FBI manhunt continues for Brian Laundrie as Petito family speaks out
Fox News contributor Ted Williams discusses the search in Florida's Carlton Reserve on 'Your World'
This is a rush transcript from "Your World" September 28, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. MARK MILLEY, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: We should keep a steady state of 2, 500. And it could bounce up to 3, 500, maybe something like that, in order to move toward a negotiated, gated solution.
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Do you share that assessment?
GEN. FRANK MCKENZIE, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: Senator, I do share that assessment.
COTTON: Did these officers' and General Miller's recommendations get to the president personally?
LLOYD AUSTIN, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Their input was received by the president and considered by the president.
MILLEY: The president doesn't have to agree with that advice. He doesn't have to make those decisions just because we're generals.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEIL CAVUTO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: All right, so someone misrepresented something when it came to the military advisers telling the president that the better part of valor would be to keep troops in Afghanistan, rather than take them all out and suffer the consequences.
At the time, when the president was talking to George Stephanopoulos at ABC, he disputed this talk that military advisers told him to keep troops there, but the military advisers, as you just heard, said they did indeed throw that out at the president.
And, as the commander in chief, he was free to reject it, which he did. The confusion abounds.
Welcome, everybody. I'm Neil Cavuto. And this is "Your World." And what to make of our top military brass explaining the military debacle that ended up being our departure, more like dramatic retreat from Afghanistan.
So many things we really aren't getting a clear indication of, save this, confusion at the highest levels, all the way up to the commander in chief himself.
The latest right now from Jennifer Griffin at the Pentagon -- Jennifer.
JENNIFER GRIFFIN, FOX NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Neil, what came out loud and clear from the hearing is that the president's military advisers did not advise pulling all U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, suggesting that the president made the decision to withdraw in spite of the recommendations of his top military advisers.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCKENZIE: I recommended that we maintain 2, 500 troops in Afghanistan. And I also recommended earlier in the fall of 2020 that we maintain 4, 500 at that time. Those were my personal views.
I also have a view that the withdrawal of those forces would lead inevitably to the collapse of the Afghan military forces and eventually the Afghan government.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRIFFIN: That is not what President Biden told ABC in an interview on August 19, four days after Kabul fell.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS: So, no one told -- your military advisers not tell you, no, we should just keep 2, 500 troops, it's been a stable situation for the last several years, we can do that, we can continue to do that?
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, no one said that to me that I can recall.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRIFFIN: All three witnesses today said that their recommendations, as well as those of General Scott Miller, the last U.S. commander in Afghanistan, made it to President Biden.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AUSTIN: All of the parties had an opportunity to provide input, and that input was received.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRIFFIN: White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki attempted to clarify.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He made clear, Secretary Austin specifically said, if you stay there at a force posture of 2, 500, certainly, you would be in a fight with the Taliban. And you would have to reinforce.
So what should everybody take from that? There was a range of viewpoints.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRIFFIN: Psaki went on to say that the president did not think that, even if his commanders recommended 2, 500 troops, that would be the final recommendation. He assumed the numbers would rise and the U.S. would be back in a war with the Taliban if the U.S. stayed -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Jennifer Griffin.
Thank you, Jennifer.
To Aishah Hasnie right now on the other development here. How many Americans are still left in Afghanistan? That going thinking is around 100. but how much and how far are we going to try to get them out of there?
Aishah, what are you hearing?
AISHAH HASNIE, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Neil. Well, that's exactly right.
We finally got that testimony earlier this afternoon from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. He said that there are less than 100 Americans -- and here's the key part of this -- who are ready to depart and leave Afghanistan.
Of course, you have heard some -- from some other lawmakers that are that are upset about the way they phrase this, because there might be others that maybe can't leave because their relatives can't come with them, their wives, their children, their parents, things like that.
But really not a lot of details still, Neil, about how to get Americans and SIV applicants and green card holders out, except to say that the department -- the State Department is leading on this. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AUSTIN: The numbers fluctuate daily, and because more people come to light as time -- time goes by and they see opportunities to safely leave. And so this has been a dynamic process. But, again, we will stay focused on this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HASNIE: Now, as you know, Neil, thousands of Afghans were evacuated during a botched pullout. Shockingly, though, DHS Secretary Mayorkas revealed recently only 3 percent of those evacuees were actually SIV holders.
Now, we're also hearing from families here in the U.S. who are complaining of one-sided communication with the government as they try to get their relatives out. And House Foreign Affairs Ranking Member Michael McCaul tells us that he's been contacted by several active Texas service members who have family and friends who are still stuck in that country.
