don't be fooled bit trade. stuart: you would buy stocks. >> this is opportunity here. stuart: last 10 seconds of the show, gives us the information, by that market. you're all right, keirnen, no matter what they say. ash, liz, peter, thank you very much indeed. neil, it is yours, sir. neil: thank you very, very much. before we get issue at hand in security briefing what we have to look at what is selling off and everything has to do with everybody acting like babies! can you believe this. prominent democrats, saying whipping about obstruction they did that to us. don't they remember how they treated merrick garland, barack obama's choice for the supreme court. tit-for-tat. get over with it. deal with it. republicans saying this is very different. my point whether you're on the right or left. whether you're republican or democrat, this is not getting

anything done. and this obestin nance is why why the markets are worried about anything ever getting done. a lot of that has to do with people communicating with each other, which seems to be alien concept intraand interparty. we'll get the latest from dhs secretary john kelly, many said was left out of the decision-making process on the travel ban, whatever you want to call it. he will clarify how his department will handle that. that it is not nearly as draconian as some said in the media. having said though, you would think, would think it is reemergence of the third reich how this was handled. this echoes the same security measures the prior administration took into effect and slow, not just freeze those trying to get into this country. dhs secretary john kelly, to spell it all out now.

>> well, good afternoon, everyone. the president, as we all know issued three executive orders related to our homeland security mission. these orders will secure our borders, enhance the enforcement of our immigration laws and keep our citizens safe by keeping foreign terrorists out of country. i'd like to clarify the most recent executive order what it does and does not mean. this is not a travel ban. this is temporary pause that allows us to better review the existing refugee and visa vetting system. over next 30 days we will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of our immigration system which is the most generous in the world. we will provide our foreign partners 60 days to cooperate with our security environments that is the system is designed to do which is to protect the american people. in analysis is long overdue and strongly supported by the department's career intelligence officials.

acting undersecretary for dhs intelligence and analysis david glaw will speak to that in more detail shortly. furthermore, this is not, i repeat, a, not a ban on muslims. the homeland security mission is to safeguard the american people, our homeland, our values and religious liberty is one of our most fundamental and treasured values. it is important to understand that there are terrorists and other bad actors who are seeking to infiltrate our homeland every singgel day. the seven countries named in the executive order are those designated by congress and the obama administration as requiring additional security when making decision about who comes into our homeland. as my predecessor, secretary johnson said it is easier to play defense on the 50-yard line than it is on the one yard line. he preventing terrorists from entering our country we can stop terror attacks striking the homeland.

we can not gamble with american lives. i will not gamble with american lives. these orders are a matter of national security. it is my important responsibility as the secretary of homeland security to protect and defend the american people. and i have directed the departmental leadership to implement the president's executive orders professionally, germanely and in accordance with the law. since the court orders related to executive orders were issued over the weekend, cdp immediately began taking steps, customs and border protection, began taking steps to be in compliance. we will remain in compliance with judicial orders. we are working with our partners at the department of defense, justice and state. we are committed to insuring that all individuals affected by the eos including those affected by the court orders are being provided all rights afforded under our laws. we are and will continue to enforce president trump's executive orders humanely and with professionalism.

our job is to protect the homeland. these executive orders help do that i'm happy to have my colleagues answer any questions, clarify any positions that may be confusing. we have with us today acting commissioner of cbp, acting commissioner of i.c.e. and my intelligence, department's intelligence chief. so with that. >> good afternoon. kevin mackel wayne u.s customs & border protection. i'm talking about the cbp took immediate actions to implement the key provisions calling for suspending entry for 90 days to non-immigrant visa holders and immigrant visa holders from the seven affected countries. we routinely to make changes in our systems and policy for immigration entry at our border and we acted quickly on friday evening to make changes with

this second at this order. first we made changes in the system to identify those passport holders and visa holders from affected companies. we had a call with our field leadership, directors of field operations to inform them of executive order and actions they needed to take. we issued written guidance to the field and calls with stakeholders and air carriers, starting a few hours after receiving the order so they would understand how to operate. we also overflight on friday and saturday worked through a process to be able to waive travelers that were in transit or had sensitive cases that should be considered for a waiver in the national interest as the executive order calls for. to put this in context, in the first 72 hours of the order, one million travelers came through our borders via air. out of those travelers, 500,000 of them were foreign nationals. the people affect bid this order, we denied boarding to 721 travelers that had visas from

affected countries but we actually processed for waivers 1060 lawful permanent meant residents of the united states as well as additional 75 waivers granted to immigrant visa and non-immigrant visa holders. to make sure everyone understands how the process working today, lawful permanent residents and visa holders will be allowed to board flights and processed for a waiver upon arrival. we've done that over 1000 times so far in the three days of the implementation. secondly, immigrant visa holders and non-immigrant visa holders, that are covered denied boarding before they board the aircraft and deader to the department of state for further process. another question that has come up is whether dual nationals are treated differently. travelers will be assessed on our border based on the passport they present. not any dual national status. citizen united kingdom and

present the united kingdom passport the executive order does not apply to you on arrival. refugees, the executive order calls for refugees ready to travel causes undue hardship they would be considered for waivers. we have done that with the department of state colleagues. 872 refugees will be arriving this week and we'll be processing them for waivers through the end of the week and that is fully coordinated. as secretary kelly noted we are responding immediately to any court orders. we did so quickly friday night with the eastern district of new york order. those parties that were affected by that order were processed for a waiver and admitted into the united states. lastly i just want to tell you to increase communications and provide additional information to travelers we are updating on our website. it will be there as you log in cbp.gov. statement about the implementation. faqs giving information to the travelers and public and other

stakeholders and as well a link for specific questions affecting individual travelers. a phone number to call. all those will be on our website, thank you. >> good morning. i'm tomas homan i'm the acting director for i.c.e. it was a great honor contacted last couple days to step up to the capacity as acting director. my plans to retire were put on hold. i did so because i chose to serve my country once again. for those who don't know me, i've been in immigration and enforcement business for 33 years. i started on the front lines in the u.s. border patrol. office of investigations, homeland security investigations 20 years, climbed the ranks there. i'm enforcement operations, on the back end, arresting detaining, removing aliens. i know the immigration life cycle and how to enforce immigration laws. i chose to come back and act in this capacity because of my concern for the communities and safety of our community.

you know, folks, there's jurisdictions across the country where aliens are arrested, criminal aliens, convicted of serious crimes and walk out of jurisdictions without any cooperation from i.c.e. they walk out back in our communities. that causes my officers to go into the communities, arrest somebody on the door they should have arrested in county jail. i'm here to execute a mission within the framework provided me. that framework changed on the executive orders of president trump and men and women of i.c.e. will execute them perfectly. we're here to serve as an organization. thank you very. much. >> thank you, i'm dave glau acting undersecretary for intelligence. i want to echo secretary kelly's remarks. the national security of the united states is of utmost priority. this is the fundamental responsibility of our government to protect the national homeland from nefarious actors trying to

come inbound into the united states. this action is to take a temporary pause to collect intelligence and how we run that against databases to identify those nefarious actors. i'm taking a look, how law enforcement, the intelligence community, the department of defense and our federal state, local law enforcement organizations share information and how we run that data not just against refugee population but anyone trying to come inbound to the united states to try to identify sophisticated networks, potentially trying to come inbound. we're trying to break down those barriers, to share information, to continue our automated screening processes and vetting processes to make sure we identify the nefarious actors, nefarious networks outside of the united states may potentially try to threaten the united states. this is pause to take a look how we collect data and exploit it against national security threats. thank you. >> do we have time for a couple questions?

[inaudible]. >> yeah, come on up. probably best to be in front of the microphone. so who is first? >> -- with reuters. two quick questions. first, to the acting i.c.e. director, is i.c.e. planning on growing detention space for people detained at the borders and extending the time in which they are held? then also on cbc, you mentioned you spoke to people about the order within 72 hours. would it have been easier if you had any guidance before this order came out? could the confusion have been avoided? >> on the first question, yes. we got to secure our borders. those arrested entering the streets we need to detain those people. we're in process identifying additional detention capacity. as far as increasing length of stay, we look to do the opposite. we like to keep them in custody as little as possible. make sure they get due process.

once they get the order from a judge, execute that order. >> before you step up, let me kind of frame it a little bit. we did know the eo was coming. we had people involved in the general drafting of it. you know clearly it was, this whole approach was part of what then candidate trump talked about for a year or two. so we knew all that was coming. as i said, we had high level government lawyers from across inneragency to include homeland secu the drafting of it. so we knew it was coming. wasn't a surprise it was coming. then we implemented it. go ahead, kevin. >> right, our job at the operational level to take guidance, whether a statute, whether it's a executive order or direction from the secretary or in some case emerging threat and respond as quickly and effectively as possible. we go through the process, communications with the field, communications with

stakeholders. in this case we had court orders come in when we were operating the implementation plans so we had to adjust our efforts. we worked quickly to implement. i think the process is smoothed out. the initial comes were not 72 hours, were two hours within the order being received. >> [inaudible]. >> congressional quarterly. two questions, whoever wants to take this. there are several lawmakers and advocacy groups some border patrol agents -- handcuffed passengers and tried to deport some of them. are you looking into these reports and can you assure people that agents are following orders. the president called the executive order extreme vetting. can you explain what exactly is involved in extreme vetting over and beyond what happened? >> first i can say without question no member of the homeland security team ignored a court order, nor would they

ignore a court order. i have heard these reports. i've asked people to include members of congress who called me about them and ask them if they could run down information for me and of course we don't have any information but we would not ignore a court order. the second, i will let you come up -- >> what is exactly involved? >> extreme vetting we're looking at various options right now. we, the inner agency, led by of course homeland security, the countries, there are many countries, seven that we're dealing with right now, we have, in our view, in my view have, don't have the kind of law enforcement, records keeping that kind of thing that can convince us that one of their citizens is indeed who that citizen says they are and what their background might be. so there is other, there are various additional things we're considering. on other end when someone comes

in to ask consideration for a visa, it might be certainly accounting of what websites they visit. it might be telephone contact information so that we can see who they are talking to. again all of this is under development. those are the kind of things we're looking at. social media. we have to be convinced that people that come here, there is reasonable expectation that we know who they are, and what they're coming here for and what their backgrounds are. right now there are a number of countries on the planet that don't have, that kind of records-keeping police work, that kind of thing. the seven in question right now for the most part fall into that category. so we are developing what additional vetting, extreme vetting might look like and we will certainly work with countries on this. kevin, do you want to -- >> i would just add to the secretary's comment. specifically we had a legal team as part of our operational

action team in place friday night. as soon as the court order was received, they advised us on the implications. we put a complete hold on anyone being removed in connection with the executive order. we then processed those folks for waivers and released them into the united states. >> [inaudible] paula reed, cbs news. to clarify what you said you knew the executive order was coming? you knew it would be coming on friday? there were reports that first time you found out was on a plane and you were upset about it? >> as i said we knew it was coming two years ago when mr. trump first started to run for president. certainly didn't learn about it on airplane. knew it was coming. knew it was signed friday morning. i took a trip to miami for couple different reasons. one which was to visit people on the front lines of this whole effort. that is the folks at miami airport, tsa, border patrol

those kind of people. had some time. as you probably all know i came from, before i retired 39 months in southern command. went there and talked to the admiral, engaged with him about the partnership that is frankly very strong between homeland security and southcom. i'm very proud to say that developed very closely between myself when i was in command and my very, very good friend jeh johnson. we want to continue that. but no, i didn't learn bit on an airplane. >> how much value were you giving to them, green cardholders or visas working with u.s. military? a lot of props encountered were foreseeable? >> the, i think the, from our perspective again, people like me are expected and not just because of my military background, we are the, the departments are implementers of the policy obviously. developed by the white house,

approved by the president, in collaboration and then sent down to the departments for execution in this case homeland security. again it was more or less a collaborative process. dod was fairly clear. again when that came down, i think i was in the sixth day on the job. i relied on people like ones standing here and others at headquarters. boss this looks good to us, we're off to the races. i mean i kept being asked about chaos at the ports of entry, and as i said to many, many members of congress, individual phone calls, the, you know, our officers who were at the counters so to speak, the only chaos they say what was taking place in other part of the airport. they knew what they were doing, as immigrants, not immigrants but foreign nationals presented themselves. they knew what to do with it.

as i say the only i guess, we had to step back and recob a little bit. kevin can address that, already has. we had to step back and recob a little bit based on on court order we immediately implemented. so, no, i knew this was under development and i think we were in pretty good shape in how it was implemented by the wkforce >> [inaudible] >> white house has said repeatedly 109 people were inconvenienced by this. the number that you gave for getting waivers like 10 times that. can you explain the discrepancy there between 109 and number of people you just gave to us not let on planes, eventually given waivers? >> you can take it, kevin. the 109, i'm certainly recollecting a phone call. the 109 was very early on, it was the first day of the thing, that evening. of course over time that number

would increase but go ahead, kevin if you have anything else. >> follow up, can you explain why the white house didn't have a current number. they were saying 109 yesterday. >> as kevin will probably outline to you records-keeping we, not always, based on yesterday. so, kevin, commissioner, acting commissioner can give you very good numbers yesterday. but, in order to get the numbers today, we have to wait until tomorrow. just the way they collect the information. actually, obviously it is an on going period of comings and goings, that is why they do it way. kevin i don't know -- >> secretary is absolutely correct. white house was referring to the initial hours and folks in transit to the u.s. when the executive order came about. that was a much smaller number affected landed in the u.s. and being addressed. some of them were subject to the court order. i think that is the difference to the numbers. we'll keep updating numbers on

the website, so you have accurate, current information as of a validated number from roughly 20 hours before every time we post. >> secretary, peter thomas, abc news, did homeland security have a specific operational plan in place prior to the executive order being signed? secondarily, when did you learn specifically that president trump was signing the order? >> i guess i would go back i knew he was going to sign an order, year-and-a-half, two years before he became the president-elect. from day one in terms of the inauguration, finishing touches, i have to put it that way were being put on the executive order. as i say, high-level folks in the government, attorneys as well were part of that. people on my staff were generally involved. i guess probably tuesday wednesday, during the week that

it would be signed out. as you can imagine, copies go back and forth, there are tweets right up to the last minute, adjusted right up to the last minute. thursday we found out it would be signed the next day. the certainly, if you really want to know what was in the executive order, read newspaper day before and you can find out. it was done that way. kevin and his team, the whole team, knows it is coming. knows what certainly the president-elect and knows what direction the draft eo was outlining. people like kevin, i don't know nearly as much about this as he does how you execute right down to the counter level at the airports, but he was leaning forward on that. so when it was signed we executed it and only, as kevin i think would agree, the only adjustment had to be made when the court order came out and of

course we reacted to that as fast as we could? >> evan. >> yeah, would you explain a little bit about the impression of confusion. we heard from some airlines, they felt they were getting contradictory guidance especially with regard whether or not legal permanent resident were allowed to even board aircraft and where they would get the secondary screening that people started talking about. perhaps you can explain a little bit about that level of confusion and why it developed. >> so under the executive order, section 3, there is a provision for granting of waivers when it is in the national interest. lawful permanent residents are covered in the executive order as immigrant visa holders. we worked quickly with counsel to devise a waiver process. secretary gave guidance, returning resident is dispositive into the national interests to welcome that home. once we got the guidance we were

able to delegate authority to grant a waiver out in the field and clarify with carriers that folks allowed to perform. >> that didn't happen immediately? it happened sunday. >> it unfolded matter of hours friday night into saturday afternoon, correct. >> to secretary, kevin, i'm a little bit confused don't want to beat a dead horse, 2 1/2, two years ago, we published, several days in advance details of the draft. that doesn't preclude you not knowing what was in it. did you know details what was in the order outside of open sourced media? who exactly in the department of homeland security was involved, if you can't provide names, a landing team from the transition, trump administration prior to its arrival or career staff involved from the department of homeland security prior to this announcement? >> i did know it was under development. had an opportunity to look at at

least two, as i recollect drafts as it got closer to friday. again, don't exactly know other than some of the, my legal shop representatives were involved. i would imagine some, on the landing team, i would imagine some of them but the point is it came to the department. it was, you know, on a close hold basis meaning we didn't distribute it to everyone in the department. only those that needed it, myself included, my chief and the lawyers, so it was a back and forth process. i did talk to a representative in the white house, oh, probably, certainly early in the week about where it was going, how it was being developed. i commented that i had seen some of the initial drafts. pretty busy week. i didn't get involved in correcting grammar or

reformatting the thing. so, i don't know if that answers it. >> what were drafts from the white house, were they from the media or associated press. >> no, they weren't from the media. although i give you credit, you had it, but no, they were just, the drafts that were coming back and forth within the inneragency >> claire citycation please. -- clarification, pleaser. you had no personal input or any sort of advance working with making these drafts? in other words, there was drafter's name and presented to you and signed? >> presented to me, i mean, this is a staff, primary a staff process, right? so the policy gurus in the white house are working with inneragency people, not a large number, i wouldn't expect of inneragency people. i saw the, the draft because it is still in staffing, and the

people that worked in and around me were saying we got it, boss. this is, this is kind of what we expected it to be. i did not look at it from the perspective of as i say correcting grammar, no we need to change these words to do this thing. people that know the immigration process infinitely better than i do right now, that include people around the inner agency were the ones that did the staff work and ultimately the president signed it. then, as you know, in our government then that is now passed down to the relevant agency, in this case homeland security and we executed it. and as kevin indicated, and i certainly would endorse the people on the front lines, border protection in this particular case, cbp did an absolutely outstanding job. more credit is due because they flexed very quickly when the court order came out, and throughout all of this, the

people were inconvenienced for some period of time as they were entering our country were treated in the way they're always treated, with dignity and respect so. >> two more questions. content related to the executive order itself and not the timing only, please. >> two for -- >> actually molly needs to get one question. go ahead. >> you said no -- [inaudible] court order came out saturday night required that lawyers at those airports have access to people held up there. there were people held up when the order came down at least 24 hours. every single lawyer i talked to there said they had not have access to those held on the airports. your view why you don't consider that violation of the court order. there were numerous reports of people -- basically eliminate your legal residency.

is that correct or were cbp officials directed to give copies of that form to people they encountered at airport. were there any repercussions for cpb officials that were held up. >> that is about six questions but i will let kevin handle it. >> very quickly, lprs process at dulles. as soon as we got it we developed a process to give access to counsel for those being processed at dulles, offered to law if you recall permanent resident coming through and implemented immediately. didn't apply to everyone being processed for a waiver of law if you recall permanent residents. >> [inaudible] >> how does that process work? we make sure arriving permanent resident have a list of legal counsel. again at this point we're processing for waiver expeditiously being released. we're not away everyone taken up opportunity to call counsel from inside the federal inspection service area. they're departing and welcomed home.

in terms of the form issued, we'll look into that. there were some issues with expedited removal that was canceled by the court order and we quickly moved to change the status in the system and correct it. so if there any issues with individuals, given information on cpb.gov. we're happy to look with it and immigration council. we briefed the american association of immigration lawyers on the process and we're happy to make through it to make any corrections to staff. >> just to be clear, and i will answer this, kevin, to the best of our knowledge no cpb officer knowingly intentionally violated the court order? >> that's correct. >> thank you. last question. >> senator rubio and other members of congress today said they, their staff were told they had been instructed by the white house not to provide information about the executive order. if you could respond to those allegations. in addition, during your testimony, during your

confirmation you said, you did not have conversations it is not your understanding that president trump would be placing any additional limits on muslim travelers. so i'm wondering when that may have changed. last question, if the, was an operational plan in place, why was it that a legal process was then developed subsequently after the fact and green cardholders were turned away, sivs were turned away and what is done for people that already has happened to? do you have a plan in place to get them? >> do you want to do the last one. >> that second part, there were sivs denied boarding in the immediate hours afterwards. carriers overinterpreted our guidance. we have great partnership. weed ha to work with them to rebook travelers. contacting relin the u.s. find someone already denied foreign boarding so we can tell them they will be allowed to board. we worked hard to correct and

clarify those issues. >> as of yesterday the secretary of department of defense were under this guidance and compiling a request to let sivs in the country. if this guidance was clear, just a few cases in which people overinterpreted the guidance to airlines, why didn't the department know as of yesterday, that sivs were allowed to the extent which they're compiling a list? >> i think it is fair to acknowledge that communications, publicly and interagency haven't been in the best in initial rollout of this process. we communicated with the department of state now. again these guidelines will be on the website and working with state and carriers to make sure these folks know the rules and we'll allow them to bored and process -- >> molly say the first thing about the senator's office? >> senator rubio said yesterday that his office had been told by department of state and i believe also by the department of homeland security that they weren't allowed to provide information about the executive order to members of congress. that they had been instructed by

the white house not to do so? >> that people in homeland security and that people in homeland and security and defense instructed by white house not to talk to congress. >> not to provide information. >> i don't know anything about that. >> last question. >> one more. go ahead. >> during your testimony, during your confirmation process you had not had conversations with, at the time president-elect trump and did not have the understanding that increased limits would be placed on muslim travelers. can you comment on that now given what has happened? >> i think what happened now obviously is that the eo has outlined seven countries for various reasons as to why travelers from those countries will be prevented from traveling to the night until we can satisfy ourselves that, you know, all, that the people that, they are who they say they are and their background such that we could trust that they're

coming here for the right reasons as opposed to nefarious reasons. you know, this is a process by which we will over the next 30, 60, 90, 120 days, ideally work with those countries. as i say we're loose -- also looking at countries that we could help and suggest they tighten under their procedures. i will say this, the vast majority of the 1.7 billion muslims that live on this planet, vast majority of them, have, all other things being equal have access to the united states. and relatively small number, right now, are being held up for a period of time until we can take a look at what their procedures are. i would be, i would be less than honest if i told you that some of those countries that are currently on the list may not be taken off the list anytime soon. they are countries that are in

various states of collapse as an example. but ultimately, we would like to see all those countries taken off the list but we'll have to see how that goes, molly. >> that concludes the press conference. >> take care. neil: all right. that is the new department of homeland security secretary john kelly, who the media was ripping a a new one about what he knew and when he knew it. whether he was out of loop on this president trump executive order to sort of scale back those, from these dangerous countries, some seven of them, getting into the united states and freezing that, slowing that. what i found remarkable as we were covering this, we felt we owed it to you to cover that in its entirety some of the other news networks, onegy r begins with an m, ends with a c, one begins with a c, and ends with an n.

ripping the administration how much information was forthcoming, could they explain themselves. here he is and partners colleagues, some staying on in the capacity from the prior administration, to explain everything that happened and what went down and they leave it, leave it in the middle of it. bottom line here, what came out of this, is that this executive order, might, might have been sloppily executed, i think that might be a kind term here, but to say people were caught entirely unaware or they didn't know this was coming down the pipe as the director pointed out, this was something that was two years in the making. maybe the direct timing of this, the fact this would happen the next day he said he found out about it last thursday, that was the only issue here. and this maybe wasn't properly communicated to all agencies. for example they cited various airports. i would assume lax and jfk international where a number of people were detained for no reason or what appeared to be no reason. that has sense been resolved.

a lot of that impasse also has been corrected. 720 individuals from these countries, again, those targeted the same list barack obama put together a couple years ago, iran, libya, somalia, sudan, syria, iraq and yemen, people coming from the countries had them take a second look at you and see what they wanted to do. that is slowing in the granting of coming to this country. it is not a freezing in the granting of coming to this country. newt gingrich here on that. newt it was interesting to me, the media was really was, justifiably so all over this execution of it, when it cast time for the homeland security to explain how it went, they leave it, not interested in explanations. >> for good reason. john kelly is one of the finest military officers of his

generation. he is extraordinarily smart. he has enormous integrity. a great combat commander in the middle east. terrific head of the southern command. he knows what he is doing. the longer you kept him on more obvious the reporters were in over their head. last thing elite media want to do start communicating donald trump has really picked really good people and they're doing a really good job. this is the first time they tried something like this. they did it very quickly. there were glitches no question about it, overall think of it as a shakedown cruise. they will get better and better. the media consistently misreported this. consistently is did torted it. frankly harming the night around the world in doing it. there has never been a muslim ban. there is very specific targeting of very specific countries. the vast majority of muslims are not affected by it at all. it has been handled by professionals. so i think the other networks on

the left, they were showing the country a guy who didn't fit their story. that is why they quit covering him. neil: i think you're right. as soon as he was adequately and capably explaining what he knew and when he knew it, despite this sort of drama story that they're trying to build up, many in the media are trying to build up, he was trying to explain how it all came down. he was aware something like this would come down. he was apprised of the fact an eo, an executive order was on tap. middle east have been, people acknowledged there was communications problem with letting various airport personnel how that was going down. it happen ad lot of times. it happened with jimmy cartwer cuban exiles as memory comes back. it happened a variety of institutions with fdr and japanese americans. i do find selectivism here -- >> by the way, remember, president obama had a freeze on syrian refugees at one point. neil: right.

>> even president obama did it. what is interesting is, you know, the longer kelly talked the clearer it was he knew it was doing. my favorite answer, one of the reporters said when you did you first know it was coming? about two years ago. neil: right. >> because, you know, candidate trump said what president trump is doing, the continuity, see it again tonight with the supreme court. continuity between the campaign and the administration is astonishing. he is actually doing what he campaigned on. neil: you know, when i see the media coverage of this, and saying all right, trump is racist and one cover on daily news showing the statue of liberty crying, how do you defend yourself against that and idea that you're bigoted or based on religion and it is not. the same seven countries targeted by the last president? it is like a zero-sum game. when someone comes along to your

point, newt, to explain the process, how it went down, no, we're not interested in that? >> well, first of all, let me point out that when general kelly was asked by president trump, would he be willing to serve as homeland security, part of what he is telling you in his answers today he knew full well as secretary of homeland security he would be implementing this policy because he was hearing about it for two years. he didn't take the job and suddenly was shocked. this is the job he took. he will protect the united states just as he did in the marine corps. he doesn't expect the press to be anymore accurate as they were in the marine corps. he is used to dealing with reporters that are ignorant and totally prejudiced. neil: i don't think they were ready for him. he did say, i have to leave here, want to get your thought on that, he was well aware of some judges, i think one prominent in seattle wanted to curtail that activity and honored those court orders. that seemed to fall on deaf ears.

you were ignoring court orders. no, we were doing what was ever, was ever coming up in those court orders, nothing. nothing. no reaction. >> well, i will make this bet. as time goes on, and people watch people like general kelly, general mattis, others, and they watch the reporters, the reporters are going to shrink and look silly and these guys will get bigger and more reliable and people will realize trump has assembled a amazing team. you saw 35 minutes of truly patriotic heroic american doing his job intelligently, surrounded by a bunch folks they don't know what they're talking about. neil: newt gingrich. thank you very much. as only you can say it. there is where we stand here. nothing racially bigoted. statue of liberty crying on "the daily news" notwithstanding she should be crying on front page of daily news, that a lot of people are getting in here and they shouldn't.

that is the issue. that is what they're trying to rein in. this is not a bigoted move. keep you all alive move. go back to republican and democratic administrations. it is high time we get this right and we get this fair and we try to be balanced which is why we stay on this. more after this. hey gary, what are you doing? oh hey john, i'm connecting our brains so we can share our amazing trading knowledge. that's a great idea, but why don't you just go to thinkorswim's chat rooms where you can share strategies, ideas, even actual trades with market professionals and thousands of other traders? i know. your brain told my brain before you told my face. mmm, blueberry? tap into the knowledge of other traders on thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade.

>> we know the eo was coming. we had people involved in the general drafting of it. clarely, this whole approach is part of what then candidate trump talked about for a year or two. neil: just a few moments ago dhs secretary john kelly explaining how this all went down, executive order, eo, that pretty trump issued. to crack down on nefarious elements, that was the fear coming into this country from

regions of the world, sudan, somalia, syria, some others. there had been some talk this was poorly communicated. i believe the retired general indicated at much it could have been better handled but the bottom line it was handled. they're getting a lot of kinks out here. whether the media wants to think this is religiously based or broad swath of contempt on whole group of people, get former i.c.e. prosecutor. a number of big technology companies including at least one attorney general maybe more as time goes on, are looking at fighting this, and what they consider the illegality of this. so let me get you first to the illegality issue. is what the president did illegal? >> neil, absolutely not. whether i like the policy or not, president trump's executive order was authorized by congress. he has broad authority under the

statutes in order to carry out immigration law. that is exactly what he is doing through the immigration order, this executive order. whether or not he carries out in discriminatory fashion is different story entirely. neil: do you think he carried it out in discriminatory fashion from what we've seen so far. >> we discriminate people on daily. you can't discriminate people against religious reasons but can discrime nate for national origin. that is what the exclusive order has done so far. neil: versus the same seven countries cited by president obama, now a lot of his backers, president obama's backers with whom i chatted say it is night and day. is it? i see two presidents who cited dangerous countries filled with people who wish us ill.

they say we carried it out too far with president trump, what is the truth. >> there was a big difference what president obama did. he cited these seven countrieses where if you traveled to them you couldn't use something called the visa waiver program to enter the united states. you had to go through further scrutiny to come into the u.s. so it is similar in a small fashion to what president trump is doing but it is the same countries both presidents identified as problematic. neil: not bigoted in nature? >> not on its face. i think that is what ultimately will come down to, are president trump's executive orders carried out in discriminatory and unconstitutional fashion. if not they will stand. neil: thank you, sir, very, very much. back to the statue of liberty crying. you know why she is crying? because everyone has this wrong. more after this.

i've spent my life planting a size-six,

non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business.

neil: the selloff ensues, largely because of gridlock in the capitol. concern whether you buy what happened with this whole you know visa thing and whether that is justified or not, who might wish us harm to get in the country. whether you accept that or reject, that concern in the markets, this and problems getting cabinet appointees in and fighting back and forth, well a lot of those things they see happen might be delayed happening, if they happen at all. the latest on the latter part of that drama, cabinet appointments where they stand with peter barnes. hey, peter. reporter: neil, one of president trump's nominees, elaine chao as new transportation secretary has been approved by the senate. but two other nominees, steve mnuchin as treasury secretary, and tom price as the secretary

of hhs, are both being held up by democrats who are boycotting a meeting of the senate finance committee today. at that meeting chairman orin hatch would call them up for those two men to be confirm for those positions but the democrats never showed up which meant they could not have a quorum. well the top democrat on that committee ron wydennen oregon said in statement, quote the finance committee was scheduled to vote on two nominees who misled the public and held back important information on their background. until questions are answered, democrats believe the committee should not move forward with either nomination. widen said price was not forthcoming about health care investment and mnuchin had not been forthcoming about robo-signing at a bank he owned. ethics laws are not optional. they do not have the right to treat disclosure like a shell game. chairman hatch was very upset about this. said that the democrats did not

have to do this. everybody knows that the republicans have the vote to get these two nominees through. called the manuever crap. and said he is going to keep calling for votes all day until the democrats show up. listen. >> they ought to be embarrassed. that is the most pathetic treatment i've seen in my 40 years in the united states senate. we could have our disagreements but the president ought to have the, their choice of cabinet officials to work with. reporter: senator hatch saying hey, if the democrats oppose two nominees vote against them. as you know, mnuchin and price are two of the eight that democratic leader chuck schumer has vowed to throw roadblocks in front of. neil? neil: peter, thank you, very much. democrats will sit out, not a single one will sit in on committee hearings for steve

mnuchin for treasury or tom price for health and human services. so they will continue to block that. many going back to say, this was done to us repeatedly, even when it comes to the supreme court ise. that president obama's choice s rejected as well. they're not going to have it.

whatever legitimacy with all of that, maybe that is just the way it works. now it's republicans who are going to route the way they did that and all of us will suffer. in case you want to go about are there in time, it was republicans who claim the same treatment on democrat when it was president bush's supreme court choices and whether it should be filibuster, whether it should be 50 though, 60 though. they say we are kicking this around because you kicked it around. you're an and now we are going to be. everything wall street wanted to seed from them is going to be delayed or the fear is it's not going to happen. the department of homeland

security secretary for the first time on the executive order concerning a freeze on those amenities country, turns out it was amazed reads. having said that, if he did know something, he said i don't know. and at the same network that were hot to trot, tc and embarrassed. try to answer what he could when he nailed and how well he knew it. acknowledge there is confusion implementing this. then i got off it. i'm not here to judge my fellow networks, the ones begin the cnn and the others that begin with and an end with c. i can tell you this spirit that is not fair. that is not right. if you are going to rip someone a new one, let ken and his team explain what happened because this is like those confirmation hearings. remember the one a couple weeks ago said i don't have time for your answer. but they had time for his criticism.

that my friend, i called and not on both sides of some of this nonsensical love. not right at all. it is what it is and that's why you're losing money. both sides here because it is now mickey mouse. florida attorney general pam bondi with us now. my take is that no one knows how nonsensical washington as until they see it up close. they sit in on committee hearings. for tat because republicans treated them this way. republicans are signing this is how you treated us before, back and forth and nothing gets done. what do you think? >> meal, i agree. the other side they have been so critical during this election and going after president trump and saying that if hillary clinton had won we would all come together. we would all support her.

look what they are doing now. look what president trump is doing now. his protecting our country. safety first. that's so weird secretary kelley said. the get-together is a country. i to have unity and find common ground and this gameplaying isn't going to work. >> at tank abbott not the secretary pointed out, there is than stumbling out the gate here. in his office among airports that didn't quite know how to coordinate this. i believe many would acknowledge, and even though publicly in the trump administration to may be the way the executive order came out and he was notified, who was that it, how is that it could've been better handled. that is probably obvious now. the fact of the matter is it is what it is and yet we stories about the statue of liberty crying the next day. she is crying because this is not the way we go about letting

people into our country. she is crying because we are ignoring the fact that there was a selection process. there was a vetting sms is not about religion. if it were up would be about putting 46 countries on the list with a majority muslim population. but we keep pushing that he appeared the fairness of it never gets out. >> that is so true. of all the seven countries, design president obama's list before he decided to undo everything in 2016. that's what folks keep forgetting about. look what happened in 2011. very little publicity. they banned for six and here this is a temporary scrutiny of people coming into this country. secretary kelley told you that the visa straightened out. neil: no worry free to mention. we latch on to a muslim van.

if you want to make a muslim venue would apply to the 46th of muslim majority populations. donald trump has said why didn't you but the united arab emirates or saudi arabia. there is a legitimate argument there. the target in a sense that are saying or disguising the fact it was only the seven countries that you weren't muslim banish enough. >> what they keep forgetting is looking at yemen. this is about 14 al qaeda members are just taken taken out by president trump in yemen right at the time this temporary ban went into effect. neil: what you make of the fact sean spicer is moments away from oppressor update. so many high-tech companies. we've had to put, goldman sachs, a host of others. just be those sentiments on. we've got to fight this tooth and nail.

do you think ricard is that the measure of the president to comment i.t. is giving his critics a chance to rock his agenda and to disrupt it because certainly that's what the market for one day, maybe two days the same. >> not at all. look what the market has done since president trump has been in office. they should all be thrilled and what he's doing for their businesses. if they want to hire true refugees, we would love for them to hire true refugees. but this is about keeping their big safe. this is about keeping the american people safe. i love to quote president clinton in 1995 when he said we are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws. that's what this administration is about protecting america first. neil: thank you very, very much. by the way, for those of you who are regular watchers of the

show, when president obama wrote the name merrick garland to be his choice to fill the post of antonin scalia on the supreme court, was very critical of republicans at the time even allowing him a fair hearing in the way they're playing games that this would mean delayed substantially filling a supreme court vacancy for a prince of the year, which is what we have. i'm critical of the charade now. if you are confident you can take on a supreme court nominee as republican said at the time they were, then go ahead, get a fair hearing and vote them down. they didn't do that. i was wrong, childish when republicans did it. this coming out the gate ahead of president trump saying he is going to make a pick for the supreme court position and democrats coming out the gate say we will oppose this person sight unseen. that is childish and a waste of time. but again, that is just me. i've got charlie gasparino here

come the jury willis here. a lot going on, but i seek is continuing. >> i was talking to people all week when are we getting tax reform and when is obamacare repealed? i wasold that congress is afraid to put up theirwn bill becae they're afraid of of a trump would say. the fact that the republican party is ridiculous. neil: we are waiting for sean spicer. i want your comment in. a maxim of this self-imposed. neil: absolutely. thanks a lot. here we go with the charade in how the white house is going to handle it on doing and democrats do it and else is doing. >> -- later this evening. according to some polls, and we'll post around here, for 70% of the voters, the president's choice for supreme court was an important choice at the ballot box in november. for more than one in five, it was the most important factor. tonight he will formally present

his nominee to the american people and i can assure you that this individual will make those voters and every american very, very proud. this particular choices when the president takes very seriously. in a civil impact the course of our country's jurisprudence for generations to come. as such, he's taking careful steps to ensure that this process has both and transparent and inclusive. he has been speaking about the list of individuals that he may nominate in may of this year and after consulting with several influential groups, there's a definitive list of 21 in september, pledging his nominee will come from that list. he sought the advice and consent of republicans, democrats, senators throughout this process. the president recognizes the gravity of the choice to fill the seat left by justice kalina. one of the most steadfast protectors of our liberty and abilities of our constitution whenever raise the bench. whoever the president selects will be a worthy successor to

the brilliant legal mind and constitutional dedication of justice kalina. it is our intention to his heart tonight at the e. room at 8:02 p.m. preset will begin at exurbia club. eastern available for live shots 20 minutes following an ounce min and both the briefing room will be outside having been in hours tonight to accommodate any additional generalist needs. we will have further guidance on tonight's plans as it evolves. moving to the news of the day. i know secretary kelley alongside other dhs officials recently concluded a briefing on the operational implementation of the president's executive order. it is pretty clear from the secretary's press conference that this executive order was enacted with proper preparation and coordination between the white house and dhs in that implementation will continue and proceed as planned. we also have a few updates on the leadership of the most critical government agencies. last night the president

released sally yates of her duty and named dana fuente as the u.s. attorney for the eastern district of virginia to serve as the acting attorney general and tell until democratic senators finally quit their obstruction and to prevent questionably qualified senator jeff sessions as our next attorney general. ms. sally yates failed to enforce an order from the office of legal counsel and protect the citizens of the united states. calling for individuals and travelers from seven nations is not extreme. it is reasonable and necessary to protect our country. around 9:00 p.m. last night the president signed an affidavit of nomination is one of the first official actions as his new post as acting attorney general, he signed a memorandum rescinding sally yates guidance to ensure its full implementation.

last night the president announced the appointment of thomas holman as acting assistant secretary of homeland security and director of ice. he has a long career, most recently serving as the executive associate director for were spent and removal operations. having a professional place like this to serve as the acting director is critical to ensuring the efficient administration of the president's agenda. one of the day from the story yesterday i hope you all saw the statement put out from the joint chiefs of staff for chairman dunford discussed the reorganization of the national old and he made it clear he continues to fully participate in the interagency process and provide the best possible military advice to the president and members of the ms e. i hope that statement closes the book on the misleading narrative and should hopefully be the final time we have to address what was in the national security directive. the family of the president -- the president had a somber and lengthy conversation with the family of chief petty officer william bryan owens.

the president offered his sincerest condolences to owe his wife, father and their three children. she thought was the son assault deployment from what i am. we could never repay the debt of gratitude we owe him, the freedom that he thought for and the sacrifice that he made as well as the other members of his unit who were injured in this operation. today in the senate, two of the president's nominees advanced out of the committee. the energy and natural resources committee approved the nomination of congressman ryan sankey ethnic secretary nomination of former texas governor rick perry as the next secretary of energy. elaine chao also gratefully received the approval of the full senate to become the next secretary of transportation. i expect further guidance on her official swearing-in to come very soon. senate democrats have done everything to slow the work of the senate while the president

continues to take decisive action. just like he promised, it's unfortunate the senate democrats remain so out of touch with the message the american people sent this past november. e people want change. president trump has delivered the change in the onesponse from senate democrats sfar to try to solve the core functions of our government. i know i've repeated this everyday, but honestly it's getting a bit ridiculous. the idea these highly qualified nominees have developed to be embarrassed out of committee and get a full vote or be installed because democrats are boycotting committee both is outrageous. the mere idea they are not even showing up to hearings is truly outrageous. i'd like to give a special shout out to the folks at c-span for making sure all of these embarrassing actions by senate democrats get the wall-to-wall coverage they deserve. voters will remember when senators stood in the way of an president trump tried to install his agency and department head the next time their names on the

ballot. i don't mean to sound like a broken record but the numbers don't lie. ask the president trump's nominees are still waiting to be confirmed. at the same time in 2009 a president obama only had seven of these people awaiting confirmation in 2001. president bush had all but two. moving on at the white house this morning, we iterate at the president's attention to continue to enforce protecting employees from the anti-algae bt discrimination while work and for the government or contractors. the president had a purpose and listening session with major pharmaceutical company executives in the roosevelt room. merck, johnson & johnson, amgen, eli lilly and the firmer trade group at the meeting. chairman greg walden, chairman of the house committee on energy and commerce also participated. during the meeting the president commended their progress in lowering drug prices, but also reiterated his insistence there's more work to be done.

he promised to continue reducing burdens from regulation to raise the cost of doing business in america. he was pleased to hear the chairman of amgen robert freely discussed a 1600 american jobs will be added. this administration will continue to prioritize jobs and make it easier for businesses around the country to hire more americans that the president had lunch with mayor giuliani a short time ago who serves as ceo of international security firm, giuliani partners and would lend his expertise to the administration cyberefforts. they are giuliani was asked to initiate the process because of his long and successful government career in law enforcement in 15 years the private sector security providing solutions for challenges we face in the cyberworld. during the transition the president announced he intended to host a series of meetings with senior corporate executives from companies facing challenges such as hacking, intrusion, deception, manipulation, that the data come identity and

securing information for technological infrastructures. these are the same challenges facing the government, facing public entities and businesses in the president believes that solutions to these issues will often come from the private sector. following the lunch with mayor giuliani, the president will host a listening session with the cybersecurity expert and mayor giuliani. no consensus or advice and recommendations from the group are widely expected, but we do expect wide-ranging discussion with the growing cybersecurity threat the nation is facing. this afternoon the president will sign an executive order or potentially sanguine that the federal government cybersecurity effort and give leaders tools they need to keep the country safe from cyberattacks. he ordered the three main things. secures the federal networks we operate on behalf of the american people to work with industry to protect critical infrastructure maintained a way of life and events cause of internet freedom. more information will be available later this afternoon, but the executive orders is the first step in the president taking the address of new

security challenges in the 21st century. the vice president participated in the policy lunch in the senate. he'll hold several minutes with members of capitol hill could the beginning of extensive outreach by legislative affairs seemed on the president supreme court choice. tonight the vice president will swear in elaine chao is mentioned. further updates at 5:00 in the ceremonial office across the way in the old executive office building. secretary chao is one of the successful campaign officials in american history or even the longest tenure secretary of labor since world war ii and also serving as deputy secretary of transportation under george h.w. bush administration. she's the perfect choice to lead the department of transportation and promises to be a significant period of modernization and improvement. as their immense blessing on our schedule tonight is the president's announcement of the next associate justice for the supreme court. tomorrow is the kickoff for black history month and the white house is excited to host a series of events this month in

recognition of it. in particular, this post office hold a ceremony tomorrow celebrating the official issuance the dorothy height forever stamp. dr. height of the national council of women for four decades and is a true pioneer in the civil rights movement. a couple of administrative no-space-on friday that president will depart from this white house to the winter white house and more lava will spend the weekend and hold meetings. further guidance will be coming out throughout the week and i'm excited to announce following up on our announcement expanding the press briefing room to skype seats will be launching the briefing room tomorrow. the ni girl panelists will be not let her make from fox eight in cleveland, ohio. lars larson of the lars larson show. check joby from jeff joby publishing in south-central kentucky and kimberly califf from wp are right in rhode island. not sure how she's not in there. i look forward to virtually welcoming them to the briefing room. and with that, questions.

john roberts. >> the removal last night has raised questions as to how this president will deal with dissent in the ranks currently and in the future. does he see what she yesterday is a different opinion and act of insubordination? how would he read it and how will he act in the future? >> there's a big difference between listening and sharing ideas and executing lawful orders. it is the right of every american to express their ideas and opinion and frankly that's what you thing the president did today. we are talking about at the 2:00 hour with cyberexperts give their opinions and ideas how to protect our critical infrastructures. but there's a difference when she has the act in attorney general is not only responsible, but required to execute lawful orders and defiantly says no to someone who's chosen to lead the

department, she was rightfully removed. that is a position of leadership that is given to somebody who is supposed to execute orders handed down to them properly wish that executive order was 100% done. ironically, it went through their offices, the department justice office of legal compliance. so the idea that it went through the entire process of which they were part and then she chooses not to execute it is actually bewildering as well as defiant. >> so is the president laying down a marker now to all of his cabinet secretaries and other officials to say if i give you a direct giving you do not follow it, you're gone. >> i think it kind of comes with the job. if you don't believe in the president's agenda and i think everyone of the cabinet cabinet members, everyone at the appointed understand her serve at the pleasure of the president. we talked about this at length. this is an adjoining the government to execute your ideas

are your initiatives. the president was clear during the campaign whether it's economic security, national security that he's had an agenda articulated clearly to the american people. hold on, thank you. and it is his job to late edition out in the people he appoints to nominate announces the staff members are cabinet level numbers or agency head, their job is to fulfill that. if they don't like it, they shouldn't take the job. it's the president's agenda we are fulfilling here. >> is released to the executive order today can hold the trump administradministr ation assured digital privacy of americans that the president looks to strengthen u.s. cybersecurity. >> just to be clear, one of the things the president wants mayor giuliani and the cyberexperts to come in is to get their ideas, to make sure where we are headed in cybersecurity ensures that our critical infrastructure throughout the

governmengovernmen t and frankly throughout business to the extent the government can be helpful on that or protect and secure it. i just want to caution what we may or may not do today. the president has a good idea where he's going to go, but he wants to hear what mayor giuliani and other experts have just read about the steps they can take in terms of executive action that will help secure further these critical infrastructures. april. >> shawn, i will couple questions. i want to go back to the issue of his travel ban. >> first of all, it not a travel ban. i apologize. i want to make sure we get this straight. secretary kelley for one of the other individual which i think a million people have now come into this country. that is not a ban. it is to make sure the people coming in are vetted properly from seven countries identified by the obama administration. a ban would mean people can't get in. we've clearly seen hundreds of thousands of people come into our country from other countries. sorry.

>> mind you, i have two questions. >> yes, of course. >> all that is happening and as he tried to give specifics about what is happening, what is the concern about the fallout from other countries who are viewing this still in a certain way. have you looked at the fallout and how to counter it and work with these other countries that may be allies or may not be allies in order to prevent something from happening. >> i think one of the things we're doing is trying to make sure people understand what actually happened. i some reporting today that secretary kelley was on a plane and flying and that it was reported on one of the networks and major institutions about what happened. secretary kelley said that was briefed on this time, the edits came from my staff. i don't know how -- i don't want to spend each of these briefings talking about misinformation. at the end of the day, a major newspaper and a major network reported today that they were

kept out of the loop. the secretary detailed multiple occasions in which he was briefed on it. his staff made edits to it. i don't know how much more. part of what we are trying to do is make sure people actually and what happened. when they use words like travel ban, that misrepresents what it is. seven countries previouslyy thea administration where we don't get the information we need for people coming into this country. this is not just the people. it's about the information that another country provides us. we work with other countries and we have systems in place to ensure when you travel from our country -- their country of our country, vice versa we share information about passengers and citizens going in and out. we don't have the information required to make an accurate determination at the time of entry into our country. we are going to make sure

because the country doesn't have the systems in place or in some cases the willingness necessary to ensure that people in this country are properly vetted. this isn't about refugees. it's about travelers. what we are doing is making sure that other countries understand exact weight what was in the order, how it applies to what it means to be seven waivers and this stuff, but for the most part you seen a lot of panic and people stopped reading the order and realizing that day. i think that's where we've tried to make sure people have the facts. we are not just doing outreach. we are brief and secretary kelley going out there that a while ago with i.c.e. and cbp. make sure people understand it's working correctly and very well and the government is doing what is supposed to do to protect its people. but the number one thing we can

do. >> the president met with the pharmaceutical companies. when is this meeting scheduled for president trump? >> my understanding is he was invited to this meeting. he had a scheduling conflict and where they can getting it back up. he was invited to the meeting today, had a scheduling conflict and we're looking to get it back. >> i expected this point will be one-on-one. >> does the president anticipate whoever that is? >> no. we have proven so far the democrats can try to obstruct, but at the end of the day the will of the american people will overcome that. again, what i mentioned that the database is the advice and consent piece of this. tnr team have met with senators from both sides of the aisle to understand the qualities they

look for in the next associate justice. we have done a very good job of getting a nominee in place that will be announced tonight that meets the criteria set forth. they may not like their political or philosophical background, but the criteria in terms of academia that round, time on the bench. the expertise and criteria needs the intent of both republicans and democrats. >> do you believe you can get nine democrats to support the nominee? >> absolutely. at the end of the day, one of the things that look time-honored tradition as we recognize the confirmation process, the default is if you're qualified for that position, you should be confirmed. not the other way around. most democrats realize that at some point having a court that is not fully operational is not a political site to have.

>> i want to ask you the obvious follow-up question then. at least one republican senator has said democrats have removed the filibuster from just about every other appointment aside from the supreme court. and he said several republicans say they would have no hesitation about moving for another new year option that democrats attempt to filibuster any of the possible nominees. is this an enterprise that was the port and has he discussed it with members of the senate? >> first and foremost, to your last question look at the nine senators regardless and i wouldn't be surprised if we get war. i'll be able to shed more light on this tomorrow in terms of the back road. but i think we've got an individual but i think is hopefully going to garner widespread bipartisan support. this individual has qualifications and experience in the judicial philosophy that should win bipartisan support.

beyond that, i would suggest senator mcconnell has done a phenomenal job of moving things along to the -- how the senate operates. >> we know that the list of 21 was put out there in the campaign. we know that the president is going to reveal -- [inaudible] any of how he got there in the last hour or in the last days, who has he been done to kind of narrow this down? >> i was say i think i probably shed a lot more light on this tomorrow. i appreciate the effort to head that off. tomorrow i think we'll have a little bit more of a discussion as to how the president came to this choice. he may touch on it a little tonight. i will leave it to him. i appreciate that.

>> at the end of the day, prescription drug prices met with the former leader earlier today. what makes them so confident he can drive down drug is for administrations past to try to do the same but haven't been able to. how's he going to go about it? >> he's a successful businessman and a top-notch negotiator. several people tried to get the cost of lansdowne. the cost of the ad 35 and the air force one and through conversations he did it, should and significant off the next generation air force one. i think he has a track record so far just during the transition but also as a businessman. he knows how to negotiate. i think he will sit down with individuals and same way he gets people to understand the agenda and regulatory and tax climate he wants to institute to bring jobs home. people are making a commitment to him to bring jobs an manufacturing back based on his track record as a businessman as his word. they understand he will create a

climate that supports american worker and american manufacturing. so i think, you know, you look over and over again the number of companies that want to come back and say we want to be part of this agenda to grow the economy and to create jobs or to help you fight on behalf of taxpayers and i think you will continue to see that. he understands the challenges that the that is holding back some of the negotiating allowing prescription drug prices to drop or get the best deal for government whether he it is medicare, medicaid who are such large buyers or the va you're not, you have such purchasing power that is not being utilized to the full extent. hunter walker. >> thank you, sean. president is meeting with mayor giuliani. what do you think of the claim that the order evolved from the muslim ban the president proposed during the campaign? is that accurate? >> he talked about extreme vetting and the need to keep

america safe for a long time. this is not a muslim ban. this is not travel ban. a vetting system to keep america safe, plain and simple. all facts and reading of it clearly show that is what it is. >> mayor giuliani stressed that to but came out -- >> you should ask mayor giuliani. that is his opinion. i'm telling you what the president has say and what the president has done to focus making sure we keep the country safe and the executive order that was drafted does just that. is to make sure and insure that people coming in from seven countries identified by the obama administration that we didn't have the proper systems to know who was coming into our country was put in place and a 90-day period was also granted to insure that we knew how to further address that situation in the future. sikh. >> thanks, sean. following up with again about the strike over the weekend, can you confirm that the strike over

the weekend that the daughter of anwar al-awlaki cast killed in the strike and address killing of american in the terrorist operation? >> i will not go any further than what the department of defense released. obviously we covered a tremendous amount of information and killed an estimated 14 members of al qaeda, aqap individuals, and then we suffered the loss of life of a service member and four people are injured. that is as far as i'm willing to go at this time. kristin. >> sean. you're saying this is not a ban. this is president trump's tweet. ban was announced -- >> look at words media is using. hold on. it can't be, it can't be jonathan, thanks i will let christen talk. it will can't be a ban if you're letting a million people in. if 325,000 people from country coming in that is by nature that is not a ban. >> i understand your point.

president himself called it a ban. are you confused or president being used. >> i am not confused. the words used deriving that media call it, this is extreme vetting. >> paul ryan said today, i think it is regrettable there was some confusion on the rollout of this, house speaker is saying that. what do you say to republicans who argue that this is part of a broader issue, president not enacting this policy smoothly? >> first of all i think we have addressed that we could have either telegraphed this days in advance which people could have gotten on planes and come over here, which would have undermined the exact nature what this sought to prevent or we could have done it in a way that inconvenienced some folks for a little while -- can i answer the question? there are clearly some confusion, part of it your network was one of the people just hours ago told people that general kelly was unaware of what is going on. moments later he gets on air, sear is how many times i have been briefed. with all due respect i think you

have been part of the confusion. you have helped cause this. despite claims to whatever you claim that you have sources that tell us, general kelly stands up and says this is how many times i've been briefed. this is how many people are involved. and yet you are out there -- >> there was "new york times" report that was cited. >> so i apologize nbc reporting is based on "the new york times" false reporting. how can it be accurate reporting, glen, if -- the secretary of homeland security stood up, you're calling him a liar? jonathan, i'm, i'm talking to, you said that the report in the "new york times" said that he was unaware of the ban. hold on. answer the question, you just called. >> a few minutes ago you stood at podium and you rerated something you said yesterday, about anyone who doesn't agree in terms of the career bureaucracy should hit the road. i'm paraphrasing. you had a statement president trump made where he accused

acting attorney general betraying her own department expressing counter opinion. don't you think that kind of language has chilling effect on the public states that your officials make. >> no, there is big difference. think about the process that at work here. department of justice office of legal compliance vetted executive order. sending it back to us completely compliant. acting attorney general says i'm not going to enforce it? you tell me how that jibes? because at the end of the day if the acting attorney general has an office under her jurisdiction says something is legal and compliant and then she gets out there and says i'm not going to enforce it that doesn't sound like attorney general upholding duty she swore to uphold. at the end of the day, she should step down. but at the end of the day the attorney general had a problem with her own decision approving something. the president followed process.

sought feedback. went through inneragency review, had departments sign off. hold on. why don't we just, let me answer glen to be polite now, huh? what the answer is that we went through the process. the office of legal compliance came back and said this is compliant executive order. it is fully legal and can be executed. so then for the attorney general to turn around and say i'm not going to uphold this lawful executive order is clearly a dereliction of duty and she should have been removed and she was. i just, it is odd to me that we're having a discussion about somebody whose job it is to execute lawful orders who chose not to do it, hold on, chose from the to do it and questioning whether or not we were right to remove her. that is the folks from right and left, constitutional scholars this morning which might not agree with policies or parity of the president but he was right

to do this he had ever right. >> why use the word betrayal? >> because the department's job, they're the department of justice. and if you have you a legally executed order, and the attorney general says i'm not going to execute it, that truly, that clearly is a betrayal of what she is supposed to do. i'm not going to define the word, glen. >> sean, "new york times" report said that secretary did not receive a full briefing until the executive order was being signed. so my question is, can we expect that secretaries, agency heads, when there are future executive orders or changes of policy may not receive full briefings? >> look, the secretary was briefed on multiple occasions with the language of the order. i don't know how you can say this any other way. >> just asking about full briefing what "the new york times" reported. >> and i'm telling you that i don't believe "the new york times" reporting is accurate. what i'm telling you that the secretary on multiple occasions was briefed of the his senior

officials were briefed. not just briefed, they were part of the drafting process. it went through, not only that, just back up. so they get consulted and briefed. goes through the office of legal compliance. gets shifted out to the nsc and homeland security council. this went through a very, very extensive staffing process. the idea, whether or not he got fully briefed, he was briefed multiple times. saw the language. his stave made edits. it came back multiple times. i'll not sure how much more briefing you can do. yes? >> from australia broadcasting. thanks for the question. australia question made a recent deal with the obama administration whereby the u.s. would take refugees from australia offshore detention centers. most are from iran and iraq and somalia. can you confirm that the deal is still on? are these refugees exempt from what you described as the the ex-vetting or will that deal change and be delayed?

>> the deal specifically deals with 1250 people, papua, new guinea are being held. part of the deal they have to be vetted in the same manner we're doing now. there will be extreme vetting applied to all of them. that is part and parcel of the deal that was made and made by the obama administration with fullbacking of the united states government. the president in accordance with that deal to honor what was agreed upon by the night government, insuring that vetting will take place, in the same manner that we're doing it now, will go forward. >> the question, looking at bigger picture, this president when he came in said he would gather us all together. he would bring us together. actions taken in the first 10 days seem to indicate otherwise from his, from people in his own party, use of word betrayal. how will this president address the fact that people are looking to him to bring people together and yet with his own words seems to be driving us apart? >> i think that is very one-sided way of looking at

this. i will, i think he brought unions together. business leaders together. republicans democrats, independents. i think someone who doesn't carry out an act using that as way to describe that he is not bringing the country together is not exactly a representtation. i'm not, the president has done a tremendous amount through both what he has said and done more importantly to start to bring this country together. hit policies frankly are toke discussed on keeping every american safe and every american a higher and better-paying job. i think something benefit all of us. >> i asked you about a shield law for journalists last week. you said you would getwhack with us. >> quick on trade, now that notices have been given the countries are you considering any changes in the roles of your official trade negotiators? what area of the globe are you going to start first on negotiation? >> well there is no change in their roles.

i'm not entirely sure as announced -- >> lead negotiator. >> he is got to be confirmed first, but as u.s. trade representative is clearly leader of negotiating trade deals. wilbur ross and peter navarro and great, robust team continuing to work on behalf of deals and renegotiating. there is a two-step process. number one we reexamine all the current trade deals. figure out to improve them but secondly i think we'll start talking to other countries around the globe including some of those tpp partners. i think of the 11 other countries, five of them we current trade deals with. so you would examine those to improve upon them. look at other countries in there, there is willingness to engage with other countries. >> the president has previously indicated that he would encourage the targeting of families of terror suspects. is that still his current position? >> when did he say that?

>> on fox, the thing with terrorists you have to take out their families. >> i think he has been very clear when it comes to seeking out isis and other terrorists he will lean on director pompeo, general mattis and seek their opinion on stuff. that will be continuing. >> families of terror suspects, civilian members about families. i got you. >> sean, thanks for taking this question. i know you indicated at that podium there will be further action. what does this look like? five detainees have been cleared for transfer that are sitting at guantanamo with this administration take action and in the next coming month on those detainees? >> all of those actions are being currently reviewed. we don't have anything further at this time. >> daily news. thanks for taking the question. the ball administration clean power plant, does the president plan to revoke the clean power plan and perhaps go further to

try to revoke the endangerment -- >> president is very clear with respect to energy policy, he wants to review all the options to wind, power, solar, clean coal. we're in the process of reyou viewing all of our energy policies. i note we don't have an energy secretary confirmed right now because the senate hasn't yet moved forward. with that inhow once that is done we'll have further updates on energy matters. >> sally yates was on obama appointee holding on through the transition. how many more through the government and at this time transition and confirmation process plays out do you expect anymore problems from any of the other ones? >> in some cases we held some individuals over because they hold a critical position within government. in some cases we named folks at acting. it is case-by-case basis. part of it right now, the

president wanted to focus getting his cabinet up and complete. we'll continue to make nominations both at deputy and under and assistant secretary level but in key agencies of i.c.e. being one of them, where assistant secretary but there are 30 other agencies where we named acting heads to insure as we move through the confirmation process we have somebody in that position to insure continuity of government. daniel. >> sean, yesterday you said 109 individuals were affected by extreme vetting. dhs said over 1100. >> hold on. first of all to be clear what they're talking about is number of people who weren't allowed to board a plane coming in. so they were stopped at their port of entry. had to get additional clearance and then take off. there is a big difference. the numbers we're talking about initial group of people in transit at time the executive order was signed. there is another group of people the department of homeland security has those numbers

up-to-date on their website where they're talking about people stopped at the port of entry to insure they're properly vetted before they board a plane. so very, very delicate distinction between people who were on the plane coming into this country when the executive order was signed, all who have been vetted and cleared. the people who have been stopped at a port of entry in one of those seven countries to insure proper vetting took place before they were able to move on. >> sean, halley's question about civilians being targeted by the administration in anti-terror raids. sikh's question was about al-awlaki's daughter. let me ask you is the president willing to kill and target american citizens, even minors just because their family members are terrorist. >> no american citizen will ever be targeted. go ahead. >> if you're qualified for the position, you said earlier, if you're qualified for the position you should get confirmed. that is not how mayor rick far land was treated in the previous

administration. >> there has never been a situation, fourth term, someone late in the election cycle. that never occurred before. the senate, republicans were very clear we should wait let voters have a choice. that exactly what happened. as i noted at beginning of this 70% of people thought the president's choice for the next supreme court was major decision. that is something he campaigned on. when you're that late in a term, never happened before and the goal was to make sure that the voters had a say in allowing that to happen. i think that clearly it worked. voters looked at that as a major reason which they voted for the president. i think as we move forward, that is why i think we'll get the support we need. yeah. >> sean, if the president does get his pick on the bench, what are any specific cases that the administration hopes that the court takes up in the near future? >> well, there is a lot of cases that i think are in the queue right now have potential to be 4-4. the idea to get this individual

confirmed as soon as possible just to the got docket moving. that is probably biggest priority right now. thank you, guys very much. have a great day. i will see you tonight. good luck. 8:00. >> president very strict ban on -- neil: these are turning into pretty feisty affairs right now. the white house spokesman sean spicer trying to go back and forth with the media about, you present one storyline that doesn't jive with the actually events line, even going back and forth what homeland security knew about the freeze on those trying to get into this country that wasn't a freeze at all in fact it is a delay, 90 days, to 120 days depending on country of origin. depending on refugees, talking about syria or some of these other countries in question. words, essentially, spicer was saying matter. shelby holiday, connell mcshane how this relationship is going. it doesn't look, connell, well. >> that is fair.

it is a little bit -- you're right about these being feisty affairs we get to watch on daily basis, back and forth between the white house press corps and press secretary continues. to the point about words mattering, caught in semantics there for a while. there was argument back and forth about things that probably don't matter much but accuracy in reporting and or statements does matter to the extent that the media was reprimanded rightfully so by the way early on when king bust story came out and inaccurately reported and sean spicer was all over them. tried to do something, not similar but use of ban, travel ban, probably sean spicer make sure your boss the president didn't send out a tweet yesterday using the word ban. that gets lost and far more important matters to discuss including supreme court nominee. merrick garland comparison came up as well. neil: that was classic case where republicans at time

wouldn't grant president obama's choice for to fill antonin scalia's seat, a hearing. now, at the time, charlotte, republicans were saying we're doing what joe biden did to george bush and what he was advocating for an outgoing president and when it was a good time to put someone on the high court or introduce a nominee. back and forth, tit-for-tat. i can't keep up with the childishness. >> a lot of fingerpointing. makes your head spine spin. mitch mcconnell did say, he make as fair point, other presidents and democrat and republican have been able to get their supreme court justices confirmed in the first year of presidency. that is lot different than last year, 8th year of presidency. he make as good case. interesting to see how it plays out. sean spicer in the press conference may give us a few clues. he said he believes this person wil have bipartisan support.

that perhaps eliminate judge william pryor who is seen as partisan pick. he said this judge has conservative credentials and the right judicial philosophy. that could point to neil gorsuch of denver, seen comparable to the late justice antonin scalia defense of religious liberties, his judicial humility. he doesn't think the justice department should step on the toes of the executive branch, legislative branch. he has been fairly critical of secondtive overreach which is something democrats are concerned about right now. he could perhaps gain bipartisan support as you know, the democrats have not said anything whether or not they would support any of these potential picks. neil: connell, things were accelerating on the sell side as this was ensuing, no doubt traders says, well, this doesn't look too promising. >> no. neil: i wonder when i hear senators like democrat jeff merkley of oregon promising a

fight, this is stolen seat, referring back to the garland situation. we'll use every lever in our power to stop this. sight unsign. don't even know the person. where are we going. >> democrat are not showing up for hearings that include the confirmation of the next treasury secretary which matters for markets. in matter of timing, odds getting something like tax reform through congress will be extended if you don't have a treasury secretary in place. to be fair to the other side of it, the discussion of white house, friday mexico story, surrounded topics seen as being protection it and in the le's views, to immigration policies maybe isolationist. things markets don't like as well. gridlock. things being held up and priorities you know, to put it that way not necessarily what wall street wanted to focus on. they want to focus on growth. neil: shelby, i don't see much olive branch activity going on here? >> no. hard to see the olive branches

extended between the republican party. you know. neil: yeah. >> there is rhetoric. house speaker paul ryan this morning back up donald trump but beneath the surface we don't know what they're getting done on tax reform. we're not sure if coming together to come to corporate taxes for example. there is a lot of unknowns of the it is very easy to see why the market is off and investors are extremely confused. neil: the worst punishment for me as a kid, when i was a kid, go to your room, no dinner. right, man. i want them all to go to their rooms, no dinner. >> no dinner. >> fair enough. neil: more after this. thanks, guys.

>> well, our long national nightmare is over. [laughter] fox business has learned that anthony scaramucci is likely to be confirmed as a top adviser or to president donald trump as early as today. the announcement has been theyed over the last couple of --

delayed over the last couple of weeks because of potential business conflicts, but we understand that today mr. scare houthi is likely to get the job he has long wanted. we do have a full report on this issue on foxbusiness.com. it goes through some of the machinations. essentially, mr. scaramucci was caught up in a battle between reince priebus, one adviser to many trump, and steve bannon. that's where we are right now, looks like bannon has won this internal war. also, from what i understand, he butted heads with oral row saw. read it all on foxbusiness.com, it's an interesting story about internal warfare in a new trump administration. back to you. neil: you love warfare, don't you? [laughter] charlie gasparino, thank you very much. i can tell you this, folks, wall street doesn't, and they kind of echo our sentiment. it looks like things are sort of veering out of control in washington and stuff they thought was going to get done

doesn't look like it's going to get done or at least anytime soon. they worry, and today they sell off and all because grown men and women are acting like babies. [laughter] ah. trish' taliban, to you. trish: really? to you? in d.c.? neil, thank you. white house press secretary sean spicer defending president trump's decision to fire sally yates, emphasizing that ms. yates was fired because she refused to comply with president trump's executive order on immigration. essentially, putting millions of american lives at risk. i am trish regan. welcome, everyone, to "the intelligence report." wow, things got heated -- as they do these days -- at the white house briefing. sean spicer calling out certain members of the media for reporting false information. he also doubled down, of course, on trump's decision to fire ms. yates. i want you to see this, because it's really quitcontentious. watchim here with one new york times reporter and an nbc reporter. >> your network was one of the