♪ john: the global response and saying, and6ers are we are all about paris, and let's get the news from our colleague mark crumpton. john, thank you very much. president obama is at the g-20, showing solidarity -- john kerry is showing support.

secretary kerry: these terrorists have declared war against all civilization. secretary kerry arrived in the french capital under unusual security, and they were not allowed to report about his planned visit. this for airst like visit to a european capital, and some are saying they will no longer accept syrian refugees, arkansas, of alabama, florida, and north carolina, although it is not clear how they would stop the refugees from settling in their dates. states, and advising vigilance in the wake of the paris attacks, and a new video reportedly posted today by the islamic state. a fighter vowed to attack they shouldnd said

take all precautions including taking the secure underground tunnels between buildings. you can get all of this information on the new bloomberg.com. i am mark crumpton. john kwan bring in another mark. my colleague. are swirling around what the global response will be for the attacks, including more call for troops in iraq and syria. the president's frustration showed through. president obama: there had been shouldho suggested we put large numbers of u.s. troops minde ground, and keep in that we have the finest military in the world, and we have the finest military mines in the world, and i have been meeting

with them intensively for years now, discussing the various options, and it is not just my view but the view of my closest military and civilian advisers that that would be a mistake. off and have pop opinions about what they think they would do. present a specific plan. if they think that somehow their than theare better chairman of my joint chiefs of staff and the folks who are actually on the ground, i went to meet them. and we can have that debate. , why is therk president's standing pact with his existing strategy, and why do you think he seems as frustrated as he dies? : he had that extraordinary

prescott prince, and if you have not seen it, it was extraordinary. you should go and see it. he said they clearly do not have a plan that would work better than what he is doing, and he is standing pat because where we are right now, he does not think -- nothing the facts has changed. it is tragic what happened in paris, but it does not change anything as far as he is concerned. john: a lot of political grandstanding taking place from all sides, from every angle, people making macho, tough talk about how we have to kill isis and destroy them. i think if it was that easy, i think it is something that even this president, given his relatively restrained approach, would embrace. it is not that easy, and if this discussion now moves to what would be required in terms of troops on the ground, people's

views will so were pretty quick, and i think president obama knows that. mark: what is surprising to me today if he has laid down a lot of markers about staying the course, but there are things that can change that. of thet think opinion public will change, and i think that is what he is basing this on along with the opinions. i think there is rational analysis that may come into play here. john: i think the president is tired of listening to people theicize who are not in position to actually do anything about the problem, but they are criticizing. today to theeech french parliament, french e says they arend at war with isis, and he extended this for three more months. is france going to evoke article five of the nato treaty, which would compel other members to

come to their defense, which would be, including the u.s.. that france would bring the community a long for a more robust operation in syria? will be aainly, there lot of solidarity express. certainly, i think intelligence sharing will increase, but i think the reality is as was written in the new york times making thearp op-ed case that, as tragic as it might sound, france is really the only country in the world for whom the eradication of isis is a top priority. it is the case that everyone would like to see isis go away, but not in the way that france does, and in some ways, france is isolated, and that would make it hard to generate the kind of coordinated, tough military response that some people think is coming.

mark: you cannot build a coalition from a standing start. ofis not clear what kind private conversations have been going on. i have been trying to figure that out all day. itthey evoke article five, is not clear exactly what that means, who would lead that effort, and france come as you say, is isolated, not just in terms of the current posture but in terms of the downsides for other countries who do not have the same emotional need politically to respond the way france needs to. john: i was in france over the weekend, not to cover this story, but over the weekend on my own, and there is no doubt what has changed is the tone and tenor of the french response within france, where after charlie hebdo, there was a different kind of feeling. there is now a lot more fragility, a lot more fear, a lot more sense of the, and on

the international stage, and things are going to change them ethically in that country, and now we have a message to the syrian refugees. you are not entirely welcome here. some states, mostly republican, all announcing intentions to close the door to syrian refugees arriving in their states. the president import americans to act compassionately towards those refugees. president obama also took a direct shot to presidential candidates, suggesting only christian refugees should be accepted into this country. president obama: when i hear political leaders suggesting , a person fleeing from a worn torn country is admitted, when some of those folks themselves come from families