In fact, he sent a letter to the president asking for a detailed plan. And nearly a month later, Neil, still no response.
And I want to just bring up this quick note too. Our Trey Yingst is reporting that there is currently a plane on the runway in Kabul preparing the take off here in the next hour or so; 127 U.S. legal permanent residents and citizens are on board.
But, again, Neil, just to underline it, there was a lot of frustration, not only from Republicans, but from the Democrats as well, in terms of just not getting a lot of information. In fact, Senator Blumenthal said that these people have a target on their backs. He's actually calling now for the appointment of an evacuation czar.
He says he's talked to several different departments, including the White House, about this. He wants someone to take lead, to take charge in getting these people out -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Yes, Aishah, to your point, I mean, there were a lot of questions back and forth on the fate of those 100 Americans, but the thousands of others who worked with us in Afghanistan still stuck there.
HASNIE: Right.
CAVUTO: The generals really didn't seem to have an immediate answer on that. And that's a bit worrisome.
All right, Aishah, thank you very much, Aishah Hasnie on this.
HASNIE: That's right. And...
CAVUTO: Go -- finish that thought, Aishah, I apologize.
HASNIE: No, you're fine.
I was just going to mention -- and somebody that I know personally, myself, who was an SIV, who has a brother still in the country with his family, they're not getting any answers either. They're one of the families out there that are complaining that they're reaching out to the DOD, they're reaching out to try to find out how to bring him here. And they're still not hearing anything yet -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Yes. And that's a little disturbing, to put it mildly.
Aishah, thank you very much, Aishah Hasnie at the Capitol.
Want to go right now to William Jerry Boykin. Of course, you know him, a familiar repeated guest on this show, because we just admire him so much. He's a retired American lieutenant general who was the U.S. deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence back under President George W. Bush.
I should point out -- he never does -- but to add to his gravitas, this guy's got a Purple Heart, Bronze Star medal, Legion of Merit, Humanitarian Service Medal, Air Medal, more medals than you can shake a stick at. And he never says word one about any of that.
General, if that were me, I'd be broadcasting it everywhere. But it's very good to have you, sir. Thank you for joining us.
LT. GEN. JERRY BOYKIN (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Thanks for having me on, Neil.
CAVUTO: All right, so let's -- you had a chance to listen to the generals, the defense secretary today. They were they were kind of caught in a position here of having to say, well, we did tell the commander in chief that getting -- drawing down our troops to zero was not a good idea.
They were -- they also mentioned, as commander in chief, he is free to override them, which he is. But the president himself said that this never happened when George Stephanopoulos was interviewing him. So what did you make of that?
BOYKIN: Yes, I think what we got out of this hearing today, one big takeaway was that the responsibility for this whole thing lies squarely on the shoulders of the president.
Now, he said he didn't recall those recommendations. In fact, he kind of insinuated that there was sort of a unanimous opinion on this. But that's very frightening too, if he doesn't recall, because, clearly, the generals, the secretary of defense, and even the secretary of state recommended against what they did, recommended against not only the pullout, which they were advocating for 2, 500 to maybe as much as 4,000, to be left behind for -- at least for some indefinite period.
But, also, the methodology that was used for the evacuation, closing Bagram, leaving all military equipment there, and then trying to secure an airfield like Kabul, they recommended against that. And if he doesn't recall that, that is also problematic, and that really concerns me.
CAVUTO: Yes, either option is a little problematic, isn't it?
To your point, I'm just wondering now where the generals go forward. I mean, there's this separate report that General Milley has talked to the Russians. Maybe there's interest on the part of Vladimir Putin to let us use any one of a number of bases that the Russians have in the region. No firm no response yet.
But these talks continue, necessitated by our departure from Afghanistan. What did you make of all that?
BOYKIN: Yes, I don't have much confidence that the Russians are going to give us much space over there in terms of being able to operate out of Uzbekistan, for example.
Remember, we staged out of Uzbekistan right at the beginning 22 -- or 20 years ago, and the Uzbeks kicked us out. They kicked us out about three years into it because of the Russians. So, I'm not sure that they want us back in Central Asia in any capacity.
But if they do, it will be a -- if they let us back in, I think it will be a good military coup for -- I mean, diplomatic coup for our State Department, if they can convince the Russians to let us come in and set up operations, even if it's only collection operations, and not kinetic operations.
