>> but i am a seahawks fan. >> i don't like that you can't be on both sides. >> 6:00 p.m. if you can't see the show, dvr it we're here to hello, everybody. i'm lou dobbs. the democratic rank and file on capitol hill this week bowing their heads and lining up with the president on the controversial issue of nuclear negotiations with iran. democrats have obviously chosen to align with the president despite their loud and persistent opposition. they are now back where they are most comfortable, in direct opposition to republicans and against the stronger sanctions that they once supported against the iranian regime. a muslim nation that is arguably the world's foremost sponsor of terrorism. tonight, we will be talking with the man at the center of the conflict between republicans and democrats, the chairman of the

powerful senate banking committee, senator richard shelby will be among our guests. also tonight hillary clinton says she's willing to testify on benghazi. we will be talking with the chairman of the house select committee on benghazi. he says the obama white house is still stonewalling his investigation and the american people. he joins us. and the president's choice to lead the department of justice says that illegal immigrants have the same rights as american citizens when it comes to the right to work in america. really. we'll take that up along with a lot of other issues. billionaire media mogul is with us on a battle we started fighting with the bush administration and that battle goes on today. a president who continues to choose political correctness over straightforwardness and national security. our first guest says sanctions

brought the iranians to the negotiating table in the first place and avoiding future sanctions is the only reason for them to enter an agreement to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons. joining us is the chairman of the senate banking committee richard shelby. good to have you with us. senator bob menendez said clearly a week ago the president sounded at times as if his talking points were from tehran and is now lined up with the president. what do you make of it? >> i think it's obama democratic politics. i would hope that we could come up with a bipartisan approach to sanctions. we have in the past. but negotiations have been going on a long time. i think they are too protracted. i don't know anything good will come out of it. but i think obama is chasing a deal. he's wanting some kind of deal

with iraq but a bad deal is a bad deal and i think that sanctions worked, they will work harder and that's what brought iran to the table thus far. i believe it will keep them at the table or they will pay an awful price. >> the awful price they paid so far is the return of about $8.5 billion that have been released by the administration, most recently just under half a billion dollars, another $3 billion or so to be released before the june deadline, at least as deadlines go with iran. they are not so quick to honor them or to meet them. >> well that is -- >> what will be the impact? >> well, you are absolutely right to point that out because that's a big apple or a big carrot they have been given iraq -- i mean iran to get them to the table. i don't see any real concrete evidence of iran negotiating in good faith. i think this could be an existential question for israel,

our ally in the area. this is serious, serious business. >> very serious business. as you say, iran absolutely opposed to the very existence of israel. netanyahu, the prime minister of israel, very clear and eloquent on the issue of how important it is that iran not, not continue to develop its nuclear weapons. where will we see the united states ultimately come down on this? another deadline comes and goes, it's extended, the next deadline to be extended and there's a vote this week. where does that vote take us? >> well i'm hoping that what we're going to do in the banking committee, which i can speak from, thursday which is just a couple days from now we are going to have a markup on some legislation to make it tougher and tougher as far as sanctions are concerned on iran.

that's something the obama administration doesn't want. they have said that, they put pressure on their fellow democrats not to support it but we are going to bring it out and we are going to let people vote up or down on it. i hope they will vote the right thing, not the political thing. >> and the political thing seems to be driving much of this, as the administration continues to suggest that each of these deadlines i referred to are just simply vague abstract markers that can shift at any time at the administration's whim, or the iranians' insistence. march 24th says senator menendez. that's as far as he's going to go. at least it's an unofficial deadline or marker as you suggested that he's put down. each time there has to be some sort of concrete progress. any idea how they would define it? any idea how you would define it? >> well i would -- if we had a

