involved, there were 40 people in the mosque at the time stay with fox news channel throughout the evening, thank you so much for watching fox news, fox news sunday is next, see you next week. chris: i'm chris wallace. federal judges temporarily block part of president trump's travel ban on people coming to the u.s. from muslim countries. ♪ ♪ >> let them out! chris: protests at airports as courts bar deporting travelers affected by the new executive order. >> we're going to have a very, very strict ban, and we're going to have extreme vetting which we should have had in this country for many years. chris: as tensions rise with mexico over plans for a border wall. >> the american people will not pay for the wall. and i've made that clear to the government of mexico. chris: we'll talk with kellyanne

conway, counsel to president trump, about his actions and ambitious agenda. then, where will democrats try to block the president? and what about his supreme court nominee this week? >> what we hope would be that our democratic friends will treat president trump's nominees in the same way that we treated clinton and obama. chris: the number two democrat in the senate, dick durbin, on the fight ahead and why he says trump's executive orders make ay paneltry less safe. about the escalating battle between the president and the press. >> they're very dishonest people. the media's very dishonest. chris: all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. donald trump's first week in office is ending in controversy and widespread protest. federal judges have now stepped in to temporarily block part of many trump's ban on --

mr. trump's ban on people coming to the u.s. from largely muslim nations. some of the travelers caught in the ban were about to be deported back to their home countries. in a moment, we'll sit down with counselor to the president kellyanne conway. but first, let's bring in correspondent rich edson reporting from the white house on a president who's charging full speed ahead. >> reporter: good morning, chris. the trump white house is halting immigration from several predominantly muslim countries, this as a judge has blocked the deportation of those detained at airports as a result of that order. the ruling falls short of letting those immigrants into the country, and in response to the ruling, the department of homeland security says in a statement, quote: the president's executive order remains in place. prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the u.s. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety. and at the white house, president trump is responding to that criticism.

>> it's not a muslim ban, but we are totally prepared, it's working out very nicely. you see it at the airports, all over, it's working out very nicely, and we're going to have a very, very strict ban, and we're going to have extreme vetting which we should have had in this country for many years. >> reporter: and the presidents has also just tweeted: our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting now. look what is happening all over europe and, indeed, the world. a horrible mess. the president also continues conversations with foreign leaders. he's already spoken to russian president vladimir putin. the white house said the two discussed, quote, topics from mutual cooperation in defeating isis to efforts in working together to achieve more peace throughout the world including syria. he's also scheduled to speak with foreign leaders from the united arab emirates, saudi arabia and south korea, and as week two of the trump white house begins, we also expect to hear who president trump will choose to fill the supreme court vacancy. that's expected thursday. chris. chris: rich edson reporting from the white house. rich, thanks for that.

to discuss what the president's done and where he's headed, we're joined now by kellyanne conway, counselor to the president. welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you, chris. of. chris: we just heard president trump say it's all working out very nicely but, in fact, as we've seen, there are protests across the country, and now federal judges have stepped in to at least temporarily block deportation of people who would come in who are banned from coming in under his order. shouldn't that have been worked out before this order went into effect? >> the judge in brooklyn, the obama appointee judge in brooklyn's stay of order really doesn't affect the executive order at all because the executive order is meant to be prospective. it's preventing, not detaining. and so you're talking about 325,000 people from overseas came into this country just yesterday new our airports. 325,000. you're talking about 300 and some who have been detained or are prevented from gaining access to an aircraft in their

home countries and must stay for now. that's 1%. and i think in terms of the upside being greater protection of our borders, of our people, it's a small price to pay. i am told by the officials that anyone who's been detained, if there's no further threat, if they're not dangerous to this country, they can expect to be released in due course as most of them have already. chris: and, but so the ones that are here will be allowed, if they're vetted, to stay? >> you're talking about the people who came on aircraft? chris: yes. >> yes, if they're vetted. it's a routine screening process that they'll go through. if they are not dangerous, if they're not a threat, then they will be disposed of on a case by case -- their situations will be handled on a case-by-case basis. you know, i was stopped many times, weren't you, after 9/11? i didn't resemble or share a name with or be part of any kind of terrorist conspiracy, but this is what we do to keep the nation safe. i mean, there are -- this whole idea that they're being separated and ripped from their

families, it's temporary. and it's just circumstantial in terms of whether you were one of those 300 and some who was already on an aircraft or trying to get on an aircraft as opposed to the over 3,000 children who will be forever more separated from their parents who perished on 9/11. chris: president trump says if we let refugees in, that christians will be given priority. here he is. >> if you are a muslim, you can come in. but if you were a christian, it was almost impossible. i thought it was very, very unfair. so we are going to help them. chris: first, that's not true. i want you to take a look at this. as you can see here in 2016, almost as many christian refugees were admitted as muslims. and second, president trump is barring people from seven countries, the ones you can see on the map, but not included are saudi arabia and egypt and afghanistan and pakistan, and saudi arabia's where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from. why are they not on the list?

