'The Five': Going back to Afghanistan is no longer an option
'The Five' discusses the possibility of the U.S returning to Afghanistan.
This is a rush transcript from "The Five," August 27, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
JESSE WATTERS, FOX NEWS HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Jesse Watters along with Katie Pavlich, Richard Fowler, Kennedy, and Greg Gutfeld. It's five o'clock in New York City, and this is The Five.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down and make you pay.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WATTERS: President Biden vowing retribution for ISIS terrorists responsible for killing 13 U.S. servicemembers in Kabul after his disastrous withdrawal led to one of the tragic outcomes imaginable. The deadliest day in 10 years for American forces in Afghanistan.
With four days to go until August 31st things aren't getting any better. America is still relying on the Taliban for protection. The White House has been warned that another attack in Kabul is likely. And the State Department says they're in contact with approximately 500 Americans in Afghanistan who want to leave the country. Here is General Jack Keane ripping into Biden.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACK KEANE, FOX NEWS SENIOR STRATEGIC ANALYST: This date certain that the president announced going back in April has been fundamentally flawed right from the beginning. And strategically it has cost us so much. All of this has been pushed too quickly. And the results have been horrible.
Now we got a date certain, supposedly to take our people out. That we are going to walk out of here on the 31st. And we know full well what we're doing. We are leaving American citizens likely by the hundreds.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WATTERS: Yesterday Joe Biden blamed Donald Trump for the disaster in Afghanistan. But the former president returned fire on Hannity last night.
(BEGIN VOICE CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It was a tough call and it started out by saying that they will be hit harder than any country has ever been hit in the history of the world. If they do anything and in particular kill our soldiers or even try to kill our soldiers.
Even Biden admitted today that the reason they didn't kill any soldiers, and we haven't lost soldiers in many, many months because of the agreement that we set because I wanted to get out. I wish we never went in.
Because of what they're doing, we're leaving in disgrace. We could have left with great dignity. We had them totally under control. Every time we saw movement, we'd hit them with an F-18 and the movement stopped.
(END VOICE CLIP)
WATTERS: And just to underscore how dire the situation is, many people still trapped in Afghanistan have come to terms with the idea that they won't get out alive.
(BEGIN VOICE CLIP)
UNKNOWN: I know that I'm going to get killed. I'm going to die for a good thing. What I did I will never regret it because I have tried to help people.
(END VOICE CLIP)
WATTERS: Let's go ladies first today. Katie P., your reaction to all of you've seen in the last 24 hours.
KATIE PAVLICH, FOX NEWS HOST: Well, in terms of people getting out the White House is now shifting the goal post on that again. So, a couple of weeks ago they said anybody who wants to get out will be able to get out, which is also a way for them to evade responsibility for when people couldn't get out and were getting stuck at Taliban checkpoints. Getting the documentation ripped up whether it was American citizens getting beaten by the Taliban or it was SIV applicants and people who were already eligible to come here.
Now we're hearing that the United States will no longer have a diplomatic process or function on the ground when we leave on August 31st. So, the question now is how are you going to get Americans out of the country if you don't have a military presence, you don't have a diplomatic presence and you are relying on the Taliban to kind of facilitate getting these people out.
So that's the first thing. The idea we are even contemplating leaving Americans behind is a new thing to, I think the American ethos. And I think it's absolutely despicable that that's even on the table rather than saying we will not leave until we get every single person out.
So that's where they are on that. In terms of the attack that they keep warning about and the response of the president promise not just yesterday but over the course of the last week to retaliate against any kind of attack on American forces or troops. Well, the time for that is now. The time is now to say well, another terrorist attack may happen because they determine the deterrence.
So, they could, you know, it's 1.3 a.m. in Kabul. Hopefully there's planning is going on and people may be out right now conducting those retaliatory attacks. But this idea that we're sitting back and saying we're going to allow the Taliban to continue doing security and maybe we'll see another attack rather than acting immediately for a deterrence says quite a lot about where we are in terms of our strength and the position.
WATTERS: And that's because we don't have another choice, Richard. We have boxed ourselves in and now we have to rely on our enemy, the Taliban, to run point for our airport.
RICHARD FOWLER, FOX NEWS HOST: Yes. I mean, I think that's an unfortunate situation that we are relying on the Taliban and not an Afghan government that was in 20 years popping up. But how we got here was on February 2020 we started negotiating with the Taliban and we excused the Afghan government from those negotiations.
Now don't get me wrong. Joe Biden mangled this withdrawal. But he was put into a corner when he got in there. And he should have said at the beginning we could have -- we should -- I'm not going to abide by any dates. I'm going to do everything in my power to ensure and take as long as I need to, to get all the Americans out.
