority.

My priority, Chris, is finding a way through this. I'm more optimistic after yesterday than I have been a long time because we had 20 senators in a room, Republicans and Democrats, listening to each other talking not just about how to get through this issue, but how to get back to an appropriations process that works.

I'm the senior Democrat on the subcommittee that funds Mick Mulvaney's OMB office, including the whole federal judiciary, the Department of Treasury, all federal properties. We never even had our final mark up in October. We are four months into the new fiscal year.

Our appropriations process is badly broken and if there was anything good that came out of this weekend whenever buddy had to cancel their plans and stay here is that we are listening to each other and trying to find a way forward.

I call on President Trump to do the same, be the leader that millions of Americans hoped he would be, a real dealmaker. Hear yes, pull together a bipartisan group today and negotiate to a conclusion. I will remind you it's partly because of that explosive meeting where he rejected a bipartisan solution on border security and Dreamers that we're in this mess.

WALLACE: Well --

COONS: There is a solution.

WALLACE: We can argue about his language, but the fact is he didn't like the deal.

COONS: That's correct. He rejected it infamously, forceful language.


WALLACE: But here's my question, because I can't -- I pressed Director Mulvaney, let me impress you, what is the bottom line? What do you have to have to reopen the government?

COONS: A commitment to move forward on all of these issues that we have been talking about -- community health centers, dealing with disaster relief, children's health insurance program and Dreamers.

WALLACE: To move forward means what?

COONS: Votes, that we are going to have votes that we're not going to say this is an issue, we don't need to deal with it.

Look, I got teenagers. It's like dad comes home at 8:00 and says, how are you doing on your homework, almost done, making progress. Nine o'clock, how are you doing, do you need to help, almost making progress. Ten o'clock, how are we doing on homework, it's bedtime.

What's the urgency? It's not due until tomorrow.

We need a recognition that it's overdue. We've got a list of things we need to move forward on.

WALLACE: I used to just say the dog ate my homework.

Senator Coons, thank you. Thanks for coming in today. Always good to talk with you and good luck in working on a deal.

COONS: Go Eagles.

WALLACE: Go Eagles? Oh, that's right. You're from Delaware. I guess that's close enough.

All right. You've now ticked off about 90 percent of the country.

Up next, we'll bring in our Sunday group to discuss how long the shutdown will last and who will pay the political price.


WALLACE: Coming up, the blame game over the government shutdown.


PELOSI: The Republicans were so incompetent, so negligent, that they couldn't get it together to keep government open.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't understand why Schumer went to this extreme. We are committed to solving this problem.


WALLACE: We'll ask our Sunday panel who will blink first coming up on "Fox News Sunday."



SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, R-MAJORITY LEADER: The votes were there. The president was ready. The solution to this manufactured crisis was inches away.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-MINORITY LEADER: Negotiating with this White House is like negotiating with Jell-O. It's next to impossible. As soon as you take one step forward, the hard right forces the president three steps back.


WALLACE: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer exchanging blame Saturday for shutting down the government.

And it's time now for our Sunday group.

The head of Heritage Action for America, Michael Needham. Charles Lane of the Washington Post. Former Democratic Congresswoman Jane Harman, director of the Woodrow Wilson Center. And Josh Holmes, Mitch McConnell's former chief of staff and now a GOP strategist.

As we just said, Josh, you're close to senator McConnell. What is the state of play right now on the Senate floor in terms of ending this shutdown?

JOSH HOLMES, FOUNDER, CAVALRY: Well, I think the state of play is Democrats are now in a situation where they've locked themselves into a box canyon and, frankly, there's no way out other than figuring out how to pass what's currently on the floor. They've got a vote that's currently scheduled for 1:00 a.m., which is --

WALLACE: 1:00 a.m. Monday morning.

HOLMES: Right, which is, again, entirely unnecessary. But basically what it would do is just keep the government open with the same criteria that we talked about on Friday night. You're funding -- full funding of the military, full funding of SCHIP, full funding of all government operations and then get to the business of negotiating the issue of DACA, which is the reason for this shutdown in the first place.

It can be done at any moment. All of this was, I think, irresponsible, but also unnecessary.