>> this was the seven countries, it was offered by president obama and his administration. in 2015 -- chris: well, that's never stopped you before. >> hold on. in 2015, chris, congress passed the terrorist prevention act, and what it essentially did is it identified the seven countries, an expanded list from four, and identifying them as a threat. these are countries that have a history of training, harboring, exporting terrorists. and one thing that's very important to recognize whether you're the orlando shooter, yes, he was born here but was radicalized on the internet. if you were san bernardino, if you are the tsarnaev brothers in boston, these are people who traveled abroad, were radicalized, trained and then came back and did their bloodletting, their massacre here on american soil. it's no different really than what's happened all across europe. we can't just keep on looking the other way and pretending there aren't people out there, there isn't a terrorist organization -- isis, al-qaeda, otherwise --

chris: i know, but, kellyanne, the specific question i'm asking you, saudi arabia, for instance, that's where most of the hijackers came from. why not block them? >> congress and president obama's administration -- chris: but this was an executive order. >> right. came up with a list of seven. we're following on that in week one. this president will certainly keep identifying threats and risks and, look, chris, people can't have it both ways with president trump. they can't say on the one hand, well, he's not taking these briefings seriously when he is. he has a presidential daily briefing. he is privy to information that the rest of us aren't, particularly media. they aren't national security intelligence experts receiving briefings every single day like a president is. a president, congress will always have information the rest of us do not. and be let me make clear, these seven countries, what about the 46 majority muslim countries that are not included? right there it totally undercuts this nonsense that this is a muslim man. this is a ban trying to prevent

terrorists in this country from countries that have a recent history of training and exporting and harboring terrorists. chris: the president also got into a rift this week with mexico after he signed an order calling for construction of a wall and has insisted that mexico was going to pay for it. we got this response from mexican president. >> translator: mexico does not believe in wall. i have said time and time again, mexico will not pay for any wall. chris: and then peña nieto, i don't have to tell you, canceled his visit this week -- >> that was mutual. the president suggested it first on twitter about 9:24 that day, on thursday. chris: well, it's not a good thing, is it, that one of our closest allies, our immediate neighbor to the south and they had a meeting scheduled for tuesday, you think that's a good thing? >> it's a great thing that they spoke for an hour after that. chris: how about the state visit? >> i'll tell you what's not a

great thing, it's not great that we have a $60 billion trade deficit with mexico. it's not great that they allow, because there is no border, there is no respect of our sovereignty in this country, chris, they allow people and drugs -- chris: that's an overstatement. >> well, you know what? chris: that is an overstatement to say that we have no border and there is no respect -- >> is it an overstatement, well, is it an overstatement to say there are not illegal immigrants, people and drugs flying over the -- chris: no, that's certainly true. >> go interview all those parents who have lost children to opiate use. it's a scourge on our society. the idea that we just allow drugs to flow over our border and look the other way, it stops with president trump. he ran on this, it's been a centerpiece. he signed executive orders to start construction of that southern wall, a physical wall, but he also in that executive order, chris, has expanded the resources and tools he will give our brave men and women in law enforcement and our border agents, they simply can't do their jobs.

you have to expand the physical space for -- chris: you're answering a question i'm not asking. the question is, the question is about trying to work out a relationship with mexico that doesn't so to offend the mexican president that he has to cancel a meeting and where relations with the u.s. become a matter of national honor. and i want to raise the issue of a possible trade war which has now been raised between mexico and the u.s., and i want to put up the practical implications of that. mexico is our third largest trading partner. if we slap a border tax on their imports and 20% is the number that's been mentioned by people in the white house, u.s. consumers will have to pay more for such things as cars and fresh food, and six million u.s. jobs that depend on trade with mexico will be hurt if they tax our exports to them. in addition, kellyanne, if mexico goes into a recession, then we're going to have even more illegal immigration. has that all been thought through? >> we're not going -- they may try, but they're not going to

get here the way they're been pouring over the borders in the past because of president trump. but what you're saying about the 20% tariff, that's one possible option as we have said as an administration, that's one possible option in terms of funding the wall. let me go back to the major point about our relationship with mexico -- chris: no, no, no, wait, isn't that a dangerous thing if we're slapping taxes on their imports and they're slapping taxes on our imports, and doesn't that destabilize mexico both politically and economically? i'm not saying that we couldn't build a wall and shouldn't protect our border, i'm just saying there's a good way of working it out and a bad way of working it out. >> there's a fundamental fairness that donald trump ran on, won on and will execute as president of the united states. whether he's meeting with manufacturing ceos, labor, doing the dakota and keystone pipelines, and he's telling mexico that this trade imbalance stops. you know, this idea that we're always worried with about the oh country, we're always worried about it citizens, this president says america first.