who benefited from protection when they were fleeing political shameful.n, that is that is not american, and so i think it is very important for us right now, particularly those who are in leadership, who have ay those platform and can be heard not to fall into that trap. not to feed that dark impulse inside of us. , a handful of governors say they will take syrian refugees, and house speaker paul ryan says they are looking at it. here is the question. they called for settling 10,000 syrian refugees in this country. how much of a problem do you think it is for this growing list of defiant states to president obama and his policy? mark: this includes a lot of governors, including the

governor of new hampshire, who is a democrat running for u.s. senate. the white house hopes that this cools down, the gases can interfere with the budget process. probably will not interfere with people resettling the refugees. people do not think through this. if people settle in one country, then they can go to any other state that they want. john: i would be calling of the governors of the states. it is not clear if they have the legal authority to do this. this is the worst kind of shameless posturing. i am with president obama and that this is un-american, but it andlso widely impractical potentially not legal, but it is something we have seen play out, and the issue over gitmo. the president knows how difficult it is when you have recalcitrant states. it could be a problem for him, but i think what we want to focus on now is how shameless these politicians are you are

doing this, i think, for political reasons. : on the one hand, we are saying the president is not doing enough to help those that are suffering under the hand of president of.com and thence they we do not have a way to bring them in. suffering under the hand of we doent assad, and then not have a way to bring them in. john: those who are suffering the most in the country. mark: when we come back, a few of the presidential candidates are responding to what is happening in paris and how that can help shape the republican nomination. ♪

since friday, many of the republican presidential candidates have been weighing in, and some have called for more troops on the ground in syria, and others have blamed president obama for what they say is an alleged lack of leadership and we will go through some of those responses now, starting with the two front runners discussing muslims in america. in nevada,carson was and donald trump phoned into "morning joe" to talk about his suspicions about muslims in this country. so, john, let's start with donald trump. he has not done as much as the other candidates, but on "morning joe," he discussed that some other countries looking at this in europe, allegedly, that perhaps you have to consider

doing more surveillance on mosques and maybe shutting down mosques. john: yes, to the extent he has been able to get traction by playing from the very beginning and lot of fears of a lot, about fears of others in america, it is not a surprise to me. i have ise question whether the establishment views about donald trump and ben carson, that both of them will now have a hard time if the policy gets elevated in this race. i am not sure that is true. what we see in the countries where candidates are outside, candidates who are strong men, they sometimes get a lot of traction from moments like this. that could actually help trump, not necessarily carson, because trump is a different kind of candidate.

mark: looking at john kasich, having the experience to fight someone like isis. both men argued that the election is not a time to take a chance on choosing an untested candidate. >> we should have no empathy for our enemies. we should destroy them, played and simple, which means a strategy in the middle east to do just that, and i believe that the american people are anxious for a leader to create a strategy, to go in, settle this, and move on, and get back to fixing things in our own country that are broken. talking about specific action on the intelligence level. we do not need oblasts. we need a plan. this is not about soundbites. , and youeal policy need to understand the implications of all of this to be effective. and then there is senator 10 crews, trying to be an antiestablishment candidate and then saying he under dance. his campaign put out a video

that played the dark edge -- darkest images, and they cut in video of him. >> we stand in solidarity with the people of france, with president hollande, and these horrific terrorists underscore that we are facing an enemy who relentless,ho is who is at war with us, even if our own president does not understand it is at war with us. mark: so, finally, even mitt romney weighed in, and he criticized president obama for not doing what romney thinks is required. >> when you are fighting a war, you say we're going to win. we are going to do whatever it takes, and the president has not been willing to do this, so it is time for us to get serious about this and come together as

nato and get rid of isis. >> would you run in 2016 under any circumstances? >> savanna, i have said it before. i am not running. this is an issue of great consequence, and the fact is, i care about this country. when you run from -- for president, and i did, and you lose, you do not stop caring about the country. we have to change course. this situation is not acceptable. marco: so mitt romney weighing in there, very similar to the other candidates, but, john, back to the topic you raise, which i think is the key one, the conventional wisdom is that their candidates are going to rise up, and particularly ben carson and donald trump are going to have a harder time making the argument that they should be nominated. think one of the things this depends on is how much this issue stays with us, and