But it's worth pointing out that in this 2020 agreement we allowed, we released 5,000 Taliban fighters that American troops put in jail for doing bad things, right? Terrorists by any structure and means of the imagination. We put -- we release them from jail. And they're now fighting us on Quantico guarding the airports and guarding American troops.
And I think it's also important to realize that the Pentagon, as well as the State Department, as well as our intelligence agencies have to be very strategic about the next move that we make when it comes to retaliating against ISIS-K. Why? Because we have military troops on the ground.
And we want to be sure that we don't lose. We've already lost 13 military. I don't want to lose another one because we made a faulty decision. So we got to get everybody we can get out as fast as we can. And with that being said, this White House has gotten over 100,000 people out in less than 10 days.
PAVLICH: Those people are not Americans the majority of them, by the way.
KENNEDY MONTGOMERY, FOX NEWS HOST: the vast majority.
PAVLICH: Yes.
FOWLER: True.
PAVLICH: The vast majority.
(CROSSTALK)
FOWLER: But it's also worth pointing --
MONTGOMERY: Very small number of Americans.
FOWLER: But it's also worth pointing out that there have been warnings over and over and over given --
PAVLICH: So, it's their fault.
FOWLER: No, I'm not saying it's their fault. I'm saying there's warning given all over --
(CROSSTALK)
MONTGOMERY: Can I take this one, Jesse?
FOWLER: -- and over again to Americans saying you've got to get out because the situation -- at some point in time we are leaving.
WATTERS: So, that's interesting, though. So, if there were warnings for months that they had to get out ASAP and the embassy couldn't help them get out ASAP, then why is Joe Biden telling the American people everything is fine?
FOWLER: I'm not denying that Joe Biden screwed this up.
(CROSSTALK)
WATTERS: The Afghan army is going to be great and the Taliban wasn't going to quickly take over. Can't have both things, Richard. Kennedy?
MONTGOMERY: Shame on this government. Shame on this government.
FOWLER: Yes.
MONTGOMERY: Because the messaging has been, you guys we told you it was really dangerous. Anyone who is in Afghanistan they know how dangerous it is. All right? They have known that for some time. You don't try and get out a 100,000 or 500,000 people in two weeks. That is a completely irresponsible move, it is totally untenable.
And then you have the secretary of state blaming people, he's blaming Americans. And then you have the administration saying, well, you know what, every once in a while, we leave something behind. We're talking about this before the show. Like, yes, when I moved from one house to another there was a broken lamp. So, I didn't pack it in the U-Haul.
That you cannot do that with American lives. I don't trust this government. I don't think they're listening to the people that they should. I think they are abandoning and stranding people who are brave and deserve to be saved. And they're not. I don't think they have a strategy. They don't have any plans. They don't know what they're doing. And this, you know, if this is not the undoing of this presidency, I don't want to see how bad it gets.
WATTERS: And Hemmer (ph) had the agreement was on set yesterday, Gutfeld. It was conditions based.
GREG GUTFELD, FOX NEWS HOST: Yes.
WATTERS: Biden could have gotten out of it. Trump said he could have moved it. It was all about meeting those conditions. He wasn't locked in.
GUTFELD: That was the -- that's why the comparison doesn't work. Because that was actually had conditions that are now missing. I'm not calling for an impeachment at all. But I love how the media is already scolding people for bringing up impeachment. In fact, saying that how dare you cheapen the process.
MONTGOMERY: Yes.
GUTFELD: This is from the same people who screamed impeachment for four years who impeached Trump over a phone call. You tell me that this is less egregious than a phone call. Dead Americans? That's crazy. but the problem -- the problem why I'm not for impeachment there is no one to replace him.
MONTGOMERY: No.
GUTFELD: Kamala, give me a break. There could be a crisis dinner every night, crisis meals every day. But what does it tell you in the bigger picture? Is that this pitiful woke embrace by the Democrats have destroyed their party. You can't lead a country if you believe the country is racist, is guilty of the original sin of racism.
You can't lead a country if you believe -- if you advocate the responsibilities of the survival of a government which is -- which is immigration and law enforcement. It's all connected, the abdication of responsibility during the riots, the denigration of the police, the conflation of the immigration process with too racism leaves to a feeble foreign policy, a foreign policy in which only a feeble response is the right one.
Because you don't -- you do not have the moral authority to actually exercise the right choices. The Democrats however, I mean this is where I'm going to defend Joe Biden. You can't --
(CROSSTALK)
WATTERS: We got to go to commercial break. Sorry. Go ahead.
GUTFELD: Here's everybody -- I think you'll like my defense.
WATTERS: OK.
GUTFELD: He -- it's the -- this is on the Democrats and the media, not Joe Biden. Joe Biden was chosen by them to beat Trump. And they knew his state. They knew he couldn't lead. But they assumed win first, worry about whether he can lead later. So now they're left holding the bag.