65% of them in a poll this week -- chris: but if consumers have to pay more, it's going to affect this country. if we lose the six million jobs, it's going to affect this country, if they have recession and more illegal imi can'ts come in -- >> none of us want that. we want a strong, vibrant mexico, there's no question. that's why the two presidents spoke by phone this week. this whole nonsense that donald trump does not want a good relationship with mexico, he's one of the two candidates accepting the invitation of the mexican president -- chris: and now the visit's been canceled. >> no, they talked by phone. there are many different ways for leaders to get work done. look at how many foreign leaders president trump talked to just this weekend. it's a dizzying, it's a dizzying number. russia and france and -- chris: okay. >> -- and australia, and certainly, we had prime minister may here. chris, the other statistic people have to realize is the number one source of revenue going into mexico are mexicans in the u.s. sending money back to mexico. i mean, people feel like things are just unfair here. this man, as president, will do

what he promised all along. he will put america first. that includes its workers, its safety, its people, its interests and its allies. chris: i want to move to a couple other issues. president trump has said he will announce his supreme court nominee this week. can you guarantee that his nominee will favor overturning roe vs. wade? >> i can guarantee that the promise that candidate trump made will continue as president trump. he has promised that he are appoint pro-life judges including to the supreme court. here's the thing about the supreme court battle we're about to face. if past is prologue, the way that democrats in the senate have treated our cabinet nominees does not bode well for filling that vacancy left by antonin scalia. it's just been terrible the way they tried to humiliate and embarrass our cabinet nominees. we still don't have a secretary of commerce, of treasury. what are we doing over this? chris: i am going to bring that up with dick durbin, i promise you.

you spoke at the march for life rally on friday, and you said this: this is a time of incredible promise for the pro-life movement. but i don't have to tell you, they don't want promise, they want roe v. wade overturned. will the president nominate someone committed to doing that? >> that will come up in the person's hearings. and, of course, they'll be on to accessively asked that question -- excessively asked that question. let me tell you about the action -- chris: no, but can can you tell us, could those hundreds of thousands of people who were out there on the mall who you said this president hears you, is he going to appoint somebody who wants to overturn roe v. wade? >> he's going to appoint somebody who respects the constitution. it's a word that you haven't herald because nobody dare -- chris: we should point out, that was the explanation for how roe v. wade -- >> not just the explanation, the supreme court decision on how we allowed -- but look what's

happened since. we've had millions of innocent babies taken from their mothers. we are having this culture of life now that does not respect life from conception to natural death. and this president gave the most -- this manhattan, male billionaire who was pro-choice most of his adult life gave the most impassioned defense of life that think of us had ever heard coming from a presidential podium, said to hillary clinton you're for partial birth, you're for sex selection abortion which, basically, extinguishes the next generation of girls, not boys. chris: okay. i don't mean to interrupt, but -- >> that's what's on the table here. chris: we're running out of time, and i want to ask you about one ore issue, and that is the president's relationship with the press. here's what he had to say about that this week. >> the media, much of the media -- not all of it -- is very, very dishonest. honestly, it's fake news. it's fake. they make things up. chris: and chief strategist steve bannon went much further. quote: the media should be embarrassed and humiliated and

keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while. but bannon wasn't finished. the media has zero integrity, zero intelligence and no hard work. you're the opposition party, not the democratic party. you're the opposition party. kellyanne, do you understand how offensive that is? >> i understand how offensive it was to never be taken seriously that donald trump could be elected president. on great days we were ignored -- chris: a lot of us, a lot of us reported on it fairly, and that's a different issue. >> no, no, no, it is the issue because it extends into this presidency, chris. you can't put a piece of tissue paper between the way donald trump was covered as the republican candidate, the republican nominee, the president-elect and the president. it's all the the same. it is completely disrespectful to the office of the president. why -- look at what happened this week. nobody's interested in learning the policies, it's just -- chris: i've been asking about policies today. i asked you about the vetting, i asked you about mexico -- >> and not everybody is treated equally. not -- look, not every network

and every print outlet is created equally in this. but if you read people's twitter feeds, that crap would never pass editorial muster in a newspaper or on your network here, nor should it. so the idea that betweens are my own really at 10:45 a.m. while you're walking out of the place where you work -- chris: all i would say is much to the dismay of some of the people here at fox, i don't tweet. >> look,s this is not necessarily -- chris: let me get, if i may, to the real point. politicians complain about bad press. i think you have some legitimate complaints about bad press. the first amendment protects the press. if we are in the constitution and it is offensive, quite frankly, to have folks -- any politician, but folks who have been in the white house for a week -- lecture us about what we should and shouldn't do and that we should keep our mouths shut. >> no, what my colleague is saying is why don't you talk less and go listen to america more. chris: that's not what he said. >> i work with him every day, i know what he meant. donald trump proved something

that the media failed to do, which is he understood america. the idea that -- chris: that's fine. it's fine to criticize, but to say we have zero intelligence, zero integrity and that we should keep our mouths shut so offensive. >> i think it's called listen more. and let me just say something else happens, it's the way everything is cherry picked. biased media coverage is easy to defect. it, frankly, helped us. this was such an elite rejection election. the establishment, the elite were all rejected by the voters. there are a heck of a lot more than them than us, chris, and that's why we won. why is that relevant? it's relevant because people -- who's cleaning house? which one is going to be the first network to get rid of people who said things that just weren't true? what happened last week? nday shows, i spoke for 35 minutes on three network sunday shows. you know what got picked? the fact that i said alternative facts. not the fact that i ripped a new one to some of those hosts for never covering the fact that