CAVUTO: For the Russians, it's a P.R. coup as well, is it not?
BOYKIN: It is indeed. And don't think they aren't considering that as they put all the factors together here.
CAVUTO: Do you think they're also considering we will do it if some of these sanctions you have had on it since Ukraine and all of that start disappearing?
BOYKIN: Oh, they will want something for it, yes. I don't think there's any questions about that.
And I think that, in spite of what people may think, I think these sanctions have really hurt the Russian -- the Russian economy, just like they have the North Korean economy, for that matter. But I think these sanctions will be an issue. And that's one of the -- probably will be one of the negotiating issues, as we really sit down and get down to business with them about whether we're going to be able to operate our drones, operate some of our other materiel, and even have people on the ground there.
I think that will be a major issue with them.
CAVUTO: All right, and think of those drones without those troops in Afghanistan. Now every drone mission becomes problematic, doesn't it?
General Jerry Boykin, thank you very much. Very good talking to you again, sir.
BOYKIN: Thanks.
CAVUTO: All right, you might notice in the corner your screen, you're not imagining it. That's an actual figure there. The Dow did indeed tumbled today, the Nasdaq bumbling as well.
A lot of this was built on better-than-expected economic news and interest rates backing up because of that news. It gets complicated, but Susan Li, fortunately, is really good at explaining complicated.
What happened, Susan?
SUSAN LI, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, not a good day to look at your 401(k), Neil, so a steep sell-off across financial markets because rates on the 10-year Treasury bond are back up to three-month highs, above 1.5 percent.
So, when rates go up, that means money starts shifting out of stocks and other riskier assets. They chase more guaranteed money on government bonds. It's also indicative that the Federal Reserve is ready to reduce stimulus in the $120 billion in monthly bond purchases.
So the Nasdaq, the S&P 500 had their worst day since at least mid-May. The Dow saw its worst day since just last week, with China Evergrande and that debacle over there. Now, technology usually the most sensitive to moves higher in the 10-year yield.
The five biggest companies in America, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, all seeing steep declines in the session. And while stock markets dropped, oil prices actually went up. So, oil prices are trading at three- year highs on supply disruptions caused by Hurricane Ida.
That actually lifted oil stocks today, like Exxon, Occidental, Chevron and Devon. Americans are also paying more for their homes. The home price index surging by close to 20 percent in July, the fastest pace on record, according to the Case-Shiller report.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: Elevated and will likely remain so in coming months before moderating.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LI: Yes, so higher consumer prices, Neil, at the pump, also for home prices as well, another reason why those 10-year Treasury yields are spiking and also concerns that the Federal Reserve, Jay Powell, might be forced to raise interest rates sooner than anticipated to cool the fattest inflation in 13 years, Neil.
CAVUTO: Well, we did get him to acknowledge today, Jerome Powell, that this inflation thing isn't transitory. We all knew that, saw it ourselves at groceries and stores.
LI: Right.
CAVUTO: And now, apparently, he must have stopped at a grocery store and seen for himself. Oh, it's sticking around.
(LAUGHTER)
CAVUTO: Wild.
LI: Pick up the chicken, yes.
CAVUTO: All right, Susan great job explaining -- yes, right, explaining complicated.
By the way, with the Dow's fall today, it's not only looking like a bad month for all the major averages. The Dow is now underwater on the quarter as well.
More after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: All right, this New York Post cover you see on the extreme left there kind of covers it all, the debt bomb. And I do mean a bomb. We're closing in on $30 trillion in collective red ink here.
We're running at an incredible pace. And they are still considering more spending, in the meantime, trying to juggle that with an imminent government shutdown if they don't do something, and soon, to at least temporarily get past this, a lot easier said than done.
A couple of big things hang in the balance.
Here to put it in perspective, Chad Pergram on Capitol Hill with more.
Hey, Chad.
CHAD PERGRAM, FOX NEWS SENIOR CAPITOL HILL PRODUCER: Good afternoon, Neil.
Well, you know things are getting serious when a senator has a meeting at the White House, leaves, and then is recalled. That's what happened with Democratic Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema today. She was at the White House, left and then went back for another meeting.
Senator Joe Manchin also met at the White House too.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): No commandments made at all, no commitments from that standpoint, just good negotiations and talking about the needs of our country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERGRAM: The social spending bill is on ice. The House won't vote on that bill this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I thought we were on a path. Then there was an intervention, as you know, in the past week or 10 days of saying, well, we can't go there. Hopefully, it will measure -- it will reach the level that we need in order to pass both bills.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERGRAM: We also don't even have a price tag on the social spending bill. It likely is a lot less than $3.5 trillion.
