Rep. Meadows defends Trump's Iran policy, talks impeachment

close

Video

Rep. Meadows defends Trump's Iran policy, talks impeachment

Republican Rep. Mark Meadows reacts to the news of the day on 'Justice with Judge Jeanine.'

This is a rush transcript from " Justice With Jeanine," January 4, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Jeanine Pirro: Breaking tonight, President Trump doubles down with new pointed threats aimed squarely at Iran and its leaders. Hello and welcome to Justice, and Happy New Year. I'm Judge Jeanine Pirro. The national security adviser to the president of the United States is standing by live to talk with me about that and breaking news. The president pulling no punches on Twitter this evening in the wake of his decisive airstrike in Baghdad that killed one of the most vicious terrorists in the world, Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Questions are raised about what the Iranian response might be and tonight, the president sent yet another clear message saying, quote, "Iran is talking very boldly about targeting certain U.S.A. assets as revenge for our ridding the world of their terrorist leader who had just killed an American and badly wounded many others, not to mention all of the people he had killed over his lifetime, including, recently, hundreds of Iranian protesters. He was already attacking our embassy and preparing for additional hits in other locations. Iran has been nothing but problems for many years. Let this serve as a warning that if Iran strikes any Americans or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago, some of very high level and important to Iran and the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, will be hit very fast and very hard. The U.S.A. wants no more threats." A clear message to an American enemy. Now, my open is coming up in just a few minutes. But first, we are joined live by President Trump's national security adviser, Robert O'Brien. Ambassador O'Brien, thanks so much for being on Justice tonight. I'm sure you've had a busy day, but what caused the president to tweet tonight?

Robert O'Brien: Well, I think we've seen various threats coming from Iran and coming from the region, threats made to Americans, and the president takes threats made to the United States and threats against American citizens, our soldiers, sailors, and our Marines and diplomats, very seriously. And I think the president is trying to make it clear to the Iranians that this is a very bad path for them to go down. We caught Qassem Soleimani in the act of planning and plotting to kill Americans in the region. He was eliminated in a precise operation carried out by the U.S. military. And we've said, "Hey, that's the end of it." But if the Iranians decide to retaliate or to escalate, then that would be a very, very bad path for them, as the president pointed out.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay, and, you know, as we wait, as many wait to see what the response of Iran will be, there are more troops going over to the Middle East, correct?

Robert O'Brien: There are more troops. There are more air assets. There are naval assets that are in the region. The United States is fully prepared to protect its citizens, its diplomats, and its military.

Jeanine Pirro: All right. And of course, President Trump, as you said, has said that Soleimani had been caught red-handed, plotting more attacks and today, pursuant to the War Powers Act, he has formally notified Congress, and I know you can't disclose it because it is classified -- about the strike -- but how credible was the information that the United States had before this strike on Soleimani?

Robert O'Brien: Well, of course, we can't get into sources and methods, but I can tell you it was very solid intelligence. Soleimani was traveling around the region working out a plan to attack Americans with his proxy allies, with Iran's proxy allies in Syria and Lebanon and in Iraq. We had the intelligence. We knew that he would -- you know, that he was in the process of planning these attacks, and we acted to defend American lives. And the president said he will always act to defend American lives when terrorism is involved.

Jeanine Pirro: What do you say then, if you can't give us any more specific information, what do you say to those people who say, "Well, this was an unauthorized use of military force. This was an assassination. This was a declaration of war. This was" -- I don't remember the last one. Oh, yeah. That's something about the sovereignty -- "massive breach of the sovereignty of Iran. That this was a high government official." In truth, he was a terrorist, was he not?

Robert O'Brien: Look, this is a man who led a terrorist organization. The IRGC Quds force has been designated by -- a terrorist organization. He was traveling in violation of a U.N. travel ban on him that had been put in place in 2007 because of his efforts to obtain nuclear materials for the regime in Tehran. This is a man who was personally responsible for killing 6- to 700 American troops during the Iraq war and maiming many, many others. Anytime you've seen an American soldier without a leg or without an arm and was in Iraq fighting, it's most likely that they were wounded or maimed by weapons provided to Shia militias by General Soleimani, by this terrorist leader. So, he's shown a propensity in the past to attack Americans, to kill Americans. He just did it recently on December 27th. He ordered the attack on our K-1 military base that killed an American contractor and wounded four servicemen and women. And he was in the midst of plotting further attacks against Americans. And so that's what -- finally, the president had to make the decision to launch this operation to protect American lives.