WALLACE: President Trump said this week that what Democrats are really trying to do is to distract from all the good economic news. Here he is.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Democrats want to see a shutdown to get off this subject, because the subject is not working for them. The tax cuts and tax reform has not been working well for the Democrats.


WALLACE: Congresswoman Harmon, are you comfortable with where Democrats are right now holding out for either a DACA fix or a commitment for a specific date for a vote on DACA? And do you think they have a strategy for if the shutdown goes on?

JANE HARMAN, FORMER U.S. CONGRESSWOMAN, D-CALI.: Well, first of all, shutting the government is a live fire exercise. Real people get hurt. There are 36 furloughed employees at the Wilson Center alone. But military training doesn't happen. Our ships are colliding. I mean this is a -- a serious problem. And the government should open now, hopefully tonight.

I -- I think the time that's gone into polling and messaging should have been spent on making a deal. And I understand that as of last night at least 19 senators -- and I just asked Senator Coons as he was walking out -- have been working together on a bipartisan basis to fix this. And what they're looking for is an improved deal with a three week term limit.


HARMAN: But at the end of that, guaranteed votes on things like DACA, a DACA fix, which 87 percent of the country supports and most members of Congress support.

WALLACE: So you're comfortable with them shutting the government down until they get that?

HARMAN: No, I'm not comfortable with anyone shutting the government down. I am comfortable -- I'm not comfortable, but I'm hopeful that 20 plus bipartisan members of the Senate will, today, craft something beyond what was offered on Friday, that a minority of people -- not 51 Republicans supported, as you pointed out in your interview. I'm comfortable that hopefully there will be an improved package that will get voted on today or at 1:00 in the morning, God save us, that will guarantee votes on all of the things that are -- should be part of this package that could have been worked out without shutting the government down.

WALLACE: Michael, back in 2013, when Republicans shutdown the government over ObamaCare, their congressional -- or their favorability ratings tanked. And yet, when you got to the midterm election in 2014, they won a big victory and they actually took back the Senate.

Do you think, to a certain degree, Democrats are pursuing the same strategy, which is, we can galvanize our base, we can play to the left wing of our party right now and by next November, months from now, everybody will forget about the shutdown?

MICHAEL NEEDHAM, CEO, HERITAGE ACTION FOR AMERICA: Yes, I think what the 2013 shutdown did was it clarified where the two parties were on an important policy issue. And these things actually are about policy. There was one party against ObamaCare. There was one that was in favor of keeping it.

What this debate is about, it's not even just about DACA. I mean the president has said he wants a solution on DACA. The Democrats allegedly have said that they'll give funding for the border.

What this is actually about his chain migration. What that means is, can the people who are currently here illegal bring not just their close relatives, their distant relatives into this country. When we bring somebody into this country, do we choose them based on merit or do we say, you can go bring a cousin with you? And so this is a shutdown over whether or not we could give amnesty to illegal immigrants who are here and have chain migration, allow them to bring distant relatives.

WALLACE: But let me -- let me just talk of --

NEEDHAM: That's not going to work out well in November if they're the party that says, we're the party in favor of amnesty and distant relatives (INAUDIBLE).

WALLACE: If you're -- you're sliding over something, which is, I think there's really been a sea change in the last 24 to 48 hours among Democrats. I get the sense they are willing to say, you want the wall, we're going to let you have the wall.

NEEDHAM: Exactly.

WALLACE: You agree with that?

NEEDHAM: That's what they're allegedly saying. We'll figure out. Gutierrez has said that he'll help build the wall. I mean they are claiming that they're in favor of the border security.

WALLACE: And you -- and you don't think -- I mean that -- the president's main premise was not chain migration. His main promise was build the wall.

NEEDHAM: And the president --

WALLACE: If he gets that, he shouldn't take yes for an answer?

NEEDHAM: The president's been very clear from the very start, when he first said we'll have a six-month reprieve on DACA, that one of the things that he wants is an end to chain migration. And from a policy perspective, he's exactly right about that. We should have a system that allows people generously into America who can provide merit, who can do it the same way Canada does it, Australia does it. Instead, we have this crazy system where people are allowed to bring distant relatives, like cousins, into the country, and that is the issue that Democrats are shutting the government over.