You can't yell at Joe. You got him in there, right? So, they wanted Joe to win, not govern. And now he has to govern and he can't. That's where we are. That's why we're all scared. We're going like, OK, this was all this political thing, hiding the hunter Biden laptop story, the entire -- the entire cabal of all these institutions working to get him elected. And then lying about this consensus, which is, again, is ridiculous.
But anyway, that's my defense of Joe Biden. I think he'd be pleased with it.
WATTERS: Well you can tell the media is guilty. You can see it written all over their face.
FOWLER: You're talking about your own face?
WATTERS: Don't talk about my face, Richard.
FOWLER: I'm talking -- you said --
(CROSSTALK)
WATTERS: Don't you dare.
FOWLER: You're sitting on TV --
(CROSSTALK)
WATTERS: -- of (Inaudible) topic right now.
GUTFELD: Yes.
WATTERS: Coming up, why Biden's botched withdrawal just made it much more likely that American troops are going to have to return to Afghanistan.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MONTGOMERY: Welcome back. President Biden standing by his decision to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan in just four days from now. But how long will that last? Former President Obama's defense secretary sounding the alarm. He says the U.S. military will inevitably be forced to go back in. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEON PANETTA, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: The bottom line is our work is not done. We are going to have to go back in to get ISIS. We'll probably going to have to go back in when Al-Qaeda resurrects itself as they will with this Taliban. They gave safe haven to Al-Qaeda before. They'll probably do it again.
I understand that we're trying to get our troops out of there. But the bottom line is we can leave a battlefield but we can't leave the war on terrorism which is still is a threat to our security.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MONTGOMERY: Do you distrust lefty hawks as much as I do?
WATTERS: Something tells me you think he wants to go back in, Kennedy.
MONTGOMERY: Yes, he seemed a little too excited about that prospect.
WATTERS: A lot of people want to go back but I don't think we will. How are you going to back when we don't have any basing rights? Pakistan says we can't base there. The stans, Tajikistan all those former satellites, they won't let us go back. Putin said, no, Joe, won't let your base there.
So, I don't know how we're getting back there. The only way we go back in any significant way is if we suffer a 9/11 style spectacular attack here on the homeland. That's the only way we're going to go back big. And if we go back big, we aren't nation building. We learned that lesson.
So, we're getting out of Afghanistan, we're going to get out of Iraq, out of Syria, and we're going to sit. The military is going to rest. And we will be pretty locked and loaded. So, the next enemy that tries to mess with the United States we are going to come out so strong and smash these idiots like a monster.
So, think twice before you do that. Right now, the Taliban, something tells me they don't want the United States back in their country. They want to go back to what it was in the 90s. They had Sharia law, they stole all the foreign aid, they exported puppy.
(CROSSTALK)
MONTGOMERY: When it was footloose without Kevin Bacon.
WATTERS: Yes, they did their thing, right? They don't -- we kicked their butts for 20 years. They need a break. OK? It's a nasty neighborhood, kind of remind me of Philly where I grew up, surrounded by China. What's so funny, Greg? China, Iran, Pakistan. Here is what I hope. I think it's China's turn to get sucked into that --
MONTGOMERY: Vortex.
WATTERS: Yes. I mean, every empire does. Right? Every single empire. It's China's turn. I bet China comes in hot after we leave and they wind up there for 30 years getting killed. I could see it happening. It happens to every empire.
MONTGOMERY: Yes. They're like we want your minerals and Afghanistan is like, we'll so high on opium. We don't care right now. And then they're going to be like, wait a second, those are really valuable, we want them back. Richard, are you war weary or do you share the former defense secretary and CIA director's enthusiasm?
FOWLER: I share nothing with Leon Panetta, especially not this opinion. I don't think going back is an option. And I do, listen, I think to some extent Jesse is right. The Taliban has every interest in making sure that nobody invades them again. Right? They want to stay in power to the point where what we saw them do today was, they went to the Turkish government and like, we don't know how to run an airport, can you help us out? Can you run the airport? Right?
Literally they asked the president of Turkey to, can you run our airport because they don't know how to do that. Right? And they want some sort of world legitimacy. They have two embassies currently open, the embassy of China, the embassy of Russia. Go figure. And they're like, listen, we want to be legitimate so that we don't get invaded again.
So, I think that's thing number one. And I think thing number two, anybody that thinks we have to go back in I don't think -- I think the American public is adamantly against that. Like this withdrawal made it very clear that Americans like, yes. We don't want to go back in and we don't to see these horrifying pictures on our screens ever again.
With that being said, I think Biden has to own the consequences of his decisions, which are playing out in front of our eyes. But his critics should also own --
(CROSSTALK)
MONTGOMERY: I don't think he knows what he wants to do. I don't think he knows if he wants to stay out and withdraw completely or somehow ramp things back up.