16.3 million women in poverty, the 12.4 million women who have no health insurance. everybody should feel outraged, the billions of dollars we have spent on public education only to have millions of kids trapped in schools that fail them and never really promote and protect their intelligence and prepare them for the world that they all deserve. they shouldn't be restricted by the sepp code where they live -- zip code where they live. they should be lifted up. this has all been a close call failure, and they want to talk about it's always playing gotcha. there's no question that when you look at the contributions made by the media, money contributions, they went to hillary clinton. we have all the headlines. people should feel embarrassed. not one network person, not one silly political analyst and pundit who talked smack all day long about donald trump has been let go. they're on panels every sunday, on cable news every day. who's the first editorial writer, the first blogger that will be let go that embarrassed his or her outlets? we know their names, i'm too polite to call them out, but

they know who they are. the election was three months ago. none of them have been let go. if this were a real business, if the mainstream media were a thriving, private sector business that actually turned a profit be -- which is not true of many of our newspapers, chris -- 20% of the people would be gone. they embarrassed, they failed to, they failed to protect their shareholders and their board members and their colleagues. and yet we deal with them every single day. we turn the other cheek. if you're part of team trump, you walk around with these gaping, seeping wounds every single day, and that's fine. i believe in a full and fair press. i'm here every sunday morning. i haven't slept in in month months. but with a free press comes responsibility, and the responsibility is to get the story right. biased coverage, easy to defect. incomplete coverage, impossible to detect. that's my major grievance, is that the media are not giving us complete coverage. president trump has signed all these executive orders this week, he's met with the heads of state, he's done so many things to stimulate the economy, to boost wages, to create jobs.

where's the coverage? chris: kellyanne, we're going to have to leave it there. >> thanks for having me. [laughter] it's been fun. chris: and let me say, you didn't rip me a new one. >> not at all. i talk like a jersey girl sometimes. [laughter] chris: thank you very much. up next, more on the tallout from president trump's executive order on immigration. order on immigration. we'll get reaction from the♪ ♪ ♪ by simply enjoying it. boost® simply complete. it's intelligent nutrition made with only 9 ingredients, plus 25 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein. and look where life can take you! boost®. be up for it.™

you think it smells fine but your passengers smell this... eliminate odors you've gone noseblind to for up to 30 days with the febreze car vent clip break out the febreze, and [inhale/exhale mnemonic] breathe happy.

♪ ♪ chris: joining me now from chicago is dick durbin, the senate's number two democrat. senator durbin, let's start with the uproar over president trump's executive order sharply limiting the number of people from largely muslim countries who can come in. here is what the president had

to say this week. >> i'm establishing new vetting measures to keep radical islamic terrorists out of the united states of america. we don't want 'em here. chris: senator, your reaction to the federal judges stepping this and stopping any possible deportation and your reaction also to what you just heard from kellyanne conway. >> well, thank goodness that this brooklyn federal judge has tried to stop these executive orders. here are three things that are wrong. first, it was an impulsive movie the president without follow-through to the department of homeland security. when we contacted customs and border protection at the airports, they said, you know, they just sprung this on us, and now we're detaining people, some of whom are legal permanent residents. so they didn't have clear guidance from the administration about how to make this work. number two, going after these refugees, these are the most carefully vetted visits to the united states of anyone who comes through our airports.

be including this ban on syrian refugees when we have had no examples, none, not one of a syrian refugee engaged in terrorism in the united states. and the third point, and i think this is one that is going to haunt us for a long time, was the suggestion by the president that somehow we're going to favor christians, and in some cases banning muslims in the future. that is exactly the opposite message we need to send to our allies and and to those who, frankly, want to do us harm around the world. chris: but, senator, the president points -- and there's no question, as kellyanne conway pointed out, there have been some mess-ups this weekend. but on the larger issue of what he's doing, the president points out that there are islamic radicals, some of them refugees, who have committed terror acts in europe. there was at least one person who came in on a visa program who was involved in the terror attack in bernandino. he says i'm the one protecting the country. >> i can tell you that i can't stand up for any european standard when it comes to