And that's why Pelosi told her members circumstances -- quote -- "necessitated a change, but not in Democratic values."
Also, the GOP just blocked another effort by Democrats to raise the debt limit. The GOP wants Democrats to stuff the debt ceiling increase into their reconciliation package for the social spending bill. It is exempt from filibusters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: It was clear that my caucus will not stand for the irresponsible and dishonest Republican default plan.
Going through reconciliation is risky to the country and is a nonstarter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERGRAM: Schumer says they will move a bill to avert a government shutdown soon. Funding expires in the wee hours of Friday morning -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Chad Pergram, thank you.
Not all Democrats are on board some of this big spending plan.
My next guest, California Congressman Scott Peters, said no when that big spending measure came up in committee. He joins us right now.
Congressman, good to see you. You're part of the House Problem Solvers Caucus as well, where Republicans and Democrats work together to sort of move the ball forward and sort of get off the stump speeches.
So, I commend you for that. But I'm wondering what gave you pause when this was in committee. I assume it still gives you pause now.
REP. SCOTT PETERS (R-CA): Well, thanks for having me, Neil.
I want to say that, very clearly, I am for reconciliation bill. I'm very strongly in favor the bipartisan infrastructure framework we're going to vote on, on Thursday, which is a historic opportunity to invest in bridges, rail, roads, ports, broadband, the grid, everything else, all the things we have been talking about for a long time.
And a trillion dollars is really -- it's really a major investment to give our kids opportunity and to make us competitive with the rest of the world, including China.
I think we have to do more. And I...
CAVUTO: So, you like that.
PETERS: Yes.
CAVUTO: Just to be clear, Congressman, you like that part, the bipartisan package that had 19 Senate Republicans voting for it.
PETERS: Right. Right.
CAVUTO: So, when that comes up Thursday, if it comes up Thursday, you would vote for that.
PETERS: Strongly support it.
CAVUTO: You have your doubts about the bigger -- the bigger plan, right? Explain what bothers you. And what's a figure that you would more favorably embrace.
PETERS: Well, my issue with the bigger plan is basically what Speaker Pelosi just said in your clip just before me, which is, we don't have a plan yet.
We don't know what the Senate is going to authorize. And if we agree that the bill should be fully paid for, which, to their credit, both the president and the speaker have said, we need to know what the number is from the Senate that they're going to support. Is it $2 trillion? Is it 1.5? Is it 1.2?
Whatever it is, send it over to us. And then we, as a House, can figure out how we would prioritize that investment. I do think it's very important. I think there's a lot of things in there related to the climate and to providing opportunity for young people we have -- we have underinvested in that I'd like to support.
But I don't feel like this bill is ready to go. And I think that's what the speaker acknowledged in the clip you just said.
CAVUTO: All right, what confuses me sometimes, Congressman, is, I hear from the president that this thing is paid for, but in the same sentence, he goes on to say, but we don't know what's in the final package.
So how can something you don't know be paid for?
(LAUGHTER)
PETERS: That was my -- that was my question, too.
I'm very concerned that it not add to the deficit. I think, frankly, under the Trump years, we racked up a lot of spending we didn't pay for. That's why we're voting on this debt ceiling, to pay that credit card bill.
I don't want to compound that mistake. And I take the president at his word that we're going to pay for this. But before we know what we're going to pay for, we have to understand what revenues the Senate is OK with. And that means talking to Senator Sinema and Senator Manchin about what their top line is.
And I'm very happy to hear that they're talking to Senator Sinema today in a really serious way. I think that's -- it's been too long for them to get to that, but they're there. They're there today. Maybe we will find out some news, because we're going to do a trillion dollars in hard infrastructure. We're going to do another significant investment in our children's future.
That'd be pretty -- pretty -- two pretty big, historic investments that I think we could all be proud of, including Republicans who helped create this infrastructure plan.
CAVUTO: You know, many say it's all borne by business and the wealthy.
And some are now looking at the numbers and saying, actually, it's not just going to be the wealthy. Very creative when it comes to increasing taxes, Congressman, but not so great when it comes to paring spending.
As a Democrat who is trying to work with Republicans and solve these problems, as you are with the Problem Solvers Caucus, does that bother you, that this is all on the wealthy and business to pay, and we don't know what that final payment will be?