Jeanine Pirro: So, it was a preemptive strike, so to speak. But what do you say to those in Congress who say, "We should have been notified that, you know, the Gang of Eight should have been notified and all" -- what do you say to them?

Robert O'Brien: Well, what I'll say is that this is common practice in these sorts of operations. It was a practice in the Obama administration. It was a practice in the Bush administration, the practice in the Clinton administration. When there is a sensitive operation of this nature that depends on close timing and sensitive intelligence and covert efforts, those things take place -- Congress was -- we started notifying Congress and congressional leaders very shortly after the strike took place. The president made a War Powers notification to Congress today, pursuant to the War Powers Act within the 48-hour period. And we'll continue. Congress has been out of session, but when they get back into session and return to Washington next week, we'll continue to talk to congressmen and women and senators and brief them on these issues.

Jeanine Pirro: And, of course, you believe that this was authorized by the 2002 -- the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Act. Correct?

Robert O'Brien: Oh. yeah. Correct. There were numerous grounds for this, Judge. First of all, as the commander-in-chief, it's well accepted that the president has the inherent authority to defend American troops when they're subject to attack. That's kind of black-letter law. I don't think that's anything in question. And there's no dispute here that Soleimani had been very recently -- was involved at the time and plotting against American troops. Moreover, there was the AUMF that you mentioned, in 2002, and, look, Soleimani was an enemy combatant in the field operating against the United States. So, this was an absolutely legal operation. It was signed off on by administrative lawyers at DOJ and otherwise. So, we feel very good about the legal basis for this military operation.

Jeanine Pirro: Let's talk about the President Rouhani and the whole concept of an eye for an eye. And of course, the president is responding to some of these threats. And Rouhani says, "They don't realize what a big mistake they made. They will see the consequences of this, of their mistake, not only today, but in years to come." So, what do you anticipate will happen? Do you think that this is all-out war, or do you think that they realize that they don’t have the ability to fight on the level that we can? Or am I wrong?

Robert O’Brien: Well, no, I -- look, I think you’re right, Judge, and I think if you go back and look at what’s just happened over the past several months, the president of the United States has shown incredible restraint in the face of terrific Iranian provocations. They shot down two American drones. They attacked the Aramco oil facilities and our ally, Saudi Arabia. They launched at least 10 indirect fire, artillery, mortar, rocket attacks on American bases in Iraq. They finally killed an American and wounded others in an attack on December 27th. So, the president was very restrained in his approach to the Iranians. They finally crossed a red line, and when Soleimani came to Damascus and then went to Baghdad to plot further crimes and further terror against Americans, that’s when his time ran out.

Jeanine Pirro: Would --

Robert O’Brien: The Iranians should be very careful. This guy was caught red-handed.

Jeanine Pirro: Right.

Robert O’Brien: We’ve said we consider the matter resolved. If they decide to move forward against the United States, there will be severe consequences, as the president has pointed out.

Jeanine Pirro: And the retaliation, some say, could be a cyber attack of some sort. A possibility of that?

Robert O’Brien: Look, it’s -- the Iranians have advanced cyber capabilities. They may attempt to do that. They may attempt other things. We discourage them from doing that. The president has warned them again and again. In his speech yesterday, in his tweet today, he’s warned the Iranians, “This is not the path you want to go down. You had someone attempting to kill and maim Americans. We put a stop to it. Let’s leave it at that.” But if they move forward down this path of retaliation and escalation, that’s one that they can’t afford, and it’s one that they can’t win.

Jeanine Pirro: All right. Ambassador Robert O’Brian, national security adviser to the president, thanks so much for being on Justice on this important weekend.

Robert O’Brien: Thanks for having me, Judge.

Jeanine Pirro: We’ll continue talking about this throughout the hour with guests, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, GOP congressman Mark Meadows, and Fox News military analyst Colonel David Hunt. They’re all on deck, but first, my open.