literally today having gotten off of a plane from paris, having spent the weekend there, this issue is in the front of my mind as well as everyone's mind in the world, but what we have seen repeatedly is how fast tongs move, and what seemed be seminal issues turn out to be so, and is is going to be the predominant issue we are talking about three weeks from now, three months from now, or is this going to fade away, as appalling as this sounds? the questions i have. it has an impact on what we are talking about, whether the candidates get a search from this or if the in surging -- insurgent candidates get a rush from this. before i, the candidates were going to have to say which one of these nominees is ready to be commander in chief, ready to face off against the democrats on national security. in some respects, i think donald

trump is going to do well, because he is appealing to people who already support him on things like immigration. i think all of the establishment candidates. chris christie, very outspoken. bush is getting a big speech on wednesday at the citadel. marco rubio. all of them, and john kasich, who is giving a speech tomorrow on national security, all of them have the chance to overcome the idea that they have not established a signature profile, and none of them have served in the military. none of them look like a normal person republicans nominate, even mitt romney, who was very fluid on foreign policy when he ran. john pulled this is an easy issue in the republican party because it plays right to the republican base. everyone now is going to want to crack down. to me, the threshold is that these establishment candidates,

and like bush is talking about, we need a real plan of action, so what would their real plan of action be western mark not just do whatever it takes. this is really a war, mr. president. what is your plan? how many boots on the ground? what are you going to say that puts some meat on those declarations? that they actually have credibility and detail and mastery of what they would do in this situation if they were president. marco: i talked to the ben mark: i talked-- to the ben carson manager, and he said they were ready to go toe to toe with the establishment candidates on these issues. john: we will see how that works out for ben carson, i am sure, in the days and weeks ahead. ♪

♪ john: so far, the tenure of hillary clinton as secretary of state has been an asset and a liability, but there is no doubt that her experience dwarfs those of bernie sanders and martin o'malley, her remaining two opponents. is there anyway that hillary clinton does not benefit from these attacks in paris in terms of the democratic nomination fight? unless sanders and o'malley find their place, other than criticizing her, which there was some over the weekend, convincing people they should be commander in chief, i think the crisis will be good for her. they are focused on domestic policy, and i do not think they will find a way to get to that

point. john: one of the things that came out in that debate that you attended over the weekend was the sanders campaign being upset compared to the -- about the questions shifting. an idea of just how uncomfortable they are in that terrain, there is a pacifist wing of the democratic party, but i do not think it is big enough to overcome the weakness that they have compared to the strength that hillary clinton does have, the let's move on to part two, the longer range question. could this week in her against republicans in a general election? mark: yes. i think the president's record is in the balance bridge she not onlyance herself, because she was secretary of state, but because they are both democrats. john: what she is inheriting legacy wise. and at the same time, talking

about foreign policy and national security, she is so much more fluent than any of the other candidates. they can obviously grow, but she has a big start when it comes to talking about these issues with confidence, with authority, and with intellectual dexterity. you do not see that from anyone in the republican field. mark: the national security will be one of the areas where they will opt to fight. can someone find their voice on national security in a way where the party says this would be a great president, this would be a great commander in chief, and can that person come through unscathed or at least not fully dented or they can say, "national security is something "?want to talk about as you said, hillary clinton is knowledgeable and formidable on these topics.

john: there are so many unknowns and known unknowns about what can happen as far as further terror attacks, and god forbid in this country, or anyplace else in the world that can change the contours of the race, so up next, we have a former state department official. and mine,f both mark and the international response. we will be right back for that. ♪

i just had a horrible nightmare. my company's entire network went down, and i was home in bed, unaware. but that would never happen. comcast business monitors my company's network 24 hours a day and calls and e-mails me if something, like this scary storm, takes it offline. so i can rest easy.