real comprehensive agreement that would keep iran from building a nuclear weapon, that would be one thing. i don't believe this is going to happen. i think they are just stalling for time time, negotiations, promises that they won't really ever fulfill not the serious ones. i think that iran's going to eat our lunch dealing with these negotiations or having no negotiation, just string us out. maybe i'm wrong. i hope i'm wrong. but i believe history will probably show that we are probably right. >> iran's deputy foreign minister saying that he had informed israel that there will be consequences to their acts including a strike in which an iranian general was killed. the united states now in the position of carrying messages for the iranians to the israelis? how unseemly will it get? >> well, it's baffling to a lot of us that this administration

would not stand up with this ally. they claim they are, but when the sanctions proposals get tough, they want to put them ofto deal with it now. they want to negotiate some more. well we've been negotiating and we have been negotiating. i'm afraid that iran's going to get what they want, stall for time and we are going to be out in the cold. >> senator richard shelby always good to talk to you. >> thank you. >> we appreciate you being with us, mr. chairman. former cuban leader fidel castro breaking his silence at least on paper over normalization talks, writing a letter over the matter, releasing one, at least. the 88-year-old still hasn't been seen in public in more than a year. no date has been set for a second round of talks between the united states and cuba. the president's unilateral efforts to normalize relations driving a surge as well and the illegal immigration of cubans to this country. the federal government reported coast guard interceptions of

cubans on boats and rafts has risen 117% from a year ago and interceptions of cubans at the miami airport and along our southern border have risen 65%. we are coming right back with much more. stay with us. the white house relents, releases more than 15,000 benghazi documents. in my world, wall isn't a street. return on investment isn't the only return i'm looking forward to. for some every dollar is earned with sweat, sacrifice, courage. which is why usaa is honored to help our members with everything from investing for retirement to saving for college. our commitment to current and former military members and their families is without equal.

start investing with as little as fifty dollars.

♪ ♪ i'm almost done. [ male announcer ] now you can pay your bill... ♪ ♪ ...manage your appointments... [ dog barks ] ...and check your connection status... ♪ ♪ ...anytime, anywhere. ♪ ♪ [ dog growls ] ♪ ♪ oh. so you're protesting? ♪ ♪ okay. [ male announcer ] introducing xfinity my account. available on any device.

the benghazi stonewall goes on. the state department preventing diplomatic security agents who are actually on the ground during the 2012 benghazi terrorist attacks preventing them from testifying before congress. here's a state department witness today at the house select committee benghazi hearing. >> we at the state department have concerns that the requested interviews will pose precisely such risks. we also want to avoid interfering with the department of justice's ongoing investigations and prosecutions. >> joining us now, the chairman of the select committee on benghazi, congressman trey gowdy, who also serves on the judiciary committee, the oversight and government reform committee. mr. chairman, good to see you and if you will, characterize

that answer from the state department, the assistant deputy secretary of state, on the witnesses. >> well, lou, thank you for having me on. that's just a boilerplate response you get sometimes from the administration that if you want to talk to a witness it's going to jeopardize their security or impact an ongoing prosecution, so the first thing you have to say is look, mr. state department official we have no interest in jeopardizing anyone's security, so we're not going to do that. you don't need to be concerned about security. secondarily, i know a little something about criminal prosecutions. the last thing we want to do is jeopardize our chances of getting a conviction but the department of justice has been much easier to work with on this issue than the state department. so those are just two kind of boilerplate, always in the letter responses you get from the state department, neither of which can withstand scrutiny. >> a lot of people right now just trying to collect

themselves after you said the justice department was easier to work with than the state department, at least in this instance. at the very same time, you're getting 15,000 documents dumped on you this week. finally a response, or is it simply if you will a bit of a swap-back from the administration? >> it's 15,000 documents that no committee of congress has ever had access to so when people tell you that all the questions on benghazi have been answered and there's nothing left to see, then why are we just getting access to 15000 documents that no other committee of congress has had access to and within those 15,000 documents, that's going to lead us to make additional requests which says nothing of the witnesses that we have not talked to that we need to talk to. so if you look at the house resolution that says all policies, all decisions all activities. the word all is incredibly comprehensive. that's what we were asked to do and you cannot do that if you