[music playing]

Thank you, Mr. President. The killing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Quds Force leader Qassem Soleimani needed to happen, and President Donald Trump was the man to do it. Everyone knew the blood of Americans was on his hands, responsible for the murder of more than 600 American servicemembers and thousands of others whose blood and limbs were spilled and left on the sands of the Middle East. He implemented the explosive devices capable of piercing through our American armor. His ruthless reign of terror, both celebrated and legendary, against Americans, our allies, and Muslims would have continued had this monster not been stopped. The president did not risk a single life in his effort to eliminate this sadistic beast who, according to all reports, as well as his history, was a clear and present danger to America. Folks, you know the president means what he says and says what he means. He is not interested in war. He is interested in America and protecting it, and in so doing, he will take swift, decisive, and strategic action, and take no prisoners along the way. And whether they’ll admit it or not, all Americans should be thankful, our allies should be thankful -- indeed, the world should be thankful -- for the removal of the world’s most dangerous terrorist. Folks, this day has been 40 years in the making. I told you last year that Iran was determined to provoke us and indeed was provoking us, and to all those who criticized the president for not trying diplomacy, a primer. This president has repeatedly tried diplomacy, stepped back, talked about restraint, and refused to take action when, ironically, criticized for not doing so. Take a listen.

[begin video clip]

Jeanine Pirro: In the last month, as Iran has reacted to the economic stranglehold under which it is suffering because of the sanctions President Trump has put on it -- a far cry, by the way, from the rollover reward of $150 billion Obama gave them and gave that regime which was used to fund terrorism throughout the world -- Iran is responding with extreme provocation, hitting oil tankers. When an American drone, however, with a wingspan as wide as a 737 was brought down by an Iranian missile, it seemed that Iran was determined to provoke us. The president was ready to conduct strikes, but pulled back because, as he said --

[begin video clip]

Donald Trump: They shot down an unmanned drone, plane, whatever you want to call it, and here we are sitting with 150 dead people, and I didn’t like it. I didn’t think it was proportionate.

[end video clip]

Jeanine Pirro: And in the last two weeks, Iran has been responsible for an attack on the U.S. embassy in Iraq, where an American was killed. Remind you of Benghazi? The parallels are frightening. Soleimani actually helped plan the Benghazi attack where four Americans were killed, and our last president never bothered to respond while he and his gang of apologists said the massacre of Americans was due to a video. Here, this President Trump took swift and precise action. His response where an American was killed was immediate. Yes, indeed, the days of appeasement are over. Gone are the days when the U.S. fetes Iran, brings her to the table to give her $150 billion and an additional $400 million on pallets flown in unmarked planes as the United States lets out the GITMO detainees to return to the battlefield. We now have a president who negotiates from strength, not from weakness, a man who has exhibited tremendous restraint while constantly being provoked by Iran. His red line was the killing of an American, and true to his word, it was only then that he responded. He had tried everything, and economic sanctions were imposed, themselves recognized as appropriate and responsible action in the spectrum of diplomacy, and yet they continued to poke the eye of the tiger. The president even tweeted, “Iran will pay a very big price for any damage or loss of life.” Quote, “This is not a warning. It’s a threat.” So, should we roll over and let them kill us? Should we decide who should be killed first or how many of us we will tolerate being killed before we act? Should we allow further casualties? It’s not an act of war. It’s not unauthorized force when the commander-in-chief is defending Americans from imminent deadly harm. And for those bozos who say that the president is using Iran to distract us from impeachment, he could have done this on any one of the last 1,079 days, because they’ve been trying to impeach him since day one. And Chuck Schumer says this.

[begin video clip]

Chuck Schumer: This action may well have brought our nation closer to another endless war, exactly the kind of endless war the president promised he would not drag us into.

[end video clip]

Jeanine Pirro: So, for Chuck and all you snowflakes who say this means war, I’ve got news for you. We’ve already been in a shadow war with Iran for decades. They haven’t confronted us with conventional military action because they’re weak, and we have superpower capabilities thanks to President Donald J. Trump. They’ve prosecuted their war against us by the use, primarily, of non-state proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, as well as the Shia militants in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. So, Iran denies responsibility, and they conduct a shadow war with relative impunity, from taking hostages in ’79 to blowing up the Marine barracks and killing 220 Marines, blowing up our embassy in Beirut in 1983, to the most recent on oil tankers in an attempt to knock out the world’s oil production in retaliation for our pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal and the imposition of economic sanctions. In fact, Soleimani himself is quoted as saying, “It is time to take our swords out and teach them a lesson.” By taking out Soleimani, we have put the Iranians on notice that its use of proxies will no longer protect those who plan or give orders for attacks against us. They, personally, will be held responsible. Trump's attack was precise. It avoided a needless loss of civilian life. It did not entail boots on the ground. So, does this mean inevitable war? No one can predict where this will lead. The Iranians have multiple military and economic interests in America which they can target. However, they now know their use of proxies will not insulate them personally from retaliation and preemptive action. The president's thinking on this has not been “shoot from the hip.” It was set strategically in motion this past April when Iran's Revolutionary Guard and its commanders were labeled terrorists. That was the game changer, my friends. It served notice to Iran's leaders, particularly those in the Iran Revolutionary Guard, that they themselves, not their subordinates, will pay the price. And if they go to bed planning an attack on America, they may wake up on the receiving end of an American plan to preempt them. Thank God for President Donald Trump. And that's my open. Let me know what you think on my Facebook and Twitter, #JudgeJeanine. Congressman Mark Meadows still on deck tonight. And next, we'll go live to the Middle East and check in with news reporter Ben Hall in Jordan. Also, ahead, I'll talk more about the president's bold decision this week and his latest threats against Iran tonight with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. You're watching Justice on a busy news night. Keep it here.