what. you don't have a desk bed? don't be left in the dark. get proactive alerts 24/7. comcast business. built for business. tand that's what we're doings to chat xfinity.rself, we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20. it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. mark: welcome back to "with all due respect." i am mark crumpton. officially off-limits

to american troops and employees on their free time, a department wideband applying to all contractors, family members, civilians, and keeps them from going within 30 miles of the french capital. excluding military assigned to diplomatic posts, and the french president says he will ask to extend the state of emergency, increasing police powers and limiting public out the rates. today, they called on the united states and russia to join forces with france in the fight against islamic date, and it was a moment reminiscent of world war ii. after addressing parliament, president hollande led his country in a moment. ♪ and: and you can get these more breaking news on bloomberg.com. john, back to you.

mark.thank you, it is time to bring in the assistant secretary of state for public affairs and state department spokesman during the clinton administration. he is now a columnist for "the sunday times of london." isis is now a threat to the entire world. he joins us from london. thank you for coming in so late there. my first question for you, at of amoment, in the wake everyone blames president obama or someone else, and at the moment of widespread blame casting, who do you think deserves the most blame? mr. rubin: i can give you many

answers. the colonial system created an arab world in which these people never learn how to govern themselves. the sunnis are fighting the shiites, which is crucial with what is going on with islamic state. there is the question of saddam hussein getting it all started by invading kuwait. there is invading iraq in the first place. obama pullingdent the troops out perhaps prematurely, and then there is the whole question of syria creating basically a vacuum into which the islamic state now has a place, a home, in which they can plan, train, and organize, and as the french president said, this operation in paris was planned there, so i think there is plenty of blame to go around, and i just hope that the politicians, the leaders can get this blame throwing phase over with quickly and start to focus on what is really, really important, which is how will the world be organized to gather

itself, its powers together and even a this essentially a terrorist state in the heart of the middle east, where terrorist acts can be planned and organized, and terrorist can be trained to come and go, and that is what needs to be done. jamie, president hollande has called this an act of war. do you think he will now try to nato, andicle iv with if he did that, what do you think will be the likely outcome? well, john, i did some checking on this, and it seems the french are resisting and avoiding nato altogether. not only are they not interested in evoking the clause, which is article v, about an attack on the country, but article iv, which you talked about, where

they get together and talk about what an attack might mean, and it appears that the french do not want to involve nato in this, which is a shame, because what is a problem, president nations is saying should work with france, the united states should work with france. we do not have a very good system in our world for organizing a coherent burden-sharing operation so that those that are good at one task are doing that task, and those that are good at other tasks do that. the only way that has happened successfully in the past is when washington, the president of the united states, organizes the world for that purpose, and that has not been happening either, so that is what worries me, is the french are not looking to nato to do that. they are just saying the russians and americans should work with them, but how do you organize this? who is in charge? what are the lines of

communication? and knowing who has what responsibility is absolutely critical if you are going to do a great job. mark: what do you think vladimir putin thinks about what happen in paris and what the implications are for his country? putin has had a big, big problem, in that he has taken the side of the shiites, the iranians, hezbollah, obviously assad in damascus, and that shiite side now has a majority -- the majority of the world muslims are sunni, and they have begun to see russia as their enemy, and the first sign of that was the taking down of this plane last week, which was the sign that isis was going to move away from action in the middle east and take the fight to their enemy, which in this case is russia, so that is a long way of saying that i think after paris, putin doesn't feel

as a, having the french, who have always had a relationship with russia, different from other countries, and i think he is hoping that he can work closely with the french socialist president, after all, and, perhaps, see russia get the kind of international stature and international respect that putin craves. france does not ask for nato's help in an official way, what do you think the role of the united states is? mr. rubin: well, it is tough. we cannot tell them exactly what to do, but i would certainly hope that regardless of what hollande says, or regardless of says, it really is only the combination of

political, economic power of the united states in the world to diplomatically organize a combined operation, because this is going to have to have many components. it is going to have to have a law enforcement component, and intelligence component, and it will obviously have to have troops on the ground, not american, but there are countries in the region that have offered forces under the right circumstance, and a greater american air component, and that is conflicting with the russian air component, and i do not think any of that will happen unless the president of the united dates takes this task on as the major final function for him as president in his last year in office. if he does not do that, i fear it will be much more ad hoc, and there will be far less seriousness of purpose, and i fear that the mission may not be achieved as quickly as it should read. really quickly in