WATTERS: Well, too shy. But I think his critics should also own the fact that the real alternative would have been a major escalation of war which most Americans opposed. If we were to stay beyond the preconditions that the Biden -- that the Trump administration laid out in the February 2020 deal including in those 2020 negotiations that Mike Pompeo did.
They basically ask that they -- those conditions say that the Taliban will not allow further territory for ISIS-K or Al-Qaeda to regrow. We know that both of those things are happening but those agreements say very carefully they're not supposed to do that.
So, I don't see a world in which we can go back to war. But I understand that if anybody who says that we need to be in there, understand that once we go back in or once we stay in it could escalate to a full-blown war which I don't think Americans want.
MONTGOMERY: It's living marrying your ex, Katie.
PAVLICH: That is true. So, I mean, I want to make sure we're not conflating two things. So, the Taliban is different than ISIS-K.
FOWLER: That's right.
PAVLICH: President Biden is talking about going after ISIS-K which they say is responsible for the suicide attack yesterday. I think a lot of people aren't convince including the Pentagon today walking back that the Taliban had nothing to do with them getting to the front of the gates.
Now that's one thing. There has a much smaller footprint. The Taliban did let thousands of them out of prison when they went to Bagram and took it over. So that's one issue. And that's what we're talking about retaliating against now.
The Taliban is basically on the verge of being recognized as an international player. They are about to be recognize as a government, essentially, the State Department is basically calling them our Afghan partners. They have a bunch of generals saying that. They have 600,000 rifles that are ours. They have thousands of vehicles that are ours.
And for us to go back and take on the Taliban would require another full- scale war. It's not going in with special forces and retaking all of the stuff. I mean, they --
(CROSSTALK)
MONTGOMERY: But that's what Panetta is saying.
PAVLICH: Right.
MONTGOMERY: You know, he's saying that there are baskets of deplorables in Afghanistan right now.
(CROSSTALK)
PAVLICH: Right. I don't think -- I don't think that's going to happen.
MONTGOMERY: ISIS-K, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban. And he is saying we are going to have to go back in it. It's like when you go to a surgeon and they amputate the wrong arm and they're like, now we have to amputate the other arm.
GUTFELD: Yes. I hate it when that happens. What am I going to talk about, Jesse?
WATTERS: The media.
GUTFELD: No. What theory am I going to bring up?
PAVLICH: The prism of two ideas.
WATTERS: The prism of two ideas.
GUTFELD: This is when people are led to believe they only have two options. And this is often done by the media because they can only handle two options. So, the options here either a forever war or we must leave now. All right? We must have this airport or this embassy. But we cannot have both.
This prism of two ideas tricks you into not hearing other options while that are, in fact, are endless. We are -- we are the greatest military in the history of the world. I have every confidence that we can find a nice little middle ground between a forever war and leaving like a Walgreen's shoplifter.
What it is, you don't, no interest in going back in, but it's what I call terror, terror control. Every few months, six months, once a year you go in and you spray for bugs. And what I mean by bugs, I mean terrorists. And that's all we have -- that's all we have the best soldiers, the best -- the best operators, we have the best weapons.
We got to go in, we got to go in and we're like exterminators. We exterminate the terrorists. We don't -- it's not a forever war. But we can't get into this either-or crap. We're going to lose.
PAVLICH: But isn't that what they are offered before, to leave a small force --
GUTFELD: Yes.
PAVLICH: -- to do exactly that, and now here we are. So.
GUTFELD: Yes.
MONTGOMERY: Well, we are going to have a much bigger Panetta force. It's awful.
All right. Coming up, hunting down the blood thirty terrorists who did this. What we know about ISIS-K as they prepare another attack. That's next on The Five.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEVE DOOCY, FOX NEWS HOST: When the president says, we will hunt you down and make you pay. What does that look like? Is he going to order a mission to kill the people responsible or would he be satisfied if they're captured and brought to trial?
JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I think he made clear yesterday that he does not want them to live on the earth anymore.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOWLER: The White House makes it clear they will hunt down ISIS-K, the terrorist group claiming responsibility for yesterday's brutal attack that killed 13 U.S. servicemembers and nearly 200 Afghans.
President Biden being warned today just to expect another terrorist attack by the group. For more, let's go to Jennifer Griffin at the Pentagon. Jennifer, how are you?
JENNIFER GRIFFIN, FOX NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Richard. Tonight, thousands of American troops are on edge at the Kabul airport as they evacuate thousands of Afghans waiting on the tarmac. Approximately 5,000 were there today according to the Pentagon.
New video of the attack shows the devastation outside Abbey gape. One suicide bomber truck then gunmen opened fire. The Pentagon has blamed an offshoot of the Taliban called ISIS-K but won't pinning blame on the Taliban which it still needs to provide airport security.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GRIFFIN: How many ISIS-K prisoners were left at Bagram and are believed to have been released from the prison there? And why weren't they not removed before the U.S. pulled out to some place like Gitmo?
JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I don't know the exact number. Clearly, it's in the thousands.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GRIFFIN: U.S. officials say reports that they shared lists of Americans and Afghan allies with the Taliban are incorrect. Adding that in some cases to get these Afghans and Americans through a checkpoint they provided the information. And for the most part the Taliban have been letting those people pass.
Twelve thousand five hundred people were evacuated yesterday on 35 military flights even after the suicide bombing attack that killed 13 Americans and wounded 20 other American troops. Those troops were Medevac to Germany. Richard?
FOWLER: Thanks, Jennifer. We're going to go around the table, and I'll start. So, today in the White House press briefing Jen Psaki indicated the U.S. government would have leverage with the Taliban. What does that leverage look like from the Pentagon's point of view?
GRIFFIN: Well, I think the Pentagon and State Department are working hand and hand. And the leverage that they believe they had, and remember Bill Burns of the CIA met with the Taliban leader Mullah Baradar on Monday and likely would have delivered a stern message, perhaps try to fill out what the Taliban's intents were, what they could, how they could work together.
And also, he needed to deliver a message that the security around the airport was going to be their responsibility and that if they did allow bombers through like the one that we saw attack yesterday that they would be held accountable. So, there have been diplomatic messages sent. There has been constant contact but from Admiral Vasely who is in charge of the operation overseeing the operation at the airport.
But in essence, I think what they're going to find, and what we have been hearing is that the Taliban want to set up a government. Now does the Taliban control all of their fighters? Are some of those fighters going to leave the Taliban when they have to become a normal so-called government and they'll then join ISIS-K?
What you find in this -- in countries like this where there are these off shoots and various terror groups competing for recruits is that the more extreme ones are not going to want to be in government. So, the U.S. is hoping to use that leverage so they can keep that airport open and still get some of these SIVs and other Americans and Afghan evacuees out after August 31.
FOWLER: Kennedy?
MONTGOMERY: Jennifer, first of all, great reporting. I know this is your wheelhouse, and you work on this throughout the year 365. But your reporting on this is really been phenomenal and straightforward. So, thank you for that, number one.
GRIFFIN: Thank you.
MONTGOMERY: Number two, I want you to talk a little bit more about the relationship between ISIS-K and the Taliban because right now, it seems like the administration is trying to make a really clear difference between the two groups. But it seems like if the Taliban were in charge of security, they shouldn't have let those people through in that horrific attack.
GRIFFIN: Well, remember Kabul is not exactly Switzerland. So, when people got through those checkpoints -- these are not TSA checkpoints. These are - - this is a chaotic street scenes where, you know, people can get through. It's not a tight cordon around the airport. So, in terms of the relationship between the Taliban and ISIS-K, it's very complicated.
On the one hand, they are rivals. ISIS-K doesn't think the Taliban are extreme enough. But on the other hand, they certainly would work together with a common goal to embarrassing the Americans and striking Americans. The Taliban have not exactly changed in that sense.
Right now, again, the relationship is going to be evolving. I think you're going to see some Taliban members leave the Taliban and join ISIS-K. Certainly, what we learned today and what was so fascinating in the briefing this morning when I asked John Kirby about how many ISIS-K prisoners had been released from Bagram which was a prison that the U.S. basically controlled until they left Bagram Air Base and left it in the hands of the Afghan National Army.
But I was surprised by the numbers. He said that there were thousands of ISIS-K in that prison and another prison. That is a huge shot of recruits into ISIS K. And again, we don't talk -- I noticed that the administration is intentionally not mentioning al-Qaeda, because it would be somewhat embarrassing, I think, because President Biden had mentioned that early on, after this operation began that there were very few al-Qaeda left 20 years later after 9/11 in Afghanistan.
That's not true based on intelligence reports and U.N. figures that were published in July. But you notice that the State Department Pentagon don't want to talk about al-Qaeda, they want to talk about ISIS K. You're really talking about shades without a difference between these three groups.
FOWLER: Katie?
PAVLICH: Jennifer, Katie Pavlich here. It seems like we have a typical enemy of my enemy is my friend situation going on between the United States, the Taliban, and ISIS-K. My question is after the United States leaves on August 31, what are the chances of the Biden administration outsourcing essentially consequences for ISIS K to the Taliban who does have an interest once the United States leaves to maintain full power of the country and to kind of eliminate ISIS-K from the picture?
GRIFFIN: Well, I think that would make sense if you don't want to go back to that $800 million embassy in Kabul. But if the Taliban are going to remain the government, then the U.S. will have to decide if they are going to reopen that embassy if they're going to deal with the Taliban as a legitimate government.