[commercial break]

Jeanine Pirro: Welcome back. As we've been telling you, President Trump taking to Twitter earlier tonight, threatening to hit Iran, quote, "very fast and very hard" if any Americans are attacked in the wake of the U.S. airstrikes that took out Iran's top general this week. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy joins me in just a moment to talk about all of this. But first, Benjamin Hall is with me live from Jordan with the latest on some of the unrest in the Middle East after the U.S. strike and President Trump's tweets tonight. Benjamin?

Benjamin Hall: Judge. Well, there is a nervous feeling across the Middle East tonight to see when, how, if Iran might retaliate. It's not thought that they would do so in the next three days, the three days of mourning and the funeral for Qassem Soleimani, but sometime after that. It was actually at that funeral today in Iraq that we got a sense of the sentiment that he stoked across the region. People in that crowd baying for blood, chanting, "Death to America" and "America is the great Satan." His body will be taken to Iran tomorrow for a larger funeral. And his followers, they're also calling for revenge. The U.S. have said that General Soleimani posed a clear and present threat to the U.S. and was actively developing plans to attack Americans throughout the region, as he has done for years. As a result of the attack, though, the Iraqi parliament, who have condemned it, will tomorrow consider the future of U.S. troops in Iraq and have threatened to order the expulsion of the 5,000 plus U.S. soldiers there. Iranian leaders are all vowing revenge, saying at least 35 U.S. targets, including warships and even perhaps Tel Aviv, have been identified for retaliatory strikes. And the White House says an attack could happen within weeks. Amid all these tensions, the U.S. have now dispatched another 3,000 troops to Kuwait and scaled back operations in Iraq to boost their defensive measures. A U.S. official has also said that no more U.S. strikes were expected unless Iran does something that warrants it. The big question, though, is whether, when, how, if Iran retaliates. It is thought to be when, not if. Another question, how big?

Jeanine Pirro: All right.

Benjamin Hall: Judge.

Jeanine Pirro: Ben Hall in Jordan, thanks so much for joining us. All right. Let's get reaction now to President Trump's tweets tonight and more from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Congressman, thanks for being here tonight. What's your reaction?

Kevin McCarthy: My reaction is the president just made the world a little safer because this individual has killed more than 600 Americans, shot down a U.S. drone, bombed two tankers, and then also went after Saudi Arabia's refinery. And let's not forget why we reacted; they went after our embassy. And the president had warned, "If you kill an American, we will react." He held back, just as you said in your opening statement, when the drone went down. But when a U.S. American was killed and when this individual, Soleimani, was planning to do more, where he was coming from, this president acted so we could be safer.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, you know, it's interesting that -- there is an article that basically said that he is quoted as saying not that long ago, "It's time to take out our swords." And he -- obviously the mastermind for so many of the other proxies and the attacks around the world. But my question, I want to move from that right now to -- but before I go to impeachment, let me ask you this. What do you expect when you go to Congress in terms of the information that the president has sent to Congress, that classified information, regarding his reasons for the attack on Soleimani? When, what, who gets to see that?

Kevin McCarthy: Well, I was with the president that night that this attack went public and with them when we got the announcement that, yes, it was active, and we did kill Soleimani. What will happen is -- and the president has all authority to do this. It is inside Iraq. He was protecting American servicemen and women -- and what we'll do is Congress will come together. I imagine O'Brien will come in, I imagine Pompeo and others, and brief the entire Congress in regards to this. The president has the authority to protect our men and women, and he acted on that. And also, remember, what had taken place prior to this, the attack on the embassy and others.

Jeanine Pirro: Right. Right.