refugees. i can, when it comes to the united states. they go through vetting of a year or two. we had one syrian refugee family that is in turkey at a refugee camp waiting four or five years to come to the united states, and because of president trump's executive order, they've been stopped. these are carefully vetted. the you meet these people, chris, you realize why we do that -- chris: so what's going on here? since people are so carefully vetted, what's going on here, senator? >> you're asking me what's going on this europe? i can't tell you finish. chris: no, no, what's going on here in the united states? >> what's going on here is he has established a target of refugees, and i don't think that is our vulnerability. if you want to make america safe, the refugee program is the most carefully vetted program in our government. think of the thousands who come in on visa waivers each day at airports all around the united states. think of so many others coming to the united states. serious questions need to be answered. but when it comes to refugees,

these children who are coming from war-torn zoneses, we're going to stop them from coming to this country? what does it say about us? and what does it say about our vigilance when it comes to keeping this country safe when we target children? chris: i want to take you back, switch subjects and take you back to a moment in the white house this week when president trump met with union leaders, and doug mccare on who's the president of the united brotherhood of carpenters said this. >> the address on friday was a great middle class address. i mean, it hit home for the people that have been hurting. it was a great, that was a great moment for working men and women of the united states. >> thank you. [applause] chris: now, senator, he endorsed hillary clinton during the campaign, and he now says, and a lot of the other union bosses say, it's president trump -- not the democrats -- who are looking out for workers. >> i can tell you this, the pipeline decision was popular with the building trades, and doug reflected that popularity.

president obama knew it when he went the other way, that they would be unhappy with him. but i will tell you this as well, in the long haul when it comes to the organizing rights of unions, when it comes to the wages paid to union members, when it comes to collective bargaining, it'll be the democratic party that'll be fighting for supreme court justices and federal judges who recognize that. traditionally, that's where we've been, and the republican party on the other side. chris: we are now nine days into this presidency at the equivalent point back in 2009, 12 of president obama's nominees had been confirmed. at this point only four of president trump's nominees have been confirmed. isn't this just obstruction by the democrats? >> definitely not, and the reason is this: eight years ago when obama came up with his nominees for the cabinet, by january the 8th, before january 20th swearing in, these nominees had filed the ethics statements they are required to file. in this case with the trump nominees, even up to the day of

the hearing, many of our committees were not receiving the required legal documents from these nominees. second, among these nominees are many billionaires and people with extensive financial holdings. when penny pritzker was nominated for secretary of commerce under president obama, it took six months to clear all of the ethical standards that had to be met and filings met before she could be considered. so here come the trump nominees saying, well, we may have a lot of money and a lot of unanswered questions, but we want to be pushed forward in the front of the line. we have an obligation to make sure they answer all legally -- chris: senator, i'll give you there are some controversial nominees who may need more scrutiny, but let's look at some of the mainstream nominees. elaine chao, she has already been confirmed for a job before, the wife of senator mitch mcconnell. ben carson, wilbur process, jeff sessions who's been a colleague of yours in the senate for a long time. isn't the president entitled to have his mainstream,

noncontroversial picks confirmed quickly? >> you may be surprised to know, chris, that when it comes to some of these nomineebe -- nominees, senator mcconnell has failed to call them. i've said from the beginning i'm voting for elaine chao. we disagree politically, but she's a good person for the job of -- chris: why isn't she confirmed already? >> well, you might ask senator mcconnell that question. we've been ready to take her name up for some time. rex tillerson is up this week. senator sessions is going to be heard before the judiciary committee this week. in the normal course of events like other nominations like attorney general. when loretta lynch went through the nomination process, after her hearing senator sessions sent her an additional 22 questions, and then she was held on the senate calendar for two months before a vote was actually taken. chris: okay. >> so we're doing our job, and we're doing due diligence. chris: let's go to one final issue because you're going to have another nominee you're going to have to consider this week, and that is president

trump's supreme court nominee. now, there has only been one nomination for the supreme court that has ever been filibustered in the history of this nation back in the 1960s. are you prepared to rule out a democratic filibuster of this nominee? >> let me just say i'm not going to jump ahead and tell you how i'm going to treat any nominee until i know who they are, what they stand for. what we've said is that if you'll bring us a moderate nominee -- and i've told the white house this directly -- chris: well, wait, wait. sir, not all -- wait, wait. not all of barack obama's choices were moderate nominees. there were some pretty liberal nominees there. i mean, he won. he's allowed to have people of his philosophical stripe. >> chris, let me tell you, there's a different world there. when i listened to your lead-in and mitch mcconnell said we just want to be treated the way we treated obama nominees, does he think we have amnesia? that he refused for the first time in the history of the senate to meet with or have a hearing or vote on a supreme

court nominee? we're going to treat this nominee fairly, but we need to know who he or she is, what they stand for and believe that they're in the mainstream of thinking when it comes to american political thought. chris: senator durbin, thank you. please come back, sir. >> thanks a lot. chris: up next, we'll bring in our sunday group to discuss president trump's extreme vetting plan. and that phone call with russian president putin. ♪ ♪ i've been on my feel all day. i'm bushed! yea me too. excuse me...coming through! ride the gel wave of comfort with dr. scholls massaging gel insoles. they're proven to give you comfort. which helps you feel more energized ...all day long. i want what he has. i mess around in the garage.

i want to pay more to file my taxes. i want my tax software to charge me at the last second. paying $60 to file my taxes was the highlight of my day. and you just saw footage of me flipping burgers. want to charge me extra to itemize my deductions? no problem. i literally have too much money. said no one ever. file for free with credit karma tax. free to start, free to finish. creditkarma.com/tax. a big tax company needs that $50 way more than me.

(ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store.

promised this during the campaign, extreme vetting. but i think people might have been surprised. i think that they might have been led to believe that rather than suspending the issuance oft

him to turn back people who already had visas, including people who had green cards. that's how the federal judges -- chris: no, no, we should explain that. so you've got a green card, you're a permanent legal resident in this country. you've gone on a trip someplace else, now you can't get back in. >> or you have received a visa approved by the united states government in the recent past, and you got on an airplane and showed up at the airport, and suddenly that vis a visa is no r valid -- chris: so donald trump would say, too bad. >> too bad. but a federal judge said you could cause irreparable harm. in fact, one of the first people who was stopped at the new york airport as luck would have it is somebody that worked for the u.s. government in iraq in the last ten years. not exactly a good thing to do in iraq. so, you know, look, the president's following through on his commitment, but it strikes me that it might have been better -- he wants the secretary of the homeland security and the secretary of state in the next 30 days to come up with the

information that they need, and those two plus the director of national intelligence and the fbi director in the next 60 days to come up with a plan for extreme vetting. it might have been better to suspend the issuance of any new visas, rigorously monitor people who come into these countries who have a visa, and then in 90 days we have a complete, new plan that we can then begin issuing new visas. chris: this is already in the courts, and i guess you've got something like 300 people who are in limbo at the airports. what's the fallout both politically and legally here? >> whatever it is, it's entirely self-inflicted. this was all avod -- avoidable for the white house. they put this thing together without a full interagency process. they put it together, obviously, without thinking new the green card angle and all its potential ramificationses, and they produced -- ramifications, and they produced an order that sort of is like a lose-lose-lose for them.

it's not even the full muslim ban he promised at one point. this is the sort of climbdown position, and yet he produces something that's overinclusive in that it brings in all the green card people and underinclusive this that it leaves out, as you pointed out a number of countries such as pakistan, afghanistan from whence terrorists have come. so the, obviously, there's huge uproar on the democratic side. that was predictable. but very interestingly, i counted at least three republican senators who voiced concerns about how this thing has worked out. so it's not even entirely clear that he's going to have unified republican support behind this thing unless they can clean it up very quickly. chris: dana, you worked for a president who famously and very in a concentrated way made the point we're at war with terrorism, we're not at war with muslims. do you worry that this ends up changing that message? >> well, i do think it's important to point out that it's a moratorium, not a ban, so there is time for them to be

able to figure it out, so it's not like it's a permanent thing. i also think that some of the responses today and the explanation from kellyanne conway earlier on your show helped explain a little bit more about the decision making process. when they say this was an obama administration recommendation, i think that would have been helpful to use initially. so i call that an ounce of prevention. how can you explain things more. because what we found, and i think president obama found it too, is that no one's going -- you can't get everyone to agree with the decision. but you should be able to get them to respect the decision making process. and i think the trump administration would be well served if it explains things a little bit more on the front end to avoid confusion on the back end so that more of those stories that kellyanne conway was talking about -- the underreporting of all the good stuff -- could get more play. chris: you know, i'm beginning to call these trump sundays because i prepare the show on saturday, and by sunday morning the world has changed. and what i thought we were going to be talking about, and what i'm going to talk about with

you, julie, is the president's phone call with russian president putin yesterday which was highly anticipated. so much so, in fact, president trump had to lower expectations. here he is. >> putin and russia, i don't say good, bad or indifferent. i don't know the gentleman. i hope we have a fantastic relationship. that's possible, and it's also possible that we won't. we will see what happens. chris: julie, have you learned anything? because the white house has not been very forthcoming at least publicly. have you learned anything privately from sources about how the call went and, two, this talk about conceivably lifting sanctions which kellyanne conway had said was under consideration? >> the readout of this call was pretty brief -- chris: literally got more information from the kremlin -- >> which can we often do. the kremlin is quite skilled at putting out readouts that are not only more detailed, but faster than the white house. it's a strategy they're pretty good at. i did talk to a white house official who said sanctions kid not come up -- did not come up in the course of this

conversation. there was a lot of talk about security issues, particularly the idea of terrorism being what putin apparently called a common foe multiple times in the course of this conversation. i think that you should look at this 30-day review that the president has ordered the pentagon to do on the isis strategy for a possible focus on coordinating more with russia and syria which is something that the obama administration resisted. but even the idea that sanctions didn't come up in this phone call doesn't ease the anxiety that you're seeing not just among european leaders, but a lot of republicans on capitol hill who worry that the president, when he has to make a decision quickly on the sanctions involving ukraine, could look to make a deal with russia and back off of those and also the sanctions that obama imposed for the hacking. chris: dana, your former boss, bush 43, famously said he looked straight in the eyes of vladimir putin, got a sense of his soul. as we know, that didn't work out very well. how do you think this relationship with -- do you think trump can somehow charm or tame vladimir putin?