don't have access to every document and every witness. so i appreciate the 15000. what i cannot tell you and your viewers, lou, is 15,000 out of how many. how many more are we entitled to. >> and the questions go on and the answers are not forthcoming or what few answers do find their way to your committee from this administration, it usually introduces more questions. where does this go and you have talked about reaching out even to the former secretary of state, hillary clinton. how far does this go, how energetic, how vigorous will the committee be in this? >> we have been vigilant and energetic. it's just been energetic behind closed doors, given the nature of some of the material we're dealing with. but you know we are going to have to talk to all the principal witnesses. you mentioned secretary clinton. there are others. i don't want to focus on her,

but clearly, you cannot have a definitive accounting of benghazi without talking to the secretary of state at the time. before i can talk to secretary of state clinton, i need the state department to provide us with the e-mails of all the principals, all the documents all the papers that any halfway decent lawyer would have to have before they went in to question a witness. so we are ready to pick up the pace. the democrats ironically who didn't want to form the committee now want us to go at a quicker pace. we are more than happy to accommodate that request. so we are going -- >> -- even wants democrats participating, full and equal partners. >> well, i know the irony of voting against a committee threatening not to participate in the committee putting up an ask and answer website, that says the committee doesn't need to do any work, now he wants to be a full partner and i welcome that. there are really good questioners on the other side.

what i'm not going to do is conclude that all the work has been done when i know for a fact that there are documents and witnesses that have not been talked to and i owe your viewers and my fellow citizens the most definitive final accounting on benghazi. that's what we were asked to do and that's what we're going to do with or without their help. >> congressman gowdy we have also watched what has transpired with the attorney general of the united states being held in contempt of congress on the issue of fast and furious. i mean there are so many of these scandals that envelop the white house that they have managed, the pejorative is stonewall, and managed to be crazily optimistic from the other side to say they preserved the integrity of the executive branch. will we see resolution or is this a conflict that will

ultimately make its way simply to the ballot box and then at that time be resolved? >> well, i think in theory things would take a detour to the courthouse before they would go to the ballot box. when i say courthouse there has been civil litigation that has resulted in additional documents both in fast and furious and in benghazi. remember, it was not congress that got the ben rhodes memo. it was someone else. what we're seeing with fast and furious is the attorney general says that an e-mail he sends to his wife is protected by executive privilege. a judge can throw that out of court but at some point our fellow citizens need to say look stop the politics. the legislative branch has the right to conduct oversight over the executive branch and when you take two and a half years to produce documents and try to just wait out the congress that's not the way this was designed. so as soon as my fellow citizens get as upset as you are about it and as upset and frustrated as i

am, regardless of which political party's in power this could be a republican administration. congress is still entitled to the documents. so my branch is going to have to stand up for itself. i hope we'll do that. >> i can't think of any analog in our history in which there was ever a question raised without resolution about what congress is entitled to but here we are now well more than two years since the death of four americans in benghazi and the burning and sacking of our consulate, the annex it's really quite something. is there a parallel in our history that has eluded us? >> well, i'm a lot older than you are but even i can't think back to what that may have been and you are a better student of history than i am. i can just tell you that in my brief time in congress, it has always been with a democratic administration and it's always been with a republican majority

in the house trying to gain access to the information and in the old days, congress kind of stood up for itself and they asserted the right of the branch to have access to information. nowadays, if your team is in power in the white house, you have no interest in forcing them to comply with congressional requests. so i hope i live long enough to see a republican president and if i do, and if i'm in congress i promise you i will make her or him be responsive to the people's house when they have legitimate requests for documents. >> i think if it's not apparent now to folks who consider them devout partisans either republican or democrat, conservative or liberal, to perhaps think about the imperial presidency as having become far too imperious and time for a modest rollback of power. we know you will be working hard in that direction. we appreciate your time and wish

you luck. >> thank you, lou. up next, we will tell you why a battle i was involved in more than 12 years ago continues. imagine that. almost 13 years ago, a battle over language and our enemies and why both bush and obama are responsible.