WALLACE: Chuck, which side do you think is in more political jeopardy now and -- which leads to the question, how do you see this ending?

CHARLES LANE, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Well, I think the Democrats have a broadly popular goal, which is DACA, relief for those kids, and they're using a risky to unpopular tactic in the pursuit of it, which is the government shutdown. And so I think the longer it goes on, the more time the Republicans could have to start saying, hey, wait a minute, you know, they are -- they're putting too much at risk in the pursuit of what we all agree is a laudable goal.

Having said that, look, the Republicans do control all the levers of the government and the Democrats have a strong argument that says, in that situation, it shouldn't shutdown.

What's kind of going on here, and I think some other people on the panel have already touched on this, both parties are only addressing these arguments at their bases. They are not, anymore, contesting over some middle ground of undecided people who are persuadable on this. And so, in a way, it's already a stalemate and it's going to just perpetuate as a stalemate, which makes it only -- which makes it only crazier that we're -- that we're going to let it go on at all.

HOLMES: Let -- let me push you on that just for a second. I think Democrats --

WALLACE: Real quick.

HOLMES: That's absolutely true with Republicans. That is not a -- the case at all in the context of this discussion. All they want to do is keep the government open and fund SCHIP. It's really clear what the discussion is about the government shutdown. It has nothing to do with DACA policy.

WALLACE: All right. We are going to have to take a break here. But I have a feeling -- well, I hope that we don't have to discuss this next week, but we may.

Up next, this weekend marks one year since President Trump took the oath of office. What has he done right? What has he done wrong?

Plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the president's first year. Just go to FaceBook or Twitter @FoxNewsSunday and we may use your question on the air.



TRUMP: 2017 was a year of tremendous achievement. Monumental achievement, actually. I don't think any administration has ever done -- has done what we've done and what we've accomplished in its first year.


WALLACE: President Trump showing his characteristic gift for salesmanship as he celebrates his first year in office.

We're back now with the panel.

Michael, how do you rate President Trump's first year?

NEEDHAM: Well, it has been a very successful year when you look at what the White House can do without Congress. And, obviously, the Congress has, at various times, been -- ben more dysfunctional. But you had a huge tax cut with Mitch McConnell, the Senate, the House deserve a big credit for the role that they played in helping that get across the finish line. You have a great regulatory rollback. I think we finally have an American foreign policy that's confidently pushing itself abroad.

I would say it's been a conventional conservative year of success. And part of what got Trump elected was reaching out to new audiences, finding ways to appeal to some issues, some anxieties that are out there that I don't know from a policy agenda we fully captured yet. I think when you look at something like Apprenticeship Week, which the president -- the White House did earlier this year, that's a theme. That's one of the types of issues that will reach out to some of those new Trump voters. I think we have to find ways to have more policy victories on those types of issues also.

WALLACE: Chuck, I think it's fair to say you are often critical of this president, but take a look at this list. A big surge in GDP. A big drop in unemployment. Record highs in the stock market. We're seeing them now at new -- breaking through the thousand mark every seven, eight days. A record list of conservative appointments to the court and a big rollback of ISIS.

I understand that you don't agree with some of the policies, but would you agree that this has been a consequential and then perhaps a successful first year for this president?

LANE: Yes, I think -- in fact, I was preparing to acknowledge that on his terms, and on the Republican Party's terms, you have to give credit where credit is due. They have achieved a number of their goals. And you just spared me the work of listing them.

But the presidency is both a policymaking job and a statesmanship job. A national embodiment job. A symbolism job. And on that latter part, on the part that revolves around character and temperament and bringing the country together and modeling behavior, this has been a disastrous year. And I would go to issues such as the remarks he made after Charlottesville. The comment -- the unprintable comment he made just a couple of days ago. All the tweets.

In terms of the part of the presidency that involves representing the country and modeling the kind of behavior that George Washington did when he established the office, I don't see how anyone could call this a successful year.

WALLACE: We asked you for questions for the panel and we got this on Facebook from Tamara Hyland. She writes, "Will Trump ever get a modicum of respect for some of the good things he has done? Economy, taxes, unemployment, ISIS."

Josh, how do you answer Tamara? And given the fact that the president's personal approval rating lag so far behind, for instance, satisfaction with the economy, is part of the problem the style points that Chuck was just talking about, that in a sense he steps on his own success?