Kevin McCarthy: So, the president has clear authority on this --

Jeanine Pirro: I'm not asking --

Kevin McCarthy: -- but the fear of what was going to happen --

Jeanine Pirro: -- about --

Kevin McCarthy: -- even further --

Jeanine Pirro: Congressman.

Kevin McCarthy: -- and he was able to stop that.

Jeanine Pirro: We're going to go to a break.

Kevin McCarthy: Yeah.

Jeanine Pirro: But I'm not asking about the authority. What I'm asking about is what will you guys see? Will everyone in Congress see this? When O'Brien does the briefing?

Kevin McCarthy: Well, what I think we'll see is, normally in these, when it's a full Congress, they will give you a briefing on it. It will be rather detailed, but there are certain things you could not share to all. It will be -- that part would probably be shared more in the Gang of Eight, but they will be briefed in the entire Congress, and Congress will be able to ask questions and others, just as we have done before with other administrations.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay, Congressman McCarthy, stay right there. The White House formally notified Congress of its strike on Qassem Soleimani and the reasons for it, and that’s sure to rile up the Democrats. I want to get your take on that and more after the break. Kevin McCarthy, GOP House Minority Leader, is still with us after the break.

[commercial break]

Aishah Hasnie: Live from America's News Headquarters, I’m Aishah Hasnie. The White House sending Congress formal notification under the War Powers Act about the drone strike that killed Iran’s top general, Qassem Soleimani, this happening as mourners taking to the streets of Baghdad, chanting “Death to America” during a funeral procession for Soleimani today. Iran has promised to avenge his killing, as President Trump once again defends the airstrike that killed him while strongly urging Iran against retaliation. Meantime, the wildfires in Australia worsening as temperatures rise to record levels. The Australian prime minister now calling about 3,000 members of the military reserves to help combat this. So far, 23 people have been killed; 23,000 square miles of bushland have burned, about the same size as West Virginia. I’m Aishah Hasnie. Back to Justice.

[music playing]

Jeanine Pirro: Welcome back to Justice on a busy night. As the president tweets new threats against Iran, word tonight the White House formally notified Congress of its strike on Qassem Soleimani. So, let’s get back now to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to talk about that and more. Congressman, thanks for staying with us. Now, I want to talk about -- and I’d love to stay with Iran, but I don’t have that much time. The -- let’s -- I want to talk to you about impeachment. So, Pelosi impeaches the president, so to speak. I’m not quite sure if she did or didn’t, because it’s still in the House, and it hasn’t been transferred to the Senate. So, they were in a rush, these Democrats. “We’re going to get it done by the end of the year; we’re going to get it done by Christmas.” They get it done by Christmas, and they’re slow to get it over to the Senate. What is going on? Do you know?

Kevin McCarthy: Well, I think Nancy Pelosi thinks she has more power than she does. Once she names the managers, it will go to the Senate. But an interesting thing happened just yesterday in the U.S. District Court of Appeals inside D.C. Pelosi’s House attorney, Douglas Letter, made the argument before a judge that they could offer another article of impeachment. This is the only thing the Democrats’ agenda is, to try to impeach this president. Al Green has said it; you’ve heard it from so many other Democrats. It’s their only goal of what they’re continuing to try to do. Their case is so weak. I think part of the Speaker’s problem is --

Jeanine Pirro: Wait, okay --

Kevin McCarthy: -- she doesn’t want to show it over to the Senate because, bipartisan, they’ll vote against it.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay, you’ve got to stop there. She wants to add another article to the two articles of impeachment that we don’t even know if are articles of impeachment? Because they’re just in limbo right now. Without a vote, she wants to add --

Kevin McCarthy: That is the argument.

Jeanine Pirro: That’s like me --

Kevin McCarthy: That is what her --

Jeanine Pirro: Go ahead.

Kevin McCarthy: Her attorney made that argument in a court of appeals in D.C. yesterday before a judge when the judge questioned why are they even asking for this -- it dealt with the Mueller report -- because impeachment is over. And he says, “Could there be another impeachment?” He said, “Yes, Nancy Pelosi has signed off on that. We could go to a third article of impeachment.” They have nothing else on their agenda. While this president is taking terrorists out and making America safer --

Jeanine Pirro: This is outrageous.

Kevin McCarthy: -- they’re trying to take the president out.

Jeanine Pirro: This is outrageous.

Kevin McCarthy: They will not put America first, by far.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay. All right, now, let’s follow this through, okay? Because this is infuriating --

Kevin McCarthy: Okay.