a few comments now on the obama administration's insistence on playing word games and the superior attitude they bring to the ignorance of their assertions particularly in their refusal to even whisper the words "radical islamist." manifestly unschooled and inexperienced spokespersons for the president stand before microphones and cameras and say with straight faces that the islamic state is not islamic and that the taliban even as it carries out a campaign of terror, is not a terrorist group. >> i would also point out that

the taliban is an armed insurgency. isil is a terrorist group. we don't make concessions to terrorist groups. >> you don't think the taliban's a terrorist group? >> i don't think that the taliban -- the taliban is an armed insurgency. >> the idiocy of such remarks creating a furious backlash against misplaced political correctness at the white house and apparently in the minds of the white house required even further rationalization, explanation, if you will, by press secretary josh earnest today. >> it is clear that there is a difference between the ambitions that are expressed by the taliban and the ambitions that are expressed by al qaeda. the threat from the taliban is acute if you are a service member serving in afghanistan or if you are a u.s. diplomat or a contractor that is working in afghanistan. in this case there is a clear

difference between the aspirations that have been articulated by the taliban and the way they resort to some of their terror tactics and the terror, you know the terror attacks that are carried out by al qaeda. >> bill plant's expression saying all of it. the result no better for all of the administration's stirring more word games perhaps because this administration can argue absurdly that it isn't negotiating with terrorists just the taliban as they did when they swapped taliban for army sergeant bowe bergdahl. the administration is rife with political correctness posing as meaningful language, refusing to call terrorists radical islamist terrorists. its homeland security secretary jeh johnson today demonstrated. >> we are concerned about the so-called foreign fighter who leaves his home country travels

to another country to take up the fight there links up with terrorist extremists and may return home, whether it's this country or one of our allies, with a terrorist extremist purpose. >> obviously the secretary giving those words a careful reading. terrorist extremist, a member of the obama political agency obviously wrote the johnson speech, he merely read the words as any obama functionary in his position seemingly would. this is not merely an obama problem, i would remind you. i was criticizing president bush and his administration as far back as 2002 for much the same reasons. they also refused to call radical islamists what they plainly are, radical islamists. in fighting something called a war on terror, more than 12 years ago, this was the home page of the drudge report, june 6, 2002.

back then, i said the government and media for the past nine months have called this a war against terror. so have we here. but terror is not the enemy. it is what the enemy wants to achieve so on this broadcast, we are making a change in the interest of clarity and honesty. the enemies in this war are radical islamists who argue all nonbelievers in their faith must be killed. as drudge pointed out my comments generated a somewhat heated angry response from nearly every quarter of the world. lots of those folks from the middle east. here we are, 12 years later, fighting the same enemies, radical islamists and those who think that by controlling language, they can change outcomes. now our quotation of the evening. this one from the sixth president of the united states, john quincy adams. yes, radical islamists were at hand even back then. he wrote the precept of the

koran is perpetual war against all who deny that muhammed is the prophet of god, the vanquished may purchase their lives by the payment of tribute, the victorious may be appeased by a false and elusive promise of peace. john quincy adams. he wasn't politically correct but how correct was he? we are coming right back. the president's choice to lead the department of justice gives congress a truly shocking opinion of the rights of illegal immigrants and rights of american citizens. billionaire mort zuckerman is our guest next. friday night, buddy. you are gonna need a wingman. and with my cash back, you are money. forget him. my airline miles will take your game worldwide. what i'm really looking for is -- i got two words for you -- re-wards. ♪ ♪ there's got to be better cards than this. [ male announcer ] there's a better way

with creditcards.com. compare hundreds of cards from all the major banks to find the one that's right for you. it's simple. search, compare, and apply at creditcards.com. first round's on me. you know your dentures can move, unlike natural teeth. try fixodent plus true feel. the smooth formula helps keep dentures in place. it's free of flavors and colorants, for a closer feeling to natural teeth. fixodent. and forget it.