My guess is that what happens after the U.S. leaves is that Afghanistan is going to fall into a civil war you already have in the Panjshir Valley, a resistance rising of former Afghan National Army and resistance fighters, you're going to have competition and fighting between ISIS-K and the Taliban. So, my guess is that it's not clear whether the Taliban are going to be able to hold on as the government of Afghanistan. And it's also not clear that the U.S. is going to recognize them.
FOWLER: Jesse?
WATTERS: So, Jen, Joe Biden made a lot of promises which I support rescuing stranded Americans and bringing these ISIS-K guys to justice. But if we don't have any basing in any of the countries neighboring Afghanistan, how do you pull off search and rescue or search and destroy missions with Rangers or SEAL teams? How do you insert those guys into that country?
GRIFFIN: Incredibly difficult to -- you don't have drone bases nearby. They're flying out of the Gulf. You don't have any friendly basing, as you mentioned, Jesse, that's a real problem. But the really big problem is that their entire intelligence network has dried up. They would be probably dependent on the Taliban for intelligence to go after ISIS-K. That would be the only realistic scenario that I can see in the days after August 31.
Those partners that they relied on those CIA networks, those have all been rolled up. They -- the CIA has gotten many of their people out and a lot of the partners that we haven't been able to evacuate, they're in hiding and it's doubtful that those partners are going to be working with the U.S. anytime soon.
FOWLER: And Greg?
GUTFELD: It just -- how are the injured -- the American -- the injured Americans doing that are in Germany?
GRIFFIN: Well, we don't -- we don't know for certain, but I suspect that they're very serious injuries. There were 20 Americans injured in the attack yesterday. I imagine they'll be brought on to Walter Reed when they're stabilized or to BAMC out in Texas. But I would suspect from a bomb of the kind of power that we saw, given the number of casualties, that those are very serious injuries.
FOWLER: Well, Jennifer, thank you so much for your incredible reporting at the Pentagon. Coming up, some on the left are being called out for their poor reaction to yesterday's terrorist attack. We'll see what they're saying after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PAVLICH: Well, you think yesterday would have been a somber day for all Americans but apparently not for the left. Liberals are being called out for their awful reactions to yesterday's harrowing events. In a since- deleted tweet about the bombing, MSNBC is Malcolm Nance said, "This ain't new. It's why we're leaving. #DealWithIt."
And liberal primetime host, Chris Hayes tried to minimize yesterday's deaths by saying, "Again, probably A Thousand people are going to die today from COVID." So Greg, I set this up for you to talk about the media.
GUTFELD: Yes, because I talk about it rarely. It's always gross when people see a major event, and they think I got a way in. When Twitter started, I think that was an obvious kind of inclination. But now when you see it, it's like these people are really, really thirsty. They do -- it's like people posting, you know, shirtless shots like Jesse does on Instagram. Nance did apologize --
WATTERS: I deleted those.
GUTFELD: Oh, yes. I still -- I photographed them before.
FOWLER: You screenshoted them.
GUTFELD: But -- so, when somebody apologizes for it, I always say you should -- you should accept it. And Nance, he is a very thirsty dude. He's always looking for attention and he got it. But at least he realized, after he got called out on it. As for Vice, we didn't mention Vice. They did published a tweet saying that Marines are -- the Marines are filled with neo-Nazis and whatnot. They took it down because of the timing, right?
But that's not the problem. The problem is the story itself, which is false, and it's garbage. And this is the reason why Vice is hemorrhaging money and had to lay off so many workers is because essentially, they become a woke zombie of Media Matters. It's like all their stuff comes from Media Matters, The Daily Beast, and they put it all together, and they hire terrible writers. They don't pay him anything, and then this is what happens. You get this kind of crap. It's disgusting, despicable, but not surprising.
PAVLICH: And Jesse, isn't this kind of a reflection of the culture war and the politics get thrown into every situation? And the broader thing about vice is that these are young men and women who voluntarily no matter their background, many of them happened to be white, go into the Marine Corps and sacrifice their life for other people who work at Vice for them to be able to do their jobs. And this is what -- this is how they treat them. There's zero respect for what happened.
WATTERS: When people say dumb things during national tragedies, the same thing goes through my mind every time. I'm glad it wasn't me.
GUTFELD: Yes.
WATTERS: Because I have a code that I live by, Katie, and it's mostly about self-preservation. On the day that people die, I don't say anything controversial. I pretend it's a funeral. And I go in there and I act somber and I act solid and uncontroversial the next day. But on the day that the bodies are still warm, celebrity suicides, mass shootings, terrorist attacks, I don't try to draw attention to myself.
PAVLICH: And that says a lot.
GUTFELD: Yes, you --
(CROSSTALK)
PAVLICH: That says a lot. It's a lot of restraint. It's a lot of restraint.
WATTERS: You don't want to have a sense that says on the day that so and so many people died, Blank said this. You don't want to be Blank. And what's the common denominator for all of these comments? These people are trying to be either edgy, or they're trying to be deep. Now, as Greg knows, you don't try to be deep, I mean deep, OK? If you try, you're not deep.