>> well, i thought that donald trump's probably best moment of his week was his press conference with the u.k. prime minister, theresa may, where he talked about good, bad or indifferent, i don't know, which is actually true. so he's not sure. he says he'd like to have a good relationship, so did the obama administration with the famous reset button. chris: that didn't work out either. >> no. so american presidents want to have good relations with countries all over the world, and then it's really up to that president or the counterpart, what their actions are. and i think the ukraine issue or whether there was more interference, i think also that donald trump will appreciate that vladimir putin has national interests of his own. he doesn't want to be friends with us because he's a friendly guy. he wants something from us, and it might be something nefarious that's not in our national interests, so he might have to back off a bit. but i think his best moment of the week was that moment when he answered that question in the press conference with theresa may. chris: all right. we have to take a break. when we come back, we'll discuss the upcoming showdown over the supreme court.

will democrats use the filibuster to block president trump's nominee? plus, what would you like to ask the panel over the battle over confirming that new justice? go to facebook or twitter at fox news sunday, and we may use your digestive balance? try align junior probiotic. so she can have a fraction dominating... status updating... hello-yellow-belt kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support with align junior. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand, now for kids.

i realize that ah, that $100k is notwell, a 103fortune. yeah, 103.

well, let me ask you guys. how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. well, i'm sure you talk to people all the time who think $100k is just pocket change. right now we're just talking to you. i told you we had a fortune. yes, you did. getting closer to your investment goals starts with a conversation. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today. >> we've never had a supreme court justice filibustered, but there's a chance that might happen. >> whatever happens, happens. >> would you want mitch mcconnell to use the nuclear option? >> yes, i would. chris: president trump telling fox's sean hannity he's ready to pull out all the stops to get his supreme court nominee this week through the senate. and we're back now with the panel. julie, there are three supposed front-runners, let's put them up on the screen. three federal circuit court judges. any sense as to the pecking order of those three, the

likelihood, and as soon as mr. trump talked about the nuclear option which would change the rules meaning the senate would approve with only 51 votes instead of a supermajority of 60 votes, mitch mcconnell immediately pushed back and said that's the senate's call. >> absolutely. i think if you look at the pecking order, we've seen judge pryor fall a little bit to the bottom. he's one that when you talk to -- chris: put the picture up on the screen again, if we can. >> he's one that democrats and republicans worry the most about. he has an extremely conservative track record, but he's been in the mix, certainly. a lot of people who have been talking to trump from heritage and the federalist have been pushing pryor. neil gorsuch seems to be rising at the moment, and we were talking about this a little bit in the green room, this is actually someone i think that democrats might have a harder time using the filibuster against. and so -- chris: because? >> because he is seen as certainly not a moderate choice, but if you look at his track record, he would be, i think, more acceptable to some people

from red states than a pryor even would. and politics comes into play enormously once you've made this pick. and i think given the atmosphere in washington right now, the anger among democrats about the way that merrick garland was treated, they are going to look to be really aggressive. so anything that the trump team can do to put someone in position to actually get approved by the senate will help them out. chris: we asked you for questions for the panel, and we got a big response on this one. first of all, this on twitter. what will happen if mcconnell uses the nuclear option? will there be a price? but on facebook, marilyn -- speaking about what julie was just saying -- remembers republicans blocking the nomination of merrick garland to the court last year. dems should block any and all trump appointees just like mcconnell did to obama, or is this different now? karl, it seems like this is going to be an even bigger political fight than usual. >> yeah. well,s it is different. for the last 80 years no president of the united states has nominated in his final year

and seen approved to the supreme court any nominee. it's not happened for 80 years. so it was to be expected that barack obama was going to be no different than all of his predecessors. in fact, joe biden and chuck schumer opposed the nomination -- in schumer's case, the approval of any supreme court nominee in the last year and a half of george w. bush's term in office and said so from the floor. biden announced it as the biden rule. no approval in the last year. so this is different. but will the democrats try and obstruct? absolutely. is this going to be a bitter fight? absolutely. at the end of the day, it comes down to two things. one is, are there enough red state democrats who say, you know what? the person who president trump has nominated is acceptable enough to the people in my state that i'm going to pay a price if i turn into a blind obstructionist like they're already making me on the nominees to the cabinet look like. and second of all, if at the end of the day are there sufficient number of them that they can