HOLMES: Yes. I think that's exactly right. I think Chuck actually laid it out pretty well. There -- there's an issue of trying to -- to take a look at this presidency from kind of two silos. One is, what are the accomplishments? And in that category, he's got an awful lot done. I mean generational tax reform alone is -- is pretty big. Supreme Court, all the judges and regulatory rollbacks, they might talk about, huge.

Stylistically, on the other hand, there's an awful lot of Americans that have a big problem with it. And where that runs into is it that most people can't make a -- a fair evaluation of the substance of the argument because they can't get around what his style is. And I -- so I think that's the -- the burden that this administration has in getting a fair report card one year in.

WALLACE: Congresswoman Harman, as our foreign policy expert, I want to ask you specifically about that area, foreign policy, whether it is rolling back ISIS, whether it's dealing with rogue states like Iran and North Korea, whether it's dealing with the great powers, China and Russia, how do you think this president has done?

HARMAN: Well, mix, but a lot of good. I don't disagree with any of this. Let's remember, he was elected by Democrats and Republicans who were frustrated with Washington. Washington isn't getting better, including his role as a uniting president. He gave an inaugural speech year ago, which could have been -- united the country. It didn't. He picked an issue, rolling back ObamaCare, which divided the country. He should have picked infrastructure. He would have had a record twice as big as the one he now has.

And on foreign policy, he's alienated a lot of our allies. He's embraced a lot of dictators around the world. He's about to go to the globalist swamp, that would be the Davos meeting this week. I'm actually going too (ph).

WALLACE: Well -- well, he may not because of the shutdown.

HARMAN: Well, he may not, but he is at least scheduled to go.


HARMAN: That's another huge opportunity. How will he use that?

On foreign policy, I give him some accomplishments. He might -- he is -- we are getting somewhere with North Korea. On Iran, Iran's bad behavior in the neighborhood deserves more sanctions. But blowing up the deal is pointless.

I -- I think I would give him the lowest marks on trade. I think jettisoning TPP created a huge market and opportunity for China in Asia. And China is our biggest competitor out there in the world. We're sort of working with them, but we have a lot of issues that -- that are -- you know, that -- that are problematic. And I think our foreign policy -- his foreign policy score would be better if his temperament were different and if the language he uses weren't this coarsening language about demonizing immigrants from Africa for anything.

WALLACE: Michael, your reaction, because you were the one who started all of this both on substance and on -- we call it style points, but behavior, conduct.

NEEDHAM: Yes, I think there's no doubt that as a country we need to find ways to take a kind of civic coming apart that's going on. People who, on the one hand, feel like the Democrat Party is always against them, that they don't understand them or their values, and bring them together with Republicans who -- who -- or others who feel, obviously, the exact other way.

I think sometimes the whole political system gets left off the hook a little bit for exacerbating some of these cultural problems. When Barack Obama passes a law that says that catholic nuns are going to have to buy birth control, and when that goes all the way to the Supreme Court, and when one party is completely united around the idea of using the force of government to compel catholic nuns to buy birth control, I don't think that's any more unifying than this president has been.

And so certainly there are aspects of this president, his demeanor, his use of Twitter that make many Americans look at Washington and feel disconnected, feel ashamed. I think that the left has to understand how so much of what they've been doing, as they're on offense on the cultural wars, as they think that the tide of history is -- is inextricably behind them, that makes many other Americans feel left out, feel persecuted and cause them to show up and vote for Donald Trump as president.

WALLACE: Congresswoman?

HARMAN: So let's have a unifying president. He can still do this. He could start this week in Davos or here saying to this bipartisan group that's trying to keep the government -- reopen the government, OK, finally, I agree. Let's have votes on these -- all these issues and put a package together that moves the country forward and makes Congress work again and then I'll take credit for being the -- the first president in this century that's made Congress work.

LANE: I -- I would just -- I think we're drawing a distinction between style and substance that is a little bit false here because I think it's not just style when a president says something like he said after Charlottesville, where he drew a moral equivalence between the neo-Nazis and the people against them. And -- and that has a substantive impact.