And edginess is all about timing. You have to have good timing to be edgy. If you're not, look what happens.
PAVLICH: Kennedy, any advice on that?
MONTGOMERY: No, I think you're absolutely right about that. And I'm so sick of these hot takes.
PAVLICH: Yes.
MONTGOMERY: You know, it's like -- and everyone is just in a race to put out these garbage hot takes without adding anything to the discussion. Because, you know, of course, we can have philosophical discussions about what is our foreign policy, what should we be doing? To your point, we should not be nation-building. That is one of the most important lessons learned.
But when you hear about the bravery and sacrifice and heroism of those Marines before that attack, when you -- you know, it's like it would bring tears to your eyes to hear what they were doing facilitating the safe exit of people who are certainly going to die if they're left there. They know what they're up against. They know that they've got three terror groups, and they've got giant bull's eyes on them. And still they are helping the most vulnerable, and then they were slaughtered.
And this is the garbage they put out? You know, it's like yes, we do have a free press. And yes, you can say that stuff. But it's still these things are insensitive and really, really stupid.
PAVLICH: Richard, Dana would say you don't have to tweet everything that comes into your head.
FOWLER: I think that's absolutely right. These folks are wrong, absolutely wrong. I didn't agree with us going to Afghanistan. I didn't agree with us staying in Afghanistan. I agree with the withdrawal. I think Biden's team did a terrible job of getting us out there.
But when it comes to our vets, when it comes to our Gold Star families, they deserve our gratitude. They deserve our praise. And when they are morning, we should be morning with them, period, point-blank, end of story.
PAVLICH: Great. All right, the darkest day in Biden's presidency how the White House -- how do they move forward? We have that up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GUTFELD: Welcome back. So, where does Joe Biden go from here? Yesterday's attack shows there are real consequences for Biden blundering his way through the presidency. Politico summed it up yesterday saying it was, "The darkest day of Joe Biden's Presidency."
Kennedy, the upside of this is that it's -- his presidency is still young.
MONTGOMERY: If it's the only thing young about Joe Biden.
GUTFELD: Yes.
MONTGOMERY: Well, first of all, you have the image of people clinging to the airplane and falling off. And then yesterday, the images that we couldn't show on TV, they -- you almost can't watch them. They're so bad. So, I can't imagine what happens to his presidency if it gets worse. This is -- this is so awful. And yes, Kamala Harris, in the words of Nikki Haley, would be 10 times worse.
GUTFELD: Yes. Is that --- I mean, Jesse, the Democrats are kind of screwed either way. They don't have a Mike Pence in case something goes bad.
WATTERS: I don't see that happening. But the best-case scenario for Joe is that no more terror attacks. He gets everybody out and he stages daring rescue missions to bring back stranded Americans. We'd all appreciate that.
Worst case scenario, another casualty we sustain at the airport, stranded Americans that do foreigners on cable TV throughout the fall, Civil War as we saw, they bring back Sharia law, atrocities on tape that go feed out all over the world, and then, God forbid, an asylum seeker comes back and blow something up in the homeland.
All of that is possible right now, but Biden -- he -- Biden is going to pivot back to COVID real soon when school gets back into session. He's going to start hitting DeSantis, and he's going to get his infrastructure thing done. So, he's going to try to turn the page here.
GUTFELD: Yes. The other thing that he didn't mention his hostages, which is that thing that really, really worries me because -- Richard, you -- what would you -- if you were in the White House, what would you suggest as advice to President Biden?
FOWLER: Oh, I think the more information you give the American people, the better. I was having a conversation with the producers today. And they were saying, all you're seeing is briefings. And I'm like, and this is the right thing at this point. He mangled us getting out. And now, what the American people now need more than ever is reassurance. When the State Department is briefing, when the Pentagon is briefing twice, when you hear -- see the president every day or every other day briefing the American people, they might not have all the information, but they have some information, and that reassures the American people that they were trying to get ahead of it.
We made a mistake at the beginning and we're working our way to try to fix it. While not perfect, we're getting there. And I think that's what they're trying to do now, which is a good step in the right direction.
GUTFELD: I think -- Katie, one of the problems with Joe Biden is that he's clinging to the sunk cost and the bad decision. He can't reverse it.
PAVLICH: He can't reverse this. And what has happened over the past two weeks which culminate into a catastrophe yesterday is that this is not an isolated event that's just going to go away because this is not just about Afghanistan, this is now about Islamic terror recruitment. This is about now the question of whether President Joe Biden can protect the United States of America from Islamic terrorism. This is now -- our enemies are watching this.