startup-ny. it's working for new york state. already 55 companies are investing over $98 million dollars and creating over 2100 jobs. from long island to all across upstate new york, more businesses are coming to new york. they are paying no property taxes no corporate taxes no sales taxes. and with over 300 locations,

and 3.7 million square feet available, there's a place that's right for your business. see if startup-ny can work for you. go to startup.ny.gov. attorney general nominee loretta lynch today defended president obama's executive amnesty fiat, saying illegal immigrants have a quote right and obligation to work in this country, the same as american citizens. joining me now, billionaire publisher, real estate magnate, boston properties executive chairman mort zuckerman. good to see you. >> good to be here. >> how could she possibly draw an analog between the rights to work specifically of american citizens and that of those in this country illegally? >> well i think frankly i don't find that leap of faith

surprising from this administration. from their point of view, it's just all politics and it has nothing to do with the values of this country or the legal rights of what we hope is going to be for people who come to this country. >> are you at least surprised the republicans are not absolutely bringing the hammer down on those comments? >> no, i'm not surprised. the republicans are doing what unfortunately the democrats are doing but from a slightly different direction. it's all politics. the substance of it gets completely wiped out. >> is it politics or is it corporatist politics? one can understand some of the motivations on the left, the political alliances that have been created but the rest of it for the democratic party and the republican alike would be nothing more than corporatist politics, if you will. >> yes, i suppose that has to be managed but i don't think that's the driving force behind this. >> what is? >> i think it's just the question of who's going to get which of the votes and who is going to get the quote, unquote

the immigrant vote or the former immigrant vote. it's just that simple. >> what we're watching is a pander gap between the true principled political parties. >> we have seen that before. that is a play we have seen before. this is not act one, act two. it's act 32. >> there is no gap between these parties on the issue of israel right now. this president in talking with former ambassador john bolton, he's talking about israel as if it has now been isolated by this administration. do you see it that way? >> yes, to a degree. not totally, but yes, to a degree. in an issue like this where israel's shall we say national security is at issue, the israelis -- >> if not their very existence. >> yes. this is where the israelis have to respond. this administration just overlooks that central issue facing the israelis and takes a position which obviously is going to undermine what the israelis are trying to accomplish. >> and we just watched the

democratic party specifically the ranking member on the senate foreign relations committee, amongst others, simply kowtow to a new line by the president which is that he does not want new sanctions and senator bob menendez giving him until at least the 24th of next month in which to -- of march, rather, in which to negotiate something undefined with the iranians. >> menendez i have to say i give him a lot of stars on the calendar for his guts, because he was up there and he stood up against his own party on a major issue. so i think at this point he is also trying to shall we say cover his political front and political back to a degree. but at least he was out there on this issue. >> i give him credit for having the guts to say that basically the statements he's heard from

this administration on iran sound like they were talking points that have been crafted in tehran. i think by the way, he's exactly right. i think he's exactly wrong in not adding those sanctions. what is your judgment? >> i think this is the key issue, okay, which is what are we going to do vis a vis iran. this administration is negotiating some kind of deal with iran, they think, but the deal, at least to the extent i know anything about it, it's such a weak deal with so many big holes in it that we're really not going to do what we should do in that transaction which is really to put a maximum amount of pressure on iran to hold back from some of their weapons development and whom they are targeting those weapons to. we are not doing that. why? because we will get a deal. but there's no such thing as a deal. you have to do something here that depends if you're the israelis, their national interest and their national security and if they are our allies, we have to back them up to a degree because this is serious stuff for them. you are talking about nuclear weapons sooner or later threatening israel from iran.

>> ambassador ron durmer, ambassador to the united states, saying add up the centrifuges. there is no other purpose for a centrifuge other than for the process of creating the fuel for a nuclear weapon. >> there can be no doubt about that except you can play games with all these numbers which is what happens to confuse -- in order to confuse the people. anybody who looks at this has exactly that conclusion. there is no other way of interpreting what's going on. >> can the public be more confused by an administration that finds itself in agreement with al-jazeera english on the issue of the words radical islamists, islamists and now terrorism? i mean that's their principal ally on these mind control word games. >> it's really kind of -- i won't say disappointing any longer because we have long passed that. >> been at it too long. >> but the problem is on --

these issues are so difficult to convey to the public at large, you know, that they think they can get away with playing these kind of games and to some extent, they are getting away with it. that's the part that's so upsetting. because nobody can doubt what iran is about. everybody who knows that region of the country, who has any kind of intelligence on what the iranians are doing, knows what they're about. not to ignore that is an absolute default of responsibility. >> ignoring, ignoring a military pact between russia and iran, ignoring the sponsorship of terrorist organizations by iran ignoring their role in the war with iraq on the part of the united states. a third of our casualties are attributed to the involvement of iran, yet this administration insists on proceeding. >> well, you know, in a way i'm at a bit of a loss for words and you know how rare that is in my

lifetime. >> i do. >> because what you are saying is so manifest in its clarity and in its implications and somehow or other, this administration is playing whatever game they're playing and allowing a lot of this stuff to proceed. it's threatening that whole region. we have enormous interests in that region and it's now going to be undermined by an administration that is absolutely willing to make these things possible politically. >> mort, thank you very much. we appreciate it. president obama's certainly not going down in history as the great negotiator. just witness what's happened in cuba. up next former u.s. ambassador to the united nations, bill richardson, on cuba, iran and everyone else having their way. [ male announcer ] whether it takes 200,000 parts ♪ ♪ 800,000 hours of supercomputing time 3 million lines of code, 40,000 sets of eyes, or a million sleepless nights. whether it's building the world's most advanced satellite, the space station, or the next leap in

unmanned systems. at boeing, one thing never changes. our passion to make it real. ♪ ♪ i bring the gift of the name your price tool to help you find a price that fits your budget. uh-oh. the name your price tool. she's not to be trusted. kill her. flo: it will save you money! the name your price tool isn't witchcraft! and i didn't turn your daughter into a rooster. she just looks like that. burn the witch! the name your price tool a dangerously progressive idea.

some of the top stories we're following here tonight. a new report by the congressional budget office says it will cost taxpayers $50,000 for each person who is insured under obamacare. $50,000. that's using a generous estimate that 27 million people will be insured under obamacare, which by the way still leaves 30 million americans uninsured. no date set for the next round of talks with cuba, if there

indeed will be another round. the castro regime is pushing for additional concessions from the obama administration during the first talks and decades. cuba's top diplomat telling the associated press quote one can't think that in order to improve and normalize relations with the u.s., cuba has to give up the principles it believes in. whoa. joining us now to help us better understand what's going on here, if that is indeed possible former u.s. ambassador to the united nations bill richardson. also a former energy secretary, former governor of new mexico. governor ambassador it is great to see you here. >> thank you, lou. nice to be with you. >> i love the fact that immediately, the cuban government says we will not change a thing. this is who we are love us or leave us. do you think that caught anybody's surprise in the obama white house? >> well, it didn't catch me by surprise. i negotiated with the cubans.

i think the obama administration expected this. where the cubans are really hard line is i have been to cuba several times. whenever i met with dissonance, because you want to show your support for human rights, they go crazy. they get very upset. so while there's progress on a number of fronts on exchanging ambassadors, on homeland security issues drugs, environmental cooperation political cooperation, when you say to the cubans all right, you've got to release those 53 that you said you would, you got to do it right away, you've got to find ways to open up the internet, the cubans go crazy and this is going to be one of the tough spots but i think it's worth continuing. we don't want the russians or iran there. i think cuba is going to open up. the castro brothers are not going to be there forever. so i support the president's move but it's not going to be

easy to move, especially in the human rights area. >> you know, i find myself scratching my head a bit. this is a president who is going it alone again. he's being the unilateralist he accused george w. bush of being. at the same time he will not even try to build a consensus or even a window into his thinking by articulating to the american people what the great advantage is to the united states by quote unquote, normalizing relations with cuba. we don't ask much of a president but that seems to me to be the least we could expect. >> well i think, lou this is why i believe it makes sense. one, it's been a thorn in our side latin american countries always beat us up on why don't we have a normal relationship with cuba, we have it with china. that's number one. i think number two, i think there is some real economic opportunities for american firms and then third there's a lot of cuban americans in our country, in florida, in new jersey, all

around, that want to have a stake in cuba's future. they probably won't go back there but they want to have an economic stake, they've got a lot of family reunification human rights issues and they're americans now so i think, lou, this is a part of the caribbean that i think strategically is also important. we've got guantanamo there. >> for 50 years we followed this policy, you can consider it wrong-headed, an example of american intransigence or simply a brilliant policy. i don't care. but the fact is we haven't heard from this president why change why now and what will be the benefit to this country. this thing amounts to the gdp of a small suburb of los angeles or chicago, for crying out loud. >> well, i do think there's an opportunity for american tourism, american investment the resort areas there. i think there's also a strategic

reason. there's ties with cuban americans -- >> who for the most part, based on the polling we have seen cuban americans are not interested in a failure to free the island and see no quid pro quo, no reciprocity whatsoever in this deal, at least as articulated, i don't know what's been negotiated but articulated publicly by this administration. do you? >> i think there's a split in the cuban american community. the younger cubans want to see a change in policy on the embargo. the older cubans want the status quo. i think the point is going to be how this new relationship evolves. i think it makes sense to open up the relationship with cuba. >> i get kind of a kick out of the cuban american thing to be honest with you. i've got the greatest respect for cuban americans but it would be like saying you want the irish in boston deciding what u.s. policy is with ireland, for crying out loud. i mean what sense does that make?

>> no but lou there is a lot of other involvements that we have had with cuba. you know the cold war kennedy, the missile crisis. it's a strategic area. we don't want iran, we don't want russia, we don't want chinese investment in there. >> ambassador, this is the administration that november a year plus ago decided to dispatch with the monroe doctrine. what are we to make of that? >> well i think for many other reasons, good foreign policy reason, look the 30 plus countries in latin america always beat us up on why we don't open up with cuba. now they can't do that. they are praising us. i think it's going to help us in the region, a region that we neglect that is very important economically, politically, strategically to us. so i think on those foreign policy grounds lou, it's woth it. but it's not going to be easy. this human rights issue we got to push the cubans. we got to not just freedom of

the internet, you know stop mistreating these dissidents, find ways to get that democracy moving there and i think they are slowly, slowly gradually they are privatizing a little bit. it's going to take some time. >> you did say democracy there, didn't you? >> i said they are moving slowly. it's not a democracy. >> i understand the spirit of the thing. governor, always good to talk with you. thank you so much. ambassador bill richardson. he's got so many titles, i don't know which honorific to apply. left wing politicses and celebrities lining up to insult the wildly popular new movie "american sniper" but one is now apologizing sort of in his own peculiar special unique way. welcome back to showdown! jerry rice here with 8 year old andrew hunter debating who will win the big race between the tortoise and the hare.

what do you think andrew? rabbits are faster. it's not a rabbit, it's a hare. what's the difference? maybe figure that out before debating the best wide reciever of all time. wait, are you odell beckham jr.? many people clean their dentures with toothpaste or plain water. and even though their dentures look clean, in reality they're not. if a denture were to be put under a microscope we can see all the bacteria that still exists on the denture and that bacteria multiplies very rapidly. that's why dentists recommend cleaning with polident everyday. polident's unique micro clean formula works in just 3 minutes, killing 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. for a cleaner, fresher brighter denture everyday. in my world, wall isn't a street. return on investment isn't the only return i'm looking forward to. for some

every dollar is earned with sweat, sacrifice, courage. which is why usaa is honored to help our members with everything from investing for retirement to saving for college. our commitment to current and former military members and their families is without equal. start investing with as little as fifty dollars. i'd rather do anything else than sit at a dealership. it's a lot of haggling and it takes so long. craig's experience is completely different than mine.

yeah. yes, mike has used truecar. at truecar, we'll show you how much others paid for the car you want and how much you should. because i used truecar there was no haggling about the price. they treated me so well, and it was just such a quick, easy experience. get your car, and get back to the life you love. welcome to the future of car-buying.

i take prilosec otc each morning for my frequent heartburn. because it gives me... zero heartburn! prilosec otc. the number 1 doctor-recommended frequent heartburn medicine for 9 straight years. one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. former vermont governor dnc chairman howard dean apologizing, sort of for some of his nasty comments he made about the fans of "american sniper" and he made them pretty angry. dean also managed to insult the right in the process. listen to this. >> i apologize to the veterans. i haven't seen the movie and i think it was wrong. i make no apologies to all the thousands of right wing nut jobs who have been twittering me with nasty language but i do apologize to the veterans.

>> well you will notice it's a nut job doing the apologizing. joining us former u.s. army ranger nicholas irving, author of the new book auto biography of one of the deadliest special ops snipers the reaper. great to have you with us. >> thank you. >> congratulations on the book. >> thank you. >> i've got to ask you, i listen to michael moore, dean. what's your reaction when you hear that sort of stuff? >> i really try not to pay it too much attention but at this point in time their careers are not doing so well. i think their careers are fading off and they want a piece of that limelight. right now chris kyle is a hot topic so they want to destroy his name or spark controversy just to get back into the limelight. >> it really seems to be -- have the left in this country scared to death that there can be a man who had great honor, commitment to duty, words that are not

exactly in currency in hollywood, for example. it's a remarkable story. what do you think? you guys are honored so much and appreciated so much by the american people and for them to run their mouths off i won't characterize them, i will leave that to others right now, it's astonishing to me. >> anybody who can call somebody a coward and has not done what that man has done, they get on tv or behind the scenes and they talk from a distance. but to say it to a man's face really defines who that man is so saying it on tv and behind their backs, that's the true coward. >> i have to agree with you. the idea that these folks, i mean, it is so much -- chris kyle's life itself was so remarkable whan he did remarkable, what he did for the country and for his fellow warriors will always remembered. let's turn to your book to you.

the reaper. whence the name? >> i pretty much got it overseas. i set a record for my battalion. in four months i took out 33 taliban insurgents and probables unknown. somehow i became the grim reaper or the angel of death. that's where it came about. >> well i would have to say that that's a title well earned with that kind of record of killing the enemy. i find it also impressive that you writing this book doesn't create a stir in the american public other than to say i'm going to buy the reaper. i want to know more about the men and the women who defend this country. >> definitely. >> that is -- i'm so proud of the time in which we live, there are so many people who support you. how do you feel? >> i feel good. i'm glad we're not living back in the vietnam era where the guys came back and got spit on. i can come back to america and

write a book and share my story. >> this is the book. the reaper. great to have you with us. appreciate it so much. it's on sale in bookstores online everywhere. than tonight on "war stories," an american spy ship seized in the high seas its crew held hostage. >> i thought at that point they were going to kill us and toss our bodies overside. >> the ship's commander forced to be a pawn in a communist propaganda machine. >> we can no longer tell a lie or make any excuse. no matter how hard, i will try. >> it was a gold mine for them. 're still paying the price 33 years later. next on "war stories." good evening. i'm oliver north