about 30 seconds or so, what about what the governors have said who have said that no more syrian refugees's should be allowed in their states? proud to be am so an american. i represented america. when i hear statements like that, it saddens me. a nation of immigrants, who came to our country in time of need, the famous side on the statue of liberty. this is not a big job to separate the dangerous people from the men, women, and children who are suffering. as a minimum, you can take the elderly and children, but to just say no muslims or no ,yrians is not the generous american people that i know, and it certainly does not do any credit to those dates where the governors are saying that -- those states where the governors are saying that. in,n: all right, jamie rub

thank you, and coming up, we talk about how the paris attacks changed the 2016 equation, after this. ♪

♪ john: we are joined now by two of the most really and political strategists we know and friends of the show, steve mcmahon, and republican strategist than ginsburg and washington, d.c., and, guys, it is taken kind of for granted that the follicle have a big effect on the 2016 presidential race, and i want to ask you both to talk about this, starting with you, ben. tell me who you think is

strongest and weakest in terms of the responses and in terms of the potential they have in some ways to capitalize politically on what is going on in the world right now. far, the candidates who have managed to talk to the anger on the state level are the ones who have done the best, this sort of more washington-based answers about process i think have not resonated as well among the primary electorate. grasp of have shown a the issue and sort of fluidity of thought obviously benefit also, but appealing to the sort of outright anger and shock of the grassroots has been, i think, the most successful response so far. steve, there is a little bit of tension in ben's answer, and there is this a view that the establishment candidates who have run something before or govern some thing before, that

they are grown-ups, and as opposed to what the people see as fringe candidates, like donald trump or ben carson, that they will be hurt by this, and ben says that the fluid is good, base isaling to the good. untangle this for us. trying tohink he is explain why donald trump was doing well and why he is still doing well. some that have glitzy with the subject and having some experience managing something that is significant and approaches the kind of seriousness that this will require will be an advantage, and here in the republican field, it does not seem to be. it is on bass, and whoever can be the most outrageous and bombastic seems to be winning, and that is donald trump, and people think he is strong and decisive, and they might think but thelittle reckless,

bases going to reward that in donald trump right now. we shall see. it should be a moment for jeb bush, but it is not clear it will be. you were working for bernie sanders, what would you tell him on the policy before the iowa caucuses? steve: well, he needs to sit down and think about what to say. moving onto his stump speech was a little bit tone deaf, to say the least, and he does not show much interest in foreign affairs and foreign policy. i think that is a little bit of a problem for him. it has worked for him when it was not an issue in the campaign, but they are now front and center. mark: ben? i would certainly agree with that. i think wearing the social democrat label is really, really

more challenging when foreign affairs like this -- the country feels ill at ease -- come to the fore, so he has a lot when it comes to convincing people he can be a commander in chief at this moment. john kasich, marco rubio, and others? ben: well, look. marco rubio is the guy on the foreign affairs committee. he can still talk about the issues really, really well. jeb bush has the name bush, which ought to be helpful to him. chris christie is a former prosecutor, so being appropriately bellicose at times like this -- mark: which one has the best stance to break through? ben: i started off with marco

rubio, and steve did a partisan plug, which i cannot blame him for. john: steve, let me ask you this question about hillary clinton if you were advising her. she is by far the most likely democratic nominee. and if that is the case, and if you were advising her, what would you tell her was the biggest bonus abilities she would have in terms of this going into a general election? steve: i would say the biggest vulnerability that she has is her vote for the iraq war. the one time when bernie sanders prosecuted his debate pretty effectively was when he was talking about the instability that resulted from the invasion of iraq. she has admitted that that was a mistake, and she has apologized for it. i do not know what you can do, and there will not be a republican on the other side who did not support the war with enthusiasm and pom-poms, and i do not think it is an issue.

i think in the primaries, it will be something that will be discussed a little bit more, and i think that is probably her only weakness in the area of foreign policy, and compared to a republican she will be running again, it is no weakness at all. john: we are out of time, unfortunately, so we believe it. berg, mcmahon and ben gins our two great friends, thanks for coming in. coming up, what you did not see at the iowa debate over the weekend. we will be back with that in 60 seconds. ♪

♪

mark: coming out of this saturday night presidential debate in iowa, hillary clinton has been taking some heat, fromy about contributions wall street. she justified them by saying this. mrs. clinton: you know, not only do i have hundreds and thousands of donors, most of them small and proud, and for the first time, most of my donors are women, 60%. [cheers and applause] clinton: i represented new york, and i represented new york on 9/11, and we were attacked where wall street is. i spent a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. : that 9/11 line has been getting hillary clinton a lot at heat, also from her rivals, and we caught up with martin o'malley and bernie sanders, and here is their reaction on that 9/11 moment. >> i thought it was a pretty

disgraceful moment when she tried to put out a smokescreen for 9/11 to hide that she has taken money from the big banks of wall street's, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees. it is what it is. >> i have no idea what the between secretary clinton's efforts and all of our efforts to help rebuild new york city after that disaster but the fact that wall street contributed. >> in the first two debates, we have two major gaffes, both of them from secretary clinton. she has to keep giving them so much ammunition? the first was when she declared in the first debate that she is proud to say that all republicans are her enemies. how are you going to get much help if you declare that all

republicans are your enemies? the second was last night in a very, very distasteful way, with a smokescreen for her coziness with the big banks of wall street for the tragedy of 9/11 and the attacks, especially so fresh after so many were murdered in paris. heat john, she is taking on all quarters. will this be a problem or fade away? john: i think this will linger and be a problem because it does get to i think one of the great vulnerabilities she has. it is the case whether you are a democrat or republican, being excessively close to wall street is not a positive place to be in terms of her politics, and, look, it is the case that she was a huge recipient of wall street cash long before 9/11, and then there is the cheapness justify 9/11 to yourself. it is not the kind of thing that will end your candidacy or bring you down, but it is the kind of

thing that will be at and picked over for a long time to come. secretary clinton has not taken any question since the debate, so she has not been asked about this. have tried to explain what she said, but i suspect that when she is asked about it, she will have to remark. there is a lot of grumbling that this is not only something that was unfortunate to say, but to go to what martin o'malley said, an unforced error, which is forced to go off her talking points, when she talks about the wall street contributions, she was not prepared with a smooth answer, and she kind of reached for 9/11 under circumstances like most people including the new york times editorial board thought was not a good thing to do. john: she will hear about it again and again, and the question of clinton money is a question of enduring interest or

the press and the rivals in the parties. no one will let hillary clinton off easily when she makes a mistake, as she did on that debate stage, and i do not think anyone will let her off easy this time, any more than otherwise. the fallout from the debate, that is the kind of thing, like i said, that everyone is attacking her for, including her democratic rivals, not only republicans, and you will see it brought up again by o'malley and sanders and ways that are maybe open and a little bit below the radar. all right, we will be back with more after this word from our sponsors. ♪

john: we say it every day, but it cannot be said enough, that

we are on the day -- on the air twice a day. make sure you check out our campaign tracker for the latest -- updates, and more on how those on wall street are reacting to the hillary clinton debate involving 9/11. mark: we sit to talk about foreign policy and a speech he is giving at the citadel on wednesday. it will be a big day for national security tomorrow. we will have jeb bush, also the john kasich speech, and we will have a lot on being commander in chief. we will see you tomorrow with jeb bush. thanks for watching. sayonara. ♪ . . ..

>> i am mark crumpton. let's get you caught up with the headlines. president obama is resisting calls from allies and critics to put u.s. boots on the ground in syria. he says sending american ground

forces in the wake of friday's terror attacks in paris would be in his words a serious mistake that would set the u.s. on an unsustainable path. the instead will double down on washington's current strategy for taking on the terror group. he's asking for patients to let military, economic, and diplomatic pressure take effect. the brother of two men believed to have helped carry out friday's attacks is speaking out. he expressed disbelief two of his brothers were involved in the carnage that left at least 129 people dead. one of his brothers died friday after allegedly decimating his vest -- detonating his destiny suicide bombing. the other is a fugitive and subject of a global manhunt. secretary of state john kerry is in paris to show american solidarity with france. journalists accompanying him were not allowed to report about his planned visit, the first such