Jeanine Pirro: -- and it’s the first I’ve heard of it. I don't think anybody has said this so far. So, here you’ve got this woman in a rush to get impeachment, and get it done by the end of the year. Now the thing is in limbo. She goes to a court -- that’s like me indicting someone for petty larceny and then saying, “Hey,” after the grand jury voted, “I’m going to indict him for murder, too, Judge. Let’s just throw that in there. What the heck? We don’t need a vote on it.” But more important is the fact that right now she says that she doesn’t want to send it over until she’s sure it’s going to be fair in the Senate. I'll tell you what I would do. I would tell Mitch McConnell that he ought to automatically dismiss it. There's got to be a default. There’s got to be -- if you’re entitled to a speedy trial, if you’re entitled to be able to -- if there’s a statute of limitations, it’s passed. This thing -- there should be a default judgment, overdone for non-prosecution. What is McConnell waiting for?

Kevin McCarthy: Well, I think what McConnell is looking and seeing -- and you’ve talked to all the senators over there -- here they’re going back in session. We will be back in session next week. That is when Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, should name the managers and send it over. She does not have a right to dictate what the Senate will do, just as the Senate didn’t have a right to dictate for the House. In the House, she did not all the minority to offer any witnesses, she did not give this president any procedures that we had given to Clinton and to Nixon. She changed the whole dynamic of where to go, and she forced this through, the thinnest, the weakest, and the fastest impeachment in history. She said it had to be bipartisan, and the only bipartisan vote was against impeachment. She knows this is weak. She’s showing her hand is weak --

Jeanine Pirro: But this is crazy.

Kevin McCarthy: -- and when it goes to the Senate, it will fail.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, but why can’t the Senate dismiss it out of hand right now? If Article I, Section Two, says the House impeaches, Article I, Section Three, says that the Senate does the actual trial. You know what? I make a motion to dismiss. I make a motion to dismiss for non-prosecution, for failure to have a speedy trial, denial of my rights, all that. Don’t even go along with this game. This is a charade. It’s a shell game.

Kevin McCarthy: It shows very clearly --

Jeanine Pirro: I don’t mean to be upset with you. I’m upset with Mitch McConnell.

Kevin McCarthy: -- that this is a shell game. If 51 senators --

Jeanine Pirro: Yeah.

Kevin McCarthy: I hear you completely, and I think America is upset.

Jeanine Pirro: He’s never coming on my show, by the way, now.

Kevin McCarthy: You shouldn’t be upset with Mitch McConnell. You should be upset -- you should be very upset with Nancy Pelosi. Listen to what Schumer is asking. Schumer is now asking for witnesses when they would not even allow the minority to have witnesses. They want to have Bolton. The Democrats could pull whoever they wanted; they never subpoenaed Bolton. But now they know their case is so weak. This is outrageous to the whole American public. Here we are with so many other problems before us; we know this is going to fail in the Senate. If 51 senators got together, based upon what Nancy Pelosi has done here, they could dismiss this, and I believe if Nancy Pelosi does not move with the managers in the next week, then I think you’ll see a movement within the Senate to do just that.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, I hope so. It should be done. It should have been done on January 1st. But what she’s doing is she’s holding her finger to the wind, hoping that something will increase the chances of impeachment to get a few extra senators in the Senate so that she can win. This is a sad commentary on politics in America. But anyway, it's always good to have you --

[cross talk]

Kevin McCarthy: Sad about it the --

Jeanine Pirro: Yeah, go ahead.

Kevin McCarthy: [laughs]

Jeanine Pirro: Go on.

Kevin McCarthy: Well, thank you. It is very sad about the speaker of the House. Look at what the position -- Soleimani killed 600 Americans and she is now questioning? She'd rather stand with Hollywood, with Rose McGowan, then to stand with our servicemen and women and make sure they're protected. That to me is an abuse of power.

Jeanine Pirro: Ah, indeed. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, thank you. And I'll talk military strategy with Colonel David Hunt in a few moments. But Congressman Mark Meadows is next, live from the nation's capital.

[commercial break]

Jeanine Pirro: Welcome back to Justice. Joining me now with more insight on the situation in the Middle East, the president's tweets tonight, and more is Republican Congressman Mark Meadows. Congressman, thanks for being with us tonight on Justice, and Happy New Year to you.

Mark Meadows: Happy New Year to you, Judge.