Some of the same people who were on the team, who were in charge of the Afghanistan pull-out, are now in charge of negotiating the Iran Nuclear Agreement. China is also building up their nuclear arsenal and Russia is still launching cyberattacks on our critical infrastructure which Joe Biden gave him a list -- a list much like we apparently gave a list to the Taliban with all of our interpreters, and Americans were still stranded in the country.
So, this is not just about Afghanistan and leaving Afghanistan, this is a broader problem of having no deterrence, and our enemies understanding that Joe Biden is incredibly weak. And based on how he handled this and hanging out to the sunk cost, is he really going to be able to stand up to other countries that have things like ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons?
GUTFELD: It's so funny. It's a good -- he has a thing for lists. He gives a list to the Taliban. He's got a list --
PAVLICH: He's like, don't bomb these -- don't attack these things.
GUTFELD: Don't attack these things.
PAVLICH: I mean, it's terrible.
GUTFELD: I mean, he's got a list of the reporters that are given to him. Everybody has given him a list and then he hands the list. All right, "ONE MORE THING" is up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WATTERS: It's time now for "ONE MORE THING." Katie P.
PAVLICH: OK, so, September is Suicide Prevention Month. It's still August but we're getting started early, especially in light of the last two weeks events. So, the Boot Campaign which is a veteran organization is seeking to destigmatize mental health care by spreading simple and powerful messages like You Matter.
Boot Campaign encourages everyone to strive to recognize the signs -- the signs of mental health struggles in others and be proactive in helping those who are suffering in silence. That of course is our very own Johnny "Joey" Jones, a Marine who lost both of his legs in Afghanistan and he's part of the Boot Campaign and the You Matter campaign.
They need some financial support. So, if you want to help continue with their life-improving programs, you can make donations to the Web site at bootcampaign.org/youmatter.
WATTERS: How I Save the World still hanging around on the New York Times bestseller list seven weeks in a row. Who would have thunk? Richard has read it six times.
FOWLER: Yes, right.
WATTERS: Tonight, I'm hosting "FOX NEWS PRIMETIME" at 7:00, so check me out there. No guests, just me the whole night. And then, you're going to see me again on Saturday live. We're going to be covering Afghanistan at 8:00. Greg?
GUTFELD: All right, tonight, I was off last night for the breaking news and -- but tonight, we're going to be back and it's a great show. Tom Shilue, Joe DeVito, Joe Mackey, Kat Timpf, me. We're going to be talking about the usual stuff. And let's do this because we need it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GUTFELD: Animals are great. Animals are great. Animals are great.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUTFELD: A brief -- a brief respite or respite -- respite? OK, let's do that. You know, I just came up with a new swear word. Puppy cock. Look at this, puppy cock. You got a rooster and a puppy. A puppy riding a rooster, puppy cock.
WATTERS: Really cute.
GUTFELD: That's puppy cock, I say. I'm going to say that all day.
PAVLICH: That's the nicest rooster I've ever seen.
GUTFELD: Yes, there you go. I'm done now.
WATTERS: They're really cute. Richard.
FOWLER: So, I tried to buy your book and then this happened to me. You know, if you live in an urban area, it happens quite a bit. Somebody stole -- somebody stole my Amazon package, Jesse. So, that's where your book is. But this is actually a black bear in Connecticut who was caught on home camera stealing somebody's Amazon package. You know, the packets contain toilet paper and Jesse's book in there.
PAVLICH: It's worth a lot of money.
FOWLER: And yes, I thought it'd be a great way to end what's a tough --
WATTERS: It's funny because a lot of people are saying are using my book as toilet paper.
FOWLER: Same difference.
WATTERS: Kennedy.
MONTGOMERY: Well, everyone loves a big Wienermobile. And Lyft has teamed up with Oscar Meyer Wiener. They're sending their five-star drivers to big cities like New York, Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles. So, if you call a Lyft, you might get a Winnermobiel. They've got Weenie whistles, they've got hats, hotdog masks, and they will give you a ride. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to be using Lyft constantly just to see if I can get a ride on the giant Wienermobile.
WATTERS: What do you think would happen if the Wienermobile ran over the poppycock?
PA: Why would you even say that?
GUTFELD: You'll have a chicken sandwich.
WATTERS: A chicken sandwich.
PAVLICH: That's terrible.
WATTERS: That's what would happen, a chicken sandwich.
PAVLICH: That is a very sad thing to think about. What if "FOX AND FRIENDS" bringing the Wienermobile to Fox Square, I want to know.
MONTGOMERY: Oh yes.
PAVLICH: That sounds like a great idea.
WATTERS: Hegseth would look good in a Wienermobile.
FOWLER: I guess he needs to call a Lyft first.
PAVLICH: Yes. He does have to call a Lyft first.
WATTERS: Hegseth, I love you. That's it for us. "SPECIAL REPORT" we're not going to talk about. We're just not. We're going to see you here on Monday. I love you, Bret.
Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, 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 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox