of its own success, because they designed it when people were flying on prop constellations, and all of a sudden the building was too small for what they needed it for. heather: looking forward to that. jon: "outnumbered" starts right now, see you back here in an hour. ♪ ♪ andrea: this is "outnumber," i'm andrea tantaros, and here today, kennedy, editor of townhall.com, katie pavlich is back, commentator and national spokeswoman for the leave right initiative, rachel campos duffy is also here, and today's #oneluckyguy, retired four-star general jack keane, also former army vice chief of staff, chair of the institute for the study of war and fox news military analyst. and, general, you are "outnumbered." >> i'm delighted to be here. andrea: are you ready? >> i'm ready. andrea: good. we're honored to have your experience with us on the couch today, general. >> thank you so much.

delighted. andrea: let's get to it. with just four days until the primaries in south carolina, donald trump and ted cruz ratcheting up their attacks on one another. their one-time bromance long in the rearview mirror. trump at a news conference in the palmetto state yesterday tearing into cruz with perhaps his harshest words yet. >> i've never seen anybody that lied as much as ted cruz. and he goes around saying he's a christian. i don't know -- i think he's an unstable person. i watch him, i see him, he's a good debater, but he can't talk. i've seen some that are much more cunning. this guy lies, but he gets caught every time. he got caught with carson. the good ones do it and don't get caught. andrea: trump also threatening to sue cruz over his canadian birth if he doesn't take his, quote, false ads and retract his lies. but cruz hit back by questioning his rival's state of mind and

saying he's, quote, lost it. listen. >> he was just going on and on about how i'm the most horrible person in the world because i keep repeating the things he said. [laughter] this is the most rattled i've ever seen donald, in this press conference today, where he just kind of stood and vented. i think he avoided profanity, so that was good. [laughter] andrea: in the meantime, while he says he's not choosing sides, the man who won the south carolina primary in 2012, former speaker of the house -- also outspoken -- newt gingrich. and he's calling on trump to cool it. >> i wish trump would drop all of the personal ad hominem things which he seems to enjoy so much. i think it weakens the country, i think it weakens him, i think it makes us look stupid. and i'm not defending cruz or anybody else. i'm just saying i think the whole politics of this kind of personal stuff is almost deranged. it makes no sense to me. andrea: all right.

so it is quite the fight on the republican side, general, and a number of these candidates on both the right and the left that have these epic battles right now, political battles, they're come to -- they've come to talk to you, probably seeking your p endorsement. you have not endorsed. when you look at what's happening on the republican side, which competitors look strong? which look weak? give us your analysis of the current state of the republican race. >> well, i can't get into the candidates because what i deal with is national security issues. but in terms of the challenges these candidates are facing and what they were seeking from me is largely the region of the world that is most troubled is the middle east, and let's face it, even scholars who spend all their time with this are valving their heads about what are -- scratching their heads about what are the solutions there. so it's understandable. the major issue they recognize -- and this is democrat and republicans -- is that the world has changed so

much, and it seems like we're facing considerably more problems now than we have in the past. what i frankly tell them is the united states has not faced problems we're dealing with today on this kind of scale since postworld war ii and the rise of the soviet union. global jihad is morphing throughout the world. we have free revisionist -- three revisionist powers, russia, china and iran, who are seeking regional domination, and every one of them has achieved a degree of that success. and we have cyber countries who have advanced technologies that have the capabilities to bring down our financial andbacking system -- banking system, our transportation system and our energy system in this country at network speed. and they are stealing money, intelligence, property and intelligence information from us at alarming rates. those are major problems that we're facing. andrea: so, general, when you hear them taking personal shots, does it bother you they're not

focused on these larger issues? >> well, yes. i want political candidates, but i'm one american citizen. i want them to focus on the issues, and the issues are so serious for the american people and the future of our security that just on national security alone we should be spending more than half the time at least on just differentiating how would you deal with this specific issue. and i think the overall issue, i tell a candidate if they want to talk to me, i say one of the things you should come to grips with, what is the role that you believe america today should play in the role. what is its leadership role. because i fundamentally believe looking at the american president we have right now he has a different view of what america's leadership role is in the world than most of his predecessors who were democrats and republicans since world war ii. ing. andrea: to that point, katie, and i agree with the general, at these debates they'll get a question about what we do in

syria or a question about the middle east, and it bothers me sometimes that i hear arm the kurds and peshmerga. moving right along, we don't have a robust debate about national security, and we're certainly not having it in south carolina. kate kate well, i think, you know, the first point is when donald trump and ted cruz are exchanging these insults on whatever issue of the day they want to talk about, for trump yesterday it was iowa, he's still on iowa, they're not talking about very serious issues that are facing the country. they are very sobering, as you just laid out, general, situations that we have to deal with. and i would argue that donald trump, his entire campaign has been based on insults and calling people liars pause he can't talk about these -- because he can't talk about these things. marco rubio can talk about these things in depth, ted cruz can, donald trump has never held a press conference to say met me lay out -- let me lay out my national security plan and talk to you about how we can make the country safer. he can't do that because his

entire campaign is based on a superficial insult continuing because he can't talk about it. andrea: in fairness though, kennedy, jeb bush has hurled quite a few insults. we heard the word mooning, loser, child molester. it reached a level of pettiness that i think we almost have not seen before. but john nolte, i'm going to play devil's advocate, he's on breitbart, and he posted this morning, look, donald trump has the wherewithal to take this to the other side. we had a candidate in john mccain and mitt romney who was scared to go after obama. so he argued in favor of these really harsh attacks that you hear playing out. is that a fair -- kennedy: well, i think we have to be flexible. i don't think we can apply the rules of past elections and campaigns. i think we're foolish to do that. and, you know, when you look at this, at some point, you know, conventional wisdom would say we have to drop the insults because people are going to get sick of it, republicans are going to damage themselves so much. i don't think that's going to

happen. we're only on south carolina. this is only the third state to cast votes. it hasn't even gotten hot yet. you're talking about candidates going after each other with these personal attacks within hours of supreme court justice scalia's death which i thought would shift the tenor of the debate dramatically, and that didn't happen. and that only adds another level of chaos to what general keane was already saying. andrea: yeah, we have been deep on the national security. i don't think any candidate has dug deep with details. george w. bush hitting the campaign trail on behalf of his brother jeb in south carolina. the former president didn't call out of any of jeb's opponents by name, but he did say this: >> i understand that americans are angry and us frustrated, bue do not need someone in the oval office who mirrors and enflames our anger and frustration. [applause] we need someone who can fix the problems that cause their anger

and frustration, and that's jeb bush. [cheers and applause] andrea: the brothers also sat down for an exclusive interview with sean hannity, talking about foreign policy and defeating isis, and bush 43 made this point: >> the lessons of 9/11 are being forgotten by a lot of people, and that is a human condition elsewhere matters to our national security. if we let down our guard against this group of thugs, they will hurt us again. and the good news is jeb won't let down his guard. andrea: okay, rachel. there is a pretty big debate in the republican party today about how much the bushes should be the highlight of jeb's campaign and how much they shouldn't be. is it a good idea for jeb to bring in his family and sort of play revisionist history on iraqing? rachel: i'm not sure it is, and i'll tell you for two reasons. one is i think that people are not so mad -- i don't think they believe what trump has been saying, that he lied. i think they maybe think he's

been misled, george bush was misled by his advisers, but i do think they think george bush got us barack obama. so that reminder is bad. the other thing is when you see george bush on the stump, he's so likable, he's so charming, and then the contrast with jeb who's so dry and sometimes seems really insecure. now, i do think back to the point we were making before, i think trump has taught these guys how to street fight and, ultimately, i think the breitbart guy was right. trump made jeb better, but seeing him next to his brother we're reminded about why it's just not enough. andrea: because the left, kennedy, they are street fighters. finally, we have a candidate who's willing to street fight. we'll see how well that plays out. kennedy: they don't shoot each other, that's the resting thing. when you watch -- interesting thing. when you watch democrats debate, it doesn't get that nasty. it looks like the nominee is going to be trump at this point, when he brings it to democrats in this general election debate, i think they're going to be

surprised at how bloody it can actually get. does that make the country better? that's what we have to ask ourselves. will it give us a better president? is it better for the process? will it bring people jobs, comfort, the things they desperately need that have created this climate in the first place? andrea: katie, you're an editor at town hall, conservative publication, so you hear from your readers all the time, and there is a divide in the republican party where i think people can agree george bush is a great guy, and he -- you can't argue that. and he did take the fight to the radical islamicy haddists -- jihadists. it's what he did after, i know that fantasy bothers me. but also to rachel's point, he wasn't a conservative in the last couple of years, the spending, the expiring tax cuts, the no child left behind without federal funding, never ending wars. people are upset, and i think, me personally, we want to turn the page from the bushes. katie: we need to keep in mind that nancy pelosi was in charge and barack obama -- george w.

bush also had a majority democrat senate in house that he had to work with. he was actually honoring congress and allowing spending to go through because they proposed it. i don't think you can put the entire expansion of the government -- although he could have vetoed more -- on george w. bush. he worked with congress which was held by liberal democrats, the most liberal of them, nancy pelosi, i already mentioned. but going back to george w. bush or jeb bringing george bush on to the campaign trail are, i would agree with rachel completely. the problem for jeb is it makes him look boring. you know, there's a reason why george w. bush was the president, pause he has charisma, he went out there and the contrast of just the way that they give the speech is just so obvious. and i think that doesn't help jeb at all. kennedy: it hasn't worked, and i think his mom was kind of a hail mary, but -- andrea: general, before we go, the iraq war seems to be tearing the republican party apart. any thoughts when you see the candidates and the debate the

other night with donald trump bringing up 9/11? you see the candidates fighting other the iraq war. any thoughts going forward on what we need to do and what you would like to hear the candidates say? >> well, certainly, i think we should try to get over this political psychosis we have over iraq in terms of whether we should have gone to war, yes or no, whether obama's responsible for isis in how we ended the war and just get on with the problems that we're really dealing with. the problems are so significant and so challenging, we've got to put our minds on those problems. and we spend so much time bashing each other about past mistakes and less -- yes, there's been past mistakings. there have been republican mistakes and democratic mistakes, and that's true throughout our history. let's deal with the challenges we've got in front of us. andrea: all right. last word goes to the general. so how much do we really know about the threat from isis? a new report that top military analysts warned intel officials the obama administration is

spewing intel on isis for political reasons. a big story, more on that up next. plus, fallout after this sickening video of our u.s. sailors being forced to their knees in surrender to iran during their capture by iran's navy. a top u.s. senator, finally, john mccain, demanding answers. we're going to tell you how he plans to get them. ♪ ♪ this is sheldon whose long day setting up the news starts with minor arthritis pain and a choice. take tylenol or take aleve, the #1 recommended pain reliever by orthopedic doctors. just two aleve can keep pain away all day. back to the news. i'm here to get the lady of the house back on her feet. and give her the strength and energy to stay healthy. who's with me?! yay! the complete balanced nutrition of great tasting ensure. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. ensure. take life in! i'm in charge of it all. business expenses, so i've been snapping photos of my receipts

and keeping track of them in quickbooks. now i'm on top of my expenses, and my bees. best 68,000 employees ever. that's how we own it. only abreva can heal it in as few as two and a half days when used at the first sign. it penetrates deep and starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells.. don't tough it out, knock it out, fast. abreva. what's that, broheim? i switched to geico and got more.

more savings on car insurance? yeah bro-fessor, and more. like renters insurance. more ways to save. nice, bro-tato chip. that's not all, bro-tein shake. geico has motorcycle and rv insurance, too. oh, that's a lot more. oh yeah, i'm all about more, teddy brosevelt. geico. expect great savings and a whole lot more.

is our partnership with habitat for humanity. pg&e is committed to clean energy and part of that commitment our mission is to build homes, community and hope. our homeowners are low-income families, so the ability for them to have lower energy cost is wonderful. we have been able to provide about 600 families with solar on their homes. that's over nine and a half million dollars of investment by pg&e, and that allows us to provide clean energy for everyone here. it's been a great partnership. together, we're building a better california.

♪ ♪ kennedy: disturbing new details about the growing threat of isis, reuters says isis unleashed mustard gas on dozennens of kurdish fighters in iraq last august. another diplomat says the weapons may have come from syria's stockpile, all this as the daily beast raises new allegations that the obama administration skewed intelligence on isis to advance the narrative the u.s. is winning the battle. says top u.s. military analysts gave warnings to the office of the director of national intelligence, the source telling the daily beast, quote: the analysts accused their superiors of editing or rejecting reports that cast doubt on whether the u.s.-red campaign against --

u.s.-led campaign against isis was dealing a trip crippling blow. all right, this is the second set of accusations that reports about isis may, in fact, be inaccurate. so, general, i will start with the mustard gas. it's very disturbing, not surprising though that isis would be able to get their hands on chemical weapons. what's the biggest threat, the stockpiles in syria or iraq or that isis may be able to manufacture these rudimentary weapons themselves? >> yeah. well, first of all, in syria it's more dangerous, and when the deal was made, remember, back in 2013 between the united states including russia and syria that they would get rid of all the chemical weapons, many observers to include myself said they are never going to get rid of all the chemical weapons. it is fool's gold to change that reality. they will not even give up all their production capabilities,

and that has turned out to be true. and at least 10% or more has been left behind to include production capability. so that's a fact. now isis marauds over syria, seizing one military base after another. it is not too surprising that they get their hands on these capabilities. and knowing the m a biggings -- ambitions that they have, this is a significant threat. and the threat in syria is more significant than what is taking place in iraq. they have used chemical weapons, the same watchdog group that you're referring to, kennedy can, reported year they used chemical weapons in syria and also reporting they used them in iraq. i believe both of those reports. this is a reliable agency that's going it, and there's been an anecdotal information before that. kennedy: yeah. >> so, yes, now we have chemical weapons in the hand of a terrorist organization that wants to do damage outside the region, in europe, in other places in the world, the united states, etc. and they will use whatever means they can to accomplish their goals.

they're a brutal, barbaric organization to, and now they have something that is dangerous. kennedy: including disseminating instructions on how to manufacture some of these weapons for worldwide isis followers. let's just a little bit, andrea, to the political ramifications of fudging the intel. how serious is this? andrea: it's very serious. and when you look in totality at what the administration has done, your jaw hits the floor. we have the fbi and dhs directing funds releasing prisoners from gitmo back to the battlefield, strangling rules of engagement on our military, also intel reports scrubbed about the threat of iran earlier this year to make it more palpable when we handed them 150 billion. also we're importing islamist refugees to the united states. there's been a stonewalling of extortion 17, the helicopter that took the lives of seal team six. we also see now they're scrubbing these intelligence reports.

it makes you wonder when you look at the list that i just came up with -- and it's a lot longer -- what is the administration doing, and whose side are they on? kennedy: and how could they claim to be the most transparent administration in history when the president is going out saying one thing, you know? we're making gains against isis, the airstrikes are working, and then you have, you know, senior officials deleting e-mails. it seems like we've heard this record before, and i don't like dancing to it. katie: well, you know, look, the obama administration has been broiled in scandal for years, you know, ever since president obama came into office. he promised he'd be the most transparent president in the history of the country. obviously, we don't want to be transparent with military intelligence, that's not something that we want. but when you're talking about reports about intelligence being deliberately changes to show -- changed to show a rosier picture of what's going on when the administration publicly is saying to the american people things are going great, that is putting political calculations

above national security and has huge implications on not only national security of the united states, but on how we handle the threat as a whole. and you can't, you know, take care of the threat if you're not willing to acknowledge it. for the president to, quite frankly, lie to the american people when they're talking about the fact that isis is being contained when clearly they're not, that really serves as a real problem about what their priorities are and how seriously they take us it. andrea: you think about politics, if this were politically beneficial to the president, it would enmean these points resonate with democrats. they don't. i know a number of democrats that are bothered by the policies of this administration, and we have a president, rachel, who says flat out that we can absorb another 9/11 and says four weeks ago there are no existential threats against the united states of america. that is fundamentally false. rachel: absolutely. i know we want to turn the page on the iraq war, but just

imagine, i mean, look at the attention that the press put on wmds, did they not have it, were they lying, blah, blah, blah. can you imagine, general, if a republican president had been caught, i mean, caught -- and, by the way, the tailly beast is -- daily beast is no conservative rag. this is a liberal web site. if they had been caught cooking the books and changing the data, and another question is how does that, how does that change how the generals advise if they're getting, if they're getting information that's not correct? how does that change how they advise on the war? >> yeah. major investigation taking place at central command headquarters over this very issue of manipulating intelligence information at a relatively high level inside central command that the analysts were very frustrated with, and they are the whistleblowers. most of us who have connections there believe the whistleblowers, frankly, and it's sad commentary. and, obviously, what they were doing was they were laying out a story which was an indictment of

what we were doing, the strategy was not succeeding, and isis was making progress, and they were minimizing, obviously, their progress and maximizing what we were doing. we were reporting on level of effort, and you see that. and it can be very misleading. number of airstrikes, number of buildings we've killed, knocked down, excuse me, number of trucks, number of soldiers, enemy soldiers that we've killed. that deals with level of effort. the real analysis and what the analysts in central command, what they were doing was being denied to the leadership is our comprehensive evaluation of an organization, the ability to command and control, the territory it's controlling, its financial/economic situation, its operational, tactical initiative that it has, its resiliency, its ability to recruit. these are the way we evaluate an organization's capabilityings. kennedy: honest measurements, and unfortunately, honesty is the first thing sacrificed here. and i can't help but wonder if

that's what puts lives at risk. all right, just days before the nevada democratic caucuses, signs team hillary starting to get worried as vunteers for bernie sanders flood the state and his aides raise new hope for a potential victory. is hillary in trouble? and a group of woman senators, yes, they were speaking out saying hillary is dealing with a sexist double standard on the campaign trail. are they right? or is hillary playing the lady card by proxy? we will discuss heatedly in moments. stay right here. ♪ ♪ ♪ lots of vitamins a&c, and, only 50 calories a serving... good morning, indeed. v8. veggies for all.

. . . .

♪ andrea: group of women in the senate are speaking out about hillary clinton and the sexist standard they say she faces on the campaign trail. maryland democrat barbara mikulski told "the hill," quote, many we women feel there double-standard. what is being said about hillary

is what women heard for centuries. you're too loud, you're too aggressive, you're too pushy, why do you want the vote? "the hill" quoted senator dianne feinstein the california democrat. i think women go through magnifying glass women don't. look at trump, talk about braggadocio, talk about the shouting, talk about demeaning it is all there. is that a fair point, kennedy they're making but does it apply to hillary clinton in this context? kennedy: it was a fair point in 1978, it really was. you're dealing with a postfeminist era. and i have to hand it to a lot of these women, career politicians who have been at it for decades, it has been a slog for them. they had to break certain ceilings but at some point no longer free to be you and me and we have to be living in the here and now. running for president is tough. probably the most painful, brutal examination and thorough that one can subject themselves to. having he said that, stop

complaining about your gender. a friend of mine who is female surgeon, women have to work twice as hard for the half the credit, i think that makes you better person. if you're working that much harder to break through you're a better candidate. if you're having surrogates complain for you why on god's earth would anyone want to elect you for public office? >> amen. andrea: if we're working twice as hard for half the credit we're not living in postfeminist world. sanders female supporters are called every name in the book by gloria steinem and madeleine albright. women on the right, called a number of names online. they get it online. easy to ignore it, you tune it out. i think misogyny and sexism exist but do they see it in hillary clinton's case or do they not like her because they perceive her to be a liar?

>> i think in this case you're seeing a divide between liberal feminists and people younger age i think what happened with gloria steinem, bernie sanders liberal supporters, young women, shows a real maturation of women's liberation movement. they said, we don't have to vote in a herd. we don't have to vote for her because she is women. that is powerful moment in the women's movement. it shows what a dinosaur hillary clinton is. i think it makes her look bad. other point i said at campaign when they picked hillary, this new generation of young women did not grow up knowing what happened in the bill and hillary and monica lewinsky episode. once they saw what happened wi bill and once they saw how hillary reacted and feminist establishment, gloria steinem and enabled and poll diesed for

it, i think this is new day and her tactics are not just working. andrea: katie, i want to ask you about nevada and what is going on the ground but i can't help notice your head nodding. they're both right. this is complex issue. these are the daughters of betty freed dan, the woman who wrote the feminine mystique. i don't have to listen to hillary clinton. i can make my own choices why are you telling me what to do but at the same time they're facing extreme misogyny and sexism. >> exactly. that is old argument hillary is facing at this point. if she is facing sexism on campaign trail, why is it bernie sanders winning millenial women 80% to 20? this holds no water who hillary clinton supporters are. the idea they're pitting liberal women against each other and really telling them they have to think a certain way or they're going to hell as madeleine albright would say,

doesn't play well. absolutely with bill clinton's behavior, in the year 2016 with all the transparency we have with social media, how the rape culture thing is such a huge issue on college campus, they're pretty out of touch if they think that young women who are involved in these issues and will look at someone like bill clinton, oh, no, i don't want that back in the white house. we'll move on to somebody else. andrea: general keane, you said at opening of the show we should be looking forward, not backward. is it helpful to drudge up the clintons past and back and forth? is it helpful to do it as far as her strategy? >> i won't get involved in her strategy but i do believe the progress women are making in this country is significant. i do agree with rachel. the youngsters out there, that are in colleges, i do speak on college campuses from time to time. they don't look at themselves as victims whatsoever.

they believe they're in meritocracy. most of the law schools in america, majority of attendees are women. majority of the people going to college are women and they feel there are opportunities out there for them. >> is it end of movement, liberal, progressive women are future of feminist movement? they're eating their young. i think it is end of all of them. andrea: they always have been. but it is on full display but they have always been doing that. senator john mccain says the administration seems to be dragging its feet when it comes to investigating iran's capture of 10 u.s. sailors last month. remember that? what the senator says he may be forced to do now and what it could mean for this investigation.

tired of working for peanuts? well what if i told you that peanuts can work for you?

that's right. i'm talking full time delivery of 7 grams of protein and 6 essential nutrients. ever see a peanut take a day off? i don't think so. harness the hardworking power of the peanut. ♪ everything kids touch during cold and flu season sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox. trust safelite. with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" you'll know exactly when we'll be there. giving you more time for what matters most. (team sing) ♪safelite repair, safelite replace.♪ you know the symptoms when they start. abdominal pain. urgent diarrhea. now there's prescription xifaxan. xifaxan is a new ibs-d treatment that helps relieve your diarrhea and abdominal pain symptoms. and xifaxan works differently. it's a prescription antibiotic

that acts mainly in the digestive tract. do not use xifaxan if you have a history of sensitivity to rifaximin, rifamycin antibiotic agents, or any components of xifaxan. tell your doctor right away if your diarrhea worsens while taking xifaxan, as this may be a sign of a serious or even fatal condition. tell your doctor if you have liver disease or are taking other medications, because these may increase the amount of xifaxan in your body. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, plan on becoming pregnant, or are nursing. the most common side effects are nausea and an increase in liver enzymes. if you think you have ibs with diarrhea, talk to your doctor about new xifaxan. ♪ kennedy: welcome back. this is "outnumbered." new fallout after 10 of our sailors were captured by iran

and forced to their niece in a video to the surrender position. the sailors were released with the iran's supreme leaders awarding medals to their captors using the propaganda at the u.s. senator john mccain may be forced to subpoena those sailors if the obama administration does not release details on the incident by march 1st. talk about this, general. what does senator mccain hope to get from a congressional subpoena with these sailors? >> well there is some obvious questions that certainly need answers. listen, the united states navy, best navy in the world does not surrender its ships and surrender its weapons. let's put that on the table. you know they're frustrated. here is what he wants answers to. why are the two small patrol boats transiting 300 miles in the most dangerous waters to begin with. kennedy: valid question. >> number two, the most dangerous place for in that in u.s. shipping is farsi island.

why would they get close to farsi island? everybody knows where it is. number three, when confronted by patrol boats from farsi island, why would we surrender our boats and surrendered our weapons? and number three, why would we participate in any way, shape or form in video when we know it will be used for propaganda. there are leaders in the room who are trained and educated on that. but yet it did take place. so these questions are what i believe the senator wants answers. he deserves to get those answers. there is some kind of constipation in the process that is it stopping this. kennedy: that is my question, is the administration stonewalling? >> i don't know if they're stonewalling them, but given some of the incidents we had in the past, track record here is pretty awful. we don't need to go through for sake of our audience to list it. i'm highly skeptical there is some manipulation going on, possibly politically to do this. i know navy wants these answers. i suspect by now the navy has all the answers and they have

already taken corrective action. >> let me talk about the political constipation you talk about. senator john mccain gets a lot of grief from freedom caucus and tea party and we're in that throw the bums phase out in american politics. isn't the moment where you really want a guy like this, a guy with gravitas, a war veteran? if we get accounting to what happened to the soldiers and get answer to all those questions, isn't it because we have guys like john mccain on our side? >> there is no doubt about it. senator mccain will always create controversy because he marchs to his own drumbeat but, an idea with a lot of senators among democrats and republicans he is highly respected and what he stands for and is well-respected. he will get the answers. they can not ignore him. >> i want the rules of engagement in the iran deal. obviously treating iranians

differently. iranians are trotting through europe, getting billions of dollars through of new business deals. andrea: great point. >> what do we handle iranians in confrontation. if you look at pictures showing on the screen of our sailors on their knees. stripped of their boots. the video they took was not only taken but also used as propaganda on iranian state television which is against the geneva convention i'm pretty sure, the obama administration i would remind everyone saw this, that you're seeing as a diplomatic victory. they came out and said this is the great new relationship that we have with the iranians. we should be celebrating the fact. how dare they say that. kennedy: but you have been saying for some time now that there is something else in play here that is not being discussed. andrea: no question. it is a great point, katie, what are the now rules for dealing with iran? was a side deal cut? on this political constipation we can not wait for the metamucil.

john mccain should subpoena them. i commend him. i'm so happy john mccain is doing this. the lone voice in washington, d.c. it is the question every journalist and every member of congress should be asking, was a stand-down order given? to your point, general, the u.s. navy would never abandon its weapons and ships in position of obvious weapons dominance this. is on heels of two navy seals dying in benghazi where they were stonewalled on information about that. not to mention downing of that helicopter i mentioned, extortion 17, where the u.s. navy lost some members of seal team six. there is stonewalling from the get-go. who told them to surrender in position of obvious weapons dominance? it is unprecedented and begs the question and i hope john mccain services them and doesn't wait for the documents because he will never get them. deserveses more questions. kennedy: is american power shrinking on the global stage? eye-opening new gallup survey how americans see u.s. military power in the obama era.

that is next. stay right here. "name your price" tool.

this highly sought-after device from progressive can be yours for... twenty grand? -no! we are giving it away for just 3 easy payments of $4.99 plus tax! the lines are blowing up! we've got deborah from poughkeepsie. flo: yeah, no, it's flo. you guys realize anyone can use the "name your price" tool for free on progressive.com, right? [ laughing nervously ] ♪ [ pickles whines ] i know, it's like they're always on television. what? ♪ >> america's status as a global superpower may be shrinking. according to the latest gallup world affair survey, fewer than

half of americans, 49%, say the u.s. is number one military power in the world. that is the lowest level since gallup tracking began more than two decades ago. 67% say it is important for us or the u.s. to have number one military just below0%, who thought following 9/11 attacks the results may reflect growing concerns over the threat from isis. general, my husband happens to member of congress. he says scariest thing he learned that how underfunded and how old our weapons systems are. >> we haven't done this very good job educating american people on. we've been fighting wars in the middle east in 13 years. we're still involved in one certainly in afghanistan and grad outly getting back into iraq and what they have done actually is denied all the services with the capability with the ability to modernize themselves. because the current administration, as the war was downsizing, they believe now is the time to cut the military budget after, after a war is