Jeanine Pirro: Which I neglected to say to everybody, but the news was so serious. But I want to start with these tweets. So, the president tweets tonight, and according to NSA, National Security Adviser O'Brien, he said it was based on intelligence that they were getting that Rouhani and the whole lot of them were threatening, and allies. He says, and this is what I think is the stick [spelled phonetically], he said, "Let this serve as a warning that if Iran strikes Americans or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites representing the 52 American hostages taken in by Iran many years ago, some at a very high level, important to Iran and the Iranian culture." I mean, the president is ready to go. And what do you think Iran's response to this is going to be?

Mark Meadows: Well, they better take it serious. I can tell you, Judge, one of the interesting things, this is not just a tweet. Everybody was talking about the president, and he made a decisive action, an action that should have been taken. We've now taken out two of the top terrorist --

Jeanine Pirro: You're right.

Mark Meadows: -- manipulators and generals in the last three months, in about three months, and it's because this president has been willing to take the action. But here's the interesting thing is when we took out this general, we had already identified these targets. This is not just a tweet. Everybody is talking about retaliation, and we should be vigilant, we should be cautious, but the risk of not doing things is certainly greater than the risk of taking this action that the president so rightly took just a few days ago. And so, I can tell you that who should be worried about this is the Iranians, the Iranian government. This is not about a regime change, but if you talk about double-digit unemployment, their economy is imploding. Here's what we do know. We will strike back, and we will strike back appropriately. And we can do it without putting boots on the ground in their country.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, you know what's interesting? There -- we may -- and, you know, Donald Trump -- I mean, what he has withstood in terms of impeachment -- I'll talk about it in a few minutes with you. But Donald Trump, by his efforts at diplomacy and then the economic sanctions and now taking out Soleimani, there may be a regime change from within because of the collapse of the regime, because of the civil unrest in in Iran, because they know that $150 billion in assets that they got from America was being used to proxy and for terrorism all over the world. I mean, you know, this -- I have to imagine that this regime is a little frightened itself. And it can't go toe to toe with us, can it, militarily?

Mark Meadows: No. It can't go toe to toe with us. You know, we spend, if you include intelligence and military, we spend twice as much every year as their entire economy. And so, I'll put our military up against anybody, anywhere in the world. But more importantly, as we look at this particular aspect of addressing Iran, the president has done more to address Iran in his first three years than the two previous presidents combined. And so, when we start to look at what happens, the Iranians understand one thing. They understand power, and they understand resolve. And they've got a message -- a double dose of -- with both of those messages just recently.

Jeanine Pirro: And, you know, the Iranian people -- I mean, the Iranian people are good people.

Mark Meadows: Oh, yeah. Yeah.

Jeanine Pirro: And, you know, the civil unrest there is incredible. I mean, you know, there's Soleimani and all of this stuff that he was doing is one thing, but the people themselves are good people. But now I've got to go to impeachment because I can't --

Mark Meadows: Okay.

Jeanine Pirro: I have to deal with this. Okay. So, Nancy -- and I find out from Congressman McCarthy, minority leader that she went to court to try to add another count of impeachment without even getting the vote in the Senate. Talk about lawless.

Mark Meadows: Yeah, well, what she's trying to do is actually convince the judges that she needs to be able to go on another fishing expedition. I don't see additional articles coming. What she's trying to do is say, "Listen, we don't have enough evidence. We should be able to get the grand jury material. We should be able to subpoena Don McGahn and have him come in, because we might be able to put that in an article of impeachment." Listen, this is all about Nancy Pelosi saying she had a constitutional duty to remove the president of the United States, and then hold on, put on fast stop, and said, "I'm only going to do half of my constitutional duty and not send the rest of the Senate." It doesn't work that way. I think everybody sees it for what it is, a political stunt.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, and the amazing part of it is they could have held off the vote in the House until the judge decided whether or not McGahn was going to come, but they decided not to. So, it --

Mark Meadows: You're exactly right.

Jeanine Pirro: They hoist themselves on their own petard. Congressman Mark Meadows, good to see you.

Mark Meadows: Good to see you, Judge.

Jeanine Pirro: All right. Thank you. I'll get the strategy behind the airstrikes that took out one of the world's most notorious terrorists when Colonel David Hunt joins me next.

[commercial break]

Jeanine Pirro: Welcome back. We’ve heard from the politicians, the pundits, and the critics, but let’s get talk from a military man. Fox News military expert and combat veteran Colonel David Hunt joins me now to talk about the airstrikes in Iraq that killed Iran’s top general. Colonel Hunt, thanks for being on. I assume that you think the president taking out the head of the Quds Force was appropriate.