PETERS: Well, you talk about paring spending.
I would just say that, under President Trump, we reached a point where we were borrowing nearly a trillion dollars a year every year just to pay our expenses.
CAVUTO: No, this is a bipartisan rant.
PETERS: OK.
CAVUTO: Any viewer of this show, Congressman, knows this has been a bipartisan rant of mine, that we keep adding debt under Republican and Democratic presidents alike...
PETERS: No, I understand.
(CROSSTALK)
CAVUTO: ... Republican and Democratic Congresses.
PETERS: Yes.
CAVUTO: And you're right to point the finger at that all types of administrations.
But it goes on unaddressed.
PETERS: Well, and I was an opponent, frankly, of the Trump tax proposal, because I thought it did skew a little bit, in a healthy economy, toward giving tax rebates and tax breaks to people who didn't need it.
So, I think supporting tax compliance, I think supporting a minimum tax around the world for companies to do not get away with paying zero, those are the kinds of things that I think we can agree on. Let's see what the Senate wants to suggest to us in addition to that...
CAVUTO: Yes.
PETERS: ... that might be able to fund some of these major investments that we all, as Democrats, want to accomplish.
CAVUTO: But are you worried -- I understand where you're coming from, Congressman, but are you worried, back then, when -- before Donald Trump's tax cuts, the top rate was 39.6 percent, that, when all is said and done in this package, the top rate could be in the mid-40s, and, for some in very high-tax states, like your own, it could be approaching 55 to 60 percent.
PETERS: I am concerned about that.
That's why, before we go pretending like we're going to have these academic tax increases in the House, I'd like to know what the Senate's really serious about, . That's really what the number is going to come from.
CAVUTO: OK.
PETERS: And let's see what they come up with.
I think that, if you turn to Senator Sinema and Senator Manchin, they're going to be pretty judicious and conservative about what they allow. And then we will not be talking sort of in theoretical ways about what tax increases are going to happen or not.
And I think, also, let's commit to making sure that we pay for these investments. The bipartisan infrastructure framework is a good start. I think that's really great. And it's a historic investment in all these things we have been talking about for years.
When I was first in Congress, we talked about $300 billion. A trillion dollars would have been unheard of.
(CROSSTALK)
CAVUTO: No, you're right.
PETERS: And then, with President Trump, we had a lot of infrastructure weeks, but no progress.
CAVUTO: Right.
PETERS: Let's get that done. And then let's figure out what else we can do with the money that we have.
CAVUTO: OK, we will watch it closely.
Congressman, thank you very, very much, Scott Peters of California.
PETERS: Thanks, Neil.
CAVUTO: He talked about some of those tax hikes they're considering. They go far and wide and much further and much wider than just the wealthy.
We will explain after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: Four hundred thousand Americans got a booster shot this week, including the president of the United States and Mitch McConnell. They might not agree on everything, but when it comes to this booster, they're certainly on board.
Why are so many Americans not?
After this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: All right, the president makes clear that $3.5 trillion human infrastructure plan, whatever you want to call it, don't worry about paying for it. It's just going to be the rich, just those earning over 40 grand a year.
But our Hillary Vaughn is sort of like that old version of Peter Falk in the "Columbo" series. She's scratching her head. She says, wait a minute, these figures don't add up. She's way too young to remember Columbo, but I love that.
(LAUGHTER)
CAVUTO: But you are already uncovering some interesting items here, that this spreads far, far beyond just the rich, right?
HILLARY VAUGHN, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Neil, that's exactly right.
And that is -- there's new analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation that is backing up what Republicans have been warning about in Congress, that the White House and the president is not being honest when they say they're going to stand by their promise to not raise taxes on anyone making under $400,000 a year, but just on the very tippy top.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: Do you guys acknowledge the sort of broader truth that it's not -- that it does cost somebody, right, that the cost of the investments that the president wants to make don't simply -- they're not simply a free lunch?
PSAKI: A lot of high income net -- or high-income individuals pay lower tax rates than nurses and teachers. Nobody thinks that's fair. Yes, they -- we're asking them to pay more, yes. So it will cost them more.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUGHN: But new analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation says if the tax hikes passed out of the House Ways and Means Committee are the final pay-fors for this reconciliation package, more than a third of Americans making less than $200,000 a year would pay more in taxes, including people making only $10,000 a year.