over, which has been done after other wars to include the end of the cold war. that actually was the wrong thing to do given what had taken place and given our world responsiblities. that is a little secret not well-known. secondly, sequestration has been deadly, absolutely deadly, because kneecapping the military. right now it is on pause and hopefully it stays on pause but the army, navy, air force are going back to world war ii numbers which makes no sense. >> that's right. >> even though we have technological advantage over world war ii, numbers have a quality all of their own. >> right. >> we can not ignore it. numbers of ships eventually matter. numbers of airplanes eventually matter and number of troops eventually matter. american people understand that. this has been wrong for some time. we have to fix it. i don't believe it will get fixed until we have a new president. >> it is interesting, andrea, this poll talks about -- the last time we saw this low of morale about our military,

frankly i will say within the military was around 1980. my dad was a military guy in 1980. was reagan democrat. democrat his whole life. cast first vote as republican in 1980. what are the political ramifications of a poll like that? >> i think military is frustrated. i think the general can speak to this more in depth. they're frustrated with the rules of engagement. they think the military policy iscog out of valerie jarrett's office and susan rice's office the two of them have zero experience in the military. general, how frustrated is the department of defense what is going on? do they feel frustrated with the white house? >> there is growing and gradual frustration inside of the department of defense during the eight-year journey of this administration and it is pretty high to be frank about it. you know, they don't like to complain about that because they give their loyalty and service to their commander-in-chief. and i did that myself for 37 years.

but, there were times when you have significant frustration with policy. it is not so much, the military is not looking to unleash all of their power and they're not interested in making war but they are interested in when policymakers decide this is what we need to do to accomplish a political objective. dealing with an enemy. then they would like to be given the resources to deal with that properly. and that is at the heart of this frustration. and then let them do planning and develop the military strategy on how to do that. they, i don't have a precedent for a president saying, okay, i want to defeat somebody and then in the sail breath tells the military but you can't put boots on the ground. we'll have limited use of air power because i don't want to a single civilian casualty. puts all those restrictions n my entire experience i have no precedent for something like that. andrea: wow, general, thank you.

it is something wee haven't seen since the vietnam war. percentage of first year college student who say they lean left. what is behind it and what it could mean for 2016? diabetes, steady is exciting.

only glucerna has carbsteady, clinically proven to help minimize blood sugar spikes. so you stay steady ahead.

only abreva can heal it in as few as two and a half days when used at the first sign. it penetrates deep and starts to work immediately to block the virus and protect healthy cells.. don't tough it out, knock it out, fast. abreva. i am benedict arnold, the infamous traitor. and i know a thing or two about trading. so i trade with e*trade, where true traders trade on a trademarked trade platform that has all the... get off the computer traitor! i won't. (cannon sound) andrea: new numbers are in that

we haven't seen since the vietnam war was winding down. incoming college freshmen say they lean to the left when it comes to politics this according to a ucla annual survey. 33.5% identify as either liberal or far left. that is just 3% less than in 1973. on the other side, 21.6% currently describe themselves as either conservative or far right. our resident millenial on the couch, katie pavlich -- >> don't fault me. andrea: we won't, we promise. what do you think about your generation leaning so far left? >> i think interesting numbers are similar to the vietnam war. who do you think is teaching generations coming up since the vietnam war? the same people who are protesting the vietnam war, far left radicals who grew up into the '60s and into the '70s. they're in the education system, not just at college level but starting in kindergarten. that is it where it starts. i do want to say although young people lean left, there are some

conservative young people doing very good things. charlie kirk, turning point usa is one of them. i would say they're going into college. will be more liberal when they leave and get out and get the job and see their taxes taken out of the paycheck and maybe go a little more conservative. andrea: it is true though, kennedy. along the border with the millenials and i have noticed change. almost impossible to when you talk to millenials because the culture, you talk about this on your show all the time, music industry, entertainment, like the air you breathe liberalism. so hard i guess not to. kennedy: especially in academia. the ills of socialism and communism are not properly taught. you have academics by and large people never existed in real world and certainly never lived through the soviet-era. which is hard to imagine because it really wasn't that long ago but yes, they promote it as though some sort of utopia. you have college students whose parents have been financially hamstrung for years, steeped in this socialist --

>> it is ridiculous. andrea: we'll not be hamstrung. we have the general. we'll ask your thoughts whether or not we're going back to the vietnam war era during "outnumbered overtime." you stay with us. grab your laptops and go there as well. we're back on noon tv eastern tomorrow. "happening now" starts right now.