David Hunt: Yeah, this guy needed to die a long time ago. Soleimani may be one of the -- well, not maybe -- was one of the top four terrorists in the world. He was the second-most powerful man in Iran. It was a big decision because, as we’re seeing, we’re waiting on the consequences, but Soleimani has been a very, very bad guy, killed hundreds of Americans and thousands of other people, and tortured thousands of people. And this was a statement to make by killing him in Iraq, along with the head of the Iraqi militia that had been up on the embassy.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay.

David Hunt: So, it -- this was a big deal, and -- but, yeah, it should have been done.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay, but you also said it should have been done a long time ago. Now, why do you think all the other presidents didn’t do this?

David Hunt: Well, it’s political will, lack of political will. There was always -- this guy was, again, the second-most powerful man in Iran, and he worked -- people worried about consequences. They made the wrong -- a bad call. I mean, that’s all. This was a very, very tough high-wire act call because Iran has a big world reach, a very organized -- they’ve got a million-two army, a very well -- very capable special operations. We’ve got a better one, but we’re a wide-open country, as opposed to Iran. This guy -- it was the right thing to do. However, you have to consider other things. The other presidents -- Bush and Obama, to be specific -- had opted not to do this, as did Trump for the first three years. So, this was -- I think it’s a tough call, and the right call to do.

Jeanine Pirro: Well, and he took about Abu Bakr Baghdadi, so, I mean, you know, you’ve got this president taking out two of the top terrorists in the world in a matter of a couple of months. But let’s talk about the reach of Soleimani and, you know, how -- I talked in my open about the fact that there was really -- although we may not be at war with Iran, it was a shadow war. Iran used all its proxies to go after American assets and all that. So, this shadow war was something that’s been going on for years, and so the question was, I mean, we could have done this for a long time, and in the end, it took Donald Trump to do this. So, this was a tough decision, no?

David Hunt: Yeah, absolutely. This is a game-changer in the relationship with Iran. This is an aggressive act, and it changes the board. We just killed the second-most powerful man in Iran. It’d be like us losing our SECDEF, our CIA director, and the Secretary of State.

Jeanine Pirro: All right, Secretary of Defense.

David Hunt: I can’t overemphasize how powerful --

Jeanine Pirro: This guy was.

David Hunt: This was a very powerful, very influential guy.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay. And -- but now the riskiest thing that any president can do is do this and not succeed, and he did succeed, but -- and he had the guts to pull a trigger with unknown consequences. And Iran is saber-rattling right now, and Iran is of the belief -- an eye for an eye, and that’s why the president has issued these rather direct tweets. Do -- what do you think -- how do you think they’re going to respond?

David Hunt: They have multiple -- first of all, the choice is going to be between the mullahs, who are very concerned about the embargo that’s already dropped the gross national product of Iran down to Romania’s level, and the military, who wants revenge. So, we don’t know who’s going to win that argument, but the military -- Iran has a very capable offensive capability, from cyber to direct action, and the problem is we are a wide-open society. We’ve got assets all over the world. We are -- you can’t protect them all, so they have a big chance to make a statement. The problem with whatever they do is we’re going to counter it. So, my argument has been if we really want to get at Iran, then embargo -- make the embargo harder and actually do a naval blockade, and that would bring them to their knees.

Jeanine Pirro: A naval blockade at the Straits of Hormuz? Where? What do you mean?

David Hunt: Absolutely, right off the coast of Iran.

Jeanine Pirro: Right.

David Hunt: Nothing gets in or out. They’re already in trouble, and we don’t have to fire a shot. All I’m saying is if we play an eye for an eye, as you and I have discussed, that could be a dangerous game --

Jeanine Pirro: Okay.

David Hunt: -- but this -- what was done yesterday was a very, very big deal.

Jeanine Pirro: Okay. All right, Colonel David Hunt, it’s always good to see you, and Happy New Year.

David Hunt: Same to you. Thank you.

Jeanine Pirro: All right, thanks. We’ll be right back, everyone.

[commercial break]

Jeanine Pirro: That's it for us tonight. Remember to follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, #JudgeJeanine. And if you want to have fun, go to JudgeJeanine.store and you'll see t shirts that say, "And that's my open" or "Impeach this" or "Are you stupid?" Thanks for watching. I'm Judge Jeanine Pirro, advocating for truth, justice, and the American way. Go to the store. The Greg Gutfeld Show is coming up, and I'll see you right here next Saturday night.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 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.