There -- there really is a problem in this country were many, many people don't just feel dissed by the president, but in some way actively threatened. And, you know, too bad if he thinks that's unfair or whatever. His job is to -- and he's failed at it -- to reach out to everyone and -- and leave everyone feeling included.

WALLACE: Well, we're going to have to end on that somewhat negative point, but having said that, I was surprised what -- generally, pretty high marks for this president. And 2018 still to come.

Thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.

Up next, our "Power Player of the Week." How a new Hollywood film shines a light on the untold story of our first military operation in Afghanistan after 9/11.


WALLACE: After 9/11, the first U.S. military operation to strike back was top-secret. Most of us never heard the real story of what happened in Afghanistan, until now. Here's our "Power Player of the Week."


LT. GEN. JOHN MULHOLLAND (RET.), FORMER "TASK FORCE DAGGER" COMMANDER: I think it's hugely important because it fills a void that I think exists about completing the story of 9/11.

WALLACE (voice over): Retired Lieutenant General John Mulholland is talking about the new movie "12 Strong."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's us. We're going in.

WALLACE: It tells how small units of American Special Forces helped overthrow the Taliban and drive al Qaeda out of Afghanistan.

WALLACE (on camera): How soon after 9/11 did you know you were going to war?

MULHOLLAND: Well, truthfully, I knew the minute the second airplane hit the -- hit the second tower.

WALLACE (voice over): Back then, Mulholland was a colonel, commander of the Fifth Special Forces Group. By October, he was in Uzbekistan, ready to send 12 man teams of Green Berets, known as ODAs, Operational Detachment Alpha, into Afghanistan to link up with anti-Taliban warlords.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I chose you. You and 11 men. Task Force Dagger.

WALLACE: It was a bold plan and Mulholland admits he felt a heavy burden.

MULHOLLAND: Here we were, America's first response. So we very much felt that we were carrying kind of the weight of the nation, if you will, responsible to them for getting the job done.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is for the towers. You carry that with you. Five weeks ago, 19 men attacked our country. The 12 of you will be the first ones to fight back.

MULHOLLAND: I cut that steel up into little pieces and I gave one to every one of my teams that went to Afghanistan. And I told them, when you find a place that makes sense, I want you to bury it.

WALLACE: The movie focuses on ODA 595 that teamed up with Northern Alliance General Abdul Rashid Dostum.

But right away the Americans ran into trouble.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right, who are we doing this for? Anyone?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Summer camp when I was nine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Cancun, spring break. What -- spring drunk (ph).

WALLACE (on camera): Did you plan ahead for your Green Berets to end up fighting on horseback?

MULHOLLAND: Did not. Did not. That -- that -- that was a bolt out of the blue.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Left to go left. Right to go right. Pull back to stop.

WALLACE (voice over): The Special Forces and local tribes attacked the Taliban, who were armed with tanks and artillery.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The target. Tanks in the open.

WALLACE: They called in air strikes if possible, but often fought the enemy in close combat. Why send in so few soldiers?

MULHOLLAND: The Afghans traditionally -- the only thing they hate more than fighting with each other is foreigners. And nothing brings them together like a foreign presence.

WALLACE: In 49 days, the Taliban regime fell. Forty-nine days.

WALLACE (on camera): How impressive an accomplishment is that?

MULHOLLAND: Historic. Absolutely historic.

WALLACE: For most Americans, this is the first time they will have heard this.

MULHOLLAND: We're not ones to kind of blow our own horn. And then we've been very busy.

WALLACE (voice over): One of the few markers of the campaign is a 16-foot statue of a horse soldier near New York's Ground Zero.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be able to take that city. The World Trade Center's just the beginning.

WALLACE: And now there is a movie to tell the story of the 12 man teams of Americans that struck back after 9/11.

MULHOLLAND: We were able to take that fight back to the enemy and bring down that regime and -- and -- and drive al Qaeda back into -- under their rocks.

It's a symbol of what America can do. It's a symbol of what America did when its enemies dare attack us.


WALLACE: I asked General Mulholland how accurate the movie is. He said, while there is some Hollywood in it, you get a good sense of how the Afghan campaign was fought and won. "12 Strong" opened in theaters nationwide this weekend.

And that's it for today. Have a great week. And we'll see you next "Fox News Sunday."


Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.