keep in place the 60 rule? if not, i think mitch mcconnell, he is absolutely right to say this is the senate's decision. but my sense is if democrats harden the line and they get to 58 or 59, 52 republicans and 6 or 7 democrats but not to 8, then they might impose the nuclear option -- chris: and just to explain, it already is the case for lower court judges that, because the democrats changed the rules in 2013, you only need a simple majority of 51. the supreme court is still the supermajority of 60, so a filibuster can till block it. now the question is will the republicans feel forced to extend that to a republican nominee for the supreme court? i want to turn to another big subject, and i had a big conversation, as you saw, in the first segment. the white house and the media. here's what the president said this week. >> a big portion of the media, the dishonesty, the total deceit and deception makes them certainly partially the

opposition party, absolutely. chris: and, dana, as i discussed with kellyanne conway and steve bannon in an interview with "the new york times" went a lot further. keep our mouths shut, zero integrity, zero intelligence. does this make sense from the white house's point of view? >> well, it does because i think they have effectively used the media against the democrats, right in so they were able to say to their base we have an enemy in the media, and the base agreed, and so it helps them a little bit. but i do think that -- so steve bannon's quote is very quotable, and i can understand why a journalist would be offended by it. but the second part of it was just give us a shot here. and i think what kellyanne said about the underreporting of some of the good policies they're doing, i've done media relations for a long time as a republican, it would be very frustrating. but the thing is also this, human beings are always going to try to eat dessert first. if you keep feeding them sugar,

they're going to go with the sugar. so if you give them something to cover that is process oriented or a tweet that seems a little -- chris: the size of the inaugural crowd -- >> they'll always do that. i sort of feel like if you can just serve the meat and potatoes, i guess you'd call that message disciplined, then you won't have so much of the sugar that is -- because everyone's on a sugar high. [laughter] >> i think it's important to note though, kellyanne talked about us notten wanting to cover policy. on friday the president signed this order on refugees, it took two hours for the white house to give us the order. it took several more hours to get the list of countries that this would actually impact, and then it took another full day to get an actual briefing on the details. we are desperate to cover the policies that this president is implementing. the white house, though, is not helping us do that. chris: let me bring chuck into this. politicians, as i said to kellyanne, complain about bad press all the time. is this different? >> this is the president of the united states declaring the

media -- which, by the way, he's not precisely defining, he's, you know, we think we know who he's talking about -- as the party of opposition. and the implication of that seems to be, well, i don't have to cooperate with them or work with them or respect them or treat them. but, you know, in a democracy the opposition is not the enemy. okay? even if you identify someone as the opposition, you sometimes work with them. you talk to them. you compromise with them. you attempt to match what you consider their bad faith with your good faith. and so it's astonishing about the rhetoric of steve bannon in all of this. when he's saying opposition, what he seems to me is implacable enemy. and i think that is new. but i would just repeat that in a democracy, the opposition is not the enemy. so even if it were true that the media is their opposition, that would not be a reason to freeze

them out and to greet them with complete hostility. chris: julie, we've got less than a minute here. do you notice any particular antagonism dealing with this white house? is it different than -- you've been around for a while in the front row of the white house >> it's a little bit different, but i would say that under the obama administration they also looked at us with some disdain. they also thought that their coverage was unfair. i'm sure karl and dana thought their coverage was unfair when they were in the white house -- >> it was, absolutely. [laughter] >> every white house believes that. i think the difference here is they don't distinguish sometimes between critical coverage and what actually is fake news. as president, you are going to get a lot of critical coverage. that's not going to stop. chris: thank you, panel. see you next time. when we come back, a final word on next week's "fox news sunday." sunday." ♪

still trying to find how ara good site.going? they all...want...to... charge me. have you tried credit karma? credit karma doesn't do taxes. does credit karma do taxes? yeah, and they're totally free, so they'll never take any of your refund. oooh, credit karma...huh? we... probably still want those. yeah, good call. file your taxes for free with credit karma tax. more "doing chores for dad" per roll

more "earning something you love" per roll bounty is more absorbent, so the roll can last 50% longer than the leading ordinary brand. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty, the quicker picker upper chris: a look at downtown houston, home of super bowl li which airs next sunday on fox. and fox news sunday will be taking our show on the road. we'll be broadcasting from nrg stadium. there you see it as the new england patriots take on atlanta falcons. check your listings for "fox news sunday" in your area, that also on fox news channel. and that's it for today, have a

great week and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." ♪ ♪ >> a fox news alert in new york here are latest details on the deadly shooting in the mosque in quebec city, canada, these were images from a cell phone, confirming that 5 people are dead, two suspects have been arrested, police cordoned off islamic cultural center of quebec, several people were also injured at the building, known as the great mosque of quebec, there of a dozen people in the center. most of them were men, gathered for evening prayers, quebec's prem