Also, the analysis says more than half of people making between $200,000 and $500,000 would also see their taxes go up. So that's a lot of taxpayers making under $400,000 a year that President Biden has promised to protect from higher taxes.
But the White House is disagreeing with the JCT's analysis. There is some analysis to back up the White House has claimed that some taxes are getting cut from the middle class. The Tax Policy Center has their own analysis out today.
They put it like this: "The bill's individual income, payroll and estate tax provisions alone would cut taxes on average for households. However, including all major provisions, including corporate income and excise tax increases, about 58 of all households would pay more."
So, Neil, today, the White House is agreeing there is no such thing as a free lunch, but they're disagreeing over who at the end of the day, at the end of the meal, is going to pick up the tab -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Hmm, very interesting. Hillary, thank you for that, Hillary Vaughn on that.
And, by the way, we're just getting this in from Bernie Sanders, who's not too keen at the go-ahead vote scheduled for Thursday on the infrastructure- only package, the $1 trillion or so bipartisan effort, without it being attached to far bigger spending commitments.
"Let's be crystal clear," he says. "If the bipartisan infrastructure a bill is passed on its own on Thursday, this will be in violation of the agreement that was reached within the Democratic Caucus. More importantly, it will end all leverage that we have to pass our reconciliation bill. That means there will be no serious effort to address the long-neglected crises facing working families in our country. I strongly urge my House colleagues to vote against the bipartisan infrastructure bill until Congress passes a strong reconciliation bill."
That seems very, very unlikely. What seems likely now is, they might not get any of this done.
Charlie Gasparino on the impact of all of this.
Charlie, what are you hearing?
CHARLIE GASPARINO, FOX NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, I'm hearing it's a mess. No one -- this is a day-to-day thing, Neil. I don't think anybody can really...
CAVUTO: Absolutely.
GASPARINO: I mean, listen, my sources are Wall Street -- Wall Street executives who have access to Congress through their lobbyists.
And I think if you were going to game plan it, it would be, they have to give Biden something. That's what I keep hearing from every C Suite executive I speak to. Biden has to get something. It can't be a strikeout here on any -- on everything. If he has a complete strikeout, the -- given what happened in Afghanistan, what's going on at the border and some of the other issues, the Biden administration will be on a protracted losing streak.
And going into the midterms, that is not good. So you need a victory. The easiest path to victory, obviously, is the thinner bill, right? Just pass the infrastructure thing and ignore Bernie Sanders.
But here's the thing with the Democrats. Everybody's talking about the implosion in the Republican Party, how you got the never-Trumpers vs. the Trumpers, and it's all this infighting, which there's some of that there. I don't think people -- the mainstream media does not appreciate just how much infighting there is in the Democratic Party -- in the Democratic sort of caucus, I guess, is the best way to put it.
You have moderates and the lefties like Sanders and AOC at each other's throats all the time. You have Biden basically giving into the lefties a lot, but now getting tremendous pushback from Joe Manchin, Sinema, and a lot of other more moderate members of Congress.
And they just have a -- and they -- and you know their majorities are almost non existent. I mean, in the Senate, the only -- it's a 50/50 with Kamala Harris as the tiebreaker. And in the House, it's a six-vote margin, I believe. So, this is really, really interesting inside the Democratic Party, the crack-up that's going on.
And what I can't understand is this. Most Republicans favor Donald Trump. So, Trumpism, I understand why that is -- why that is sort of popular within the Republican Party. What I can't understand is, why -- does Bernie Sanders and AOC represent the majority of Democrats?
I mean, I don't think that's the case, yet the tail wags the dog with this party in a big way, because I guess they're on Twitter and social media and they mobilize.
CAVUTO: Right.
GASPARINO: And they get all the media attention.
CAVUTO: Well, like just now, like just now.
GASPARINO: Yes. Yes.
CAVUTO: All right, my friend, Charlie Gasparino, thank you very, very much.
Again, Bernie Sanders saying right now do not vote on this bipartisan infrastructure package until the other thing is done, the bigger thing is done. And the bigger thing is not done. And they're risking a lot voting for this package right now, the roads and bridges and only package, the lean, mean $1 trillion package.
That's what was scheduled to go on Thursday. Now Bernie Sanders would say, no. No, no, no.
We will have more after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: With all the media's attention on Capitol Hill today, you might have missed the fact that the family of Gabby Petito held a news conference.
Bohemia, New York, is where you will find our Laura Ingle with the latest on that -- Laura.
LAURA INGLE, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Neil.
Well, this was the first time that Gabby Petito's parents and stepparents held a joint news conference all together, all four wanting to thank the public, not only for their support, but for the tips to help them find Gabby.
And now they want to keep the focus on remembering her by announcing and formally announcing the Gabby Petito Foundation, which is helping other families of missing children.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIM SCHMIDT, STEPFATHER OF GABBY PETITO: The tragedy with losing Gabby, that -- in the future, that some good can come out of it, that we can help other people that may be in a similar situation.
JOSEPH PETITO, FATHER OF GABBY PETITO: We need positive stuff to come from the tragedy that happened. All right? We can't let her name be taken in vain. We need positive stuff.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGLE: Petito's family were asked many questions today about her relationship with her missing boyfriend, Brian Laundrie, who still remains a person of interest in this case, and who hasn't been seen for at least two weeks.
I asked the family if they could tell us anything about where they think Laundrie could be or if they know anything about his parents' knowledge of where he is. Their lawyer did not mince words.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICHARD STAFFORD, ATTORNEY FOR FAMILY OF GABBY PETITO: The Laundries did not help us find Gabby. They are sure as not going to help us find Brian.
For Brian, we're asking you to turn yourself in to the FBI or the nearest law enforcement agency.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGLE: Joe and Tara Petito and Jim and Nicole Schmidt showing us their new matching tattoos. They all got them last night with the words "Let it be," the same words in the same font that Gabby Petito had on her arm, as a tribute to her and a way to keep her memory alive.
And we also learned today, Neil, during this press conference that once the FBI releases her remains that are still in Wyoming, all four will be going to that state to bring her back here to Long Island, her home -- Neil.
CAVUTO: Laura, thank you for that, Laura Ingle in Bohemia, New York.
To Ted Williams right now, FOX News contributor, former D.C. homicide detective.
Ted, where is Laundrie? I mean, they can't find the guy. They searched this park. Now they're even pulling back. They can't find him. What do you think?
TED WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, Neil, this is sort of like a needle in the haystack.
They had apparently gotten a tip or some information that Brian may very well have been in that park. They have spent over a million dollars searching that park. And, to date, they have come up with nothing.
Again, it's a mystery as to whether he was ever in that park. Neil, this is a swamp. And this is a swamp where it's very difficult to survive because you have got mosquitoes, you have got alligators, you got snakes, you got all sorts of animals out there.
And if he was out there at night, he would have to probably start a fire. And they have got drones and other materials in the air looking for him. So, it's a needle in the haystack, Neil.
CAVUTO: You know, Ted, I was wondering, what if they never find him? What if he's dead? What if he will never -- we will never know how to patch and put this case together or will we?
WILLIAMS: Neil, you're absolutely right.
There are always a possibility under these circumstances of going -- being missing that he could very well be dead. But the authorities are looking for him, and they have that obligation to try to run down each and every lead that they possibly can to try to find him at this stage, Neil.
CAVUTO: You know, Ted, the lawyer for Gabby Petito's family was apparently very skeptical as to whether Laundrie's family would help in this FBI search. Do you agree with that?
WILLIAMS: Yes, and I do agree.
Neil, Gabby Petito lived in the home of the Laundries. And you would have anticipated that, when their son came back across the country all alone, that they would have had a lot of questions. And perhaps they did have a lot of questions.
And the big question right now, Neil, is, have the family helped to hide this man? At one time, or he was considered a missing person. So, if they tried to help to hide him as a missing person, there may not be any criminal jeopardy to the family members.
But if they try to help him after now there has been a warrant -- he's a fugitive from justice as a result of a warrant from Wyoming. And if they try to help him now, they very much can be accessories after the fact.
CAVUTO: Ted Williams, we will watch very, very closely. Thank you, Ted, very, very much.
In the meantime, in our next segment, we're going to take a look at what's happening at the border. You know it's a mess, but it's got to be a real mess for no less than Barack Obama to say it's unsustainable, which he did say -- after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: All right, well, you know things are bad at the border when, maybe as a warning, President Obama speaks out, calling the situation there unsustainable.
Let's go to Jacqui Heinrich on the significance of all of that -- Jacqui.
JACQUI HEINRICH, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hey there, Neil. Good afternoon to you.
Well, former President Obama defended his V.P.'s handling of the border crisis, passing blame to the GOP for blocking comprehensive immigration reform. But cut from that interview and appearing only in the article online was President Obama saying -- quote -- "We're a nation-state. We have borders. The idea that we can just have open borders is something that, as a practical matter, is unsustainable."
Little reaction from the Biden White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: Biden agree with President Obama that open borders is unsustainable?
PSAKI: We don't have open borders. So, yes, he agrees.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEINRICH: Republicans say the numbers speak for themselves.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Largest month on record for illegal crossings until April. April was the largest month until May, May until June, June until July, when 212,000 illegal migrants' encounters on our border.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEINRICH: As up to 20,000 more migrants are now making their way from Southern Mexico up to the U.S. border, the White House says it's using paid media to tell migrants their message not to come.
They're also continuing to claim that the thousands that have been released into the U.S. waiting for their claims to be heard won't be here long.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PSAKI: It is not accurate to suggest or for anyone who is contemplating coming to the border to think that they're going to come to the border and be allowed to stay long term in the United States.
QUESTION: Taking two-and-a-half years on average. I mean, to people living in conditions that they're trying to flee, that is long-term.
PSAKI: Well, I would say first that we are still applying Title 42. We are still sending people away at the border.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HEINRICH: Meantime, the White House continues to receive incoming fire from fellow Democrats, Beto O'Rourke writing in an op-ed that the Biden administration relied on -- quote -- "a cynical Trump era policy," Title 42, to expel migrants in a way that's antithetical to American values, Neil.
CAVUTO: Jacqui Heinrich at the White House.
Thank you, Jacqui.
In the meantime, 400,000 Americans have already gotten that booster shot. Why millions more of the unvaccinated never will now because of that -- after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAVUTO: All right, President Biden getting his COVID booster shot over the weekend. So did Mitch McConnell. So they agree on the need for boosters of those of a certain population set.
But according to a Kaiser survey, the confusion over the booster just reinforces the unvaccinated population to stay, well, unvaccinated.
Dr. Kevin Campbell joins us right now of K Roc Consulting, the president and CEO, cardiologist by training.
So, Doc, I'm not too surprised by that. But that's just what worries you, right, that people will read into this, eh, forget it, I don't need it, because they can't even agree on the booster.
DR. KEVIN CAMPBELL, CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, PACEMATE: You know, I think that's been the biggest failure of the White House with the vaccination rollout. There's been no clear message, been lots of mixed messaging.
You have got the president getting ahead of the booster data, which he said he'd never do. And then you have the CDC contradicting what the advisory committee said. So I think there's lots of mixed messaging.
I think, rather than focus on boosters, we need to focus on getting more people vaccinated. This pandemic is not going to end until we have more vaccinated Americans.
CAVUTO: You know, Doctor, some of the unvaccinated say I'm not getting this booster, if I ever got vaccination in the first place, because, obviously, the vaccination that sort of wears out on and why should I bother?
What do you tell them?
CAMPBELL: You know, I think that the vaccine has been proven to be safe and effective.
There is some waning immunity over time, and that's why the booster is necessary. That's also why the data suggests that those over 65, those with chronic medical conditions and things like heart disease, cancer, immunosuppression, should probably get that booster.
But, all in all, there's nothing about the booster that says that the vaccine doesn't work.
CAVUTO: Do you tell your heart patients to get it, Doctor?
CAMPBELL: Absolutely.
I think anyone with coronary, artery disease, heart patients, whether they have pacemakers, defibrillators or valve surgery, it doesn't matter, they need this booster. They're vulnerable. They often have other comorbidities, like diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, that can make them very vulnerable to COVID.
So, yes, I will be getting one as a health care worker as well.
CAVUTO: So let's say, hypothetically, even if they're years out from heart surgery, what do you say?
CAMPBELL: I think you absolutely -- if you have a history of heart disease, you need to get the booster.
I think that front-line health care workers probably need to get it. And I certainly think anyone 65 and older with a chronic condition should definitely get it.
CAVUTO: What about for kids, not the booster, but the vaccine, 5 and up to 11?
CAMPBELL: So, what I'm hearing about that data right now is, I think that this vaccine is very safe and effective. They have got the dosing right.
The only reason it's not been approved yet is, the FDA is a very slow process.
CAVUTO: Got it.
CAMPBELL: They sent some more data today, as I understand it.
I am perplexed as to why the White House has not appointed a full-time chief of the FDA in the middle of a pandemic, because that's the leadership we need right now.
CAVUTO: All right, I hear you. Dr. Campbell, thank you.
Dr. Kevin Campbell following all of that.
Here comes "The Five."
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