>> that's all for tonight. follow me on facebook, instagram and twitter. i'm waters. this is my world. ♪ >> breaking tonight, president trump doubles down with new threat at iran and its leaders. happy new year. i'm judge jeanine. the national security advisor to the president of the united states is standing by to talk about that and breaking news. the president pulling no punches on twitter this evening in the wake of his strike in baghdad. it killed one of the most vicious terrorists in the world. soleimani. questions are raised about what the iranian response might be and tonight, the president sent another clear message saying

iran is talking boldly about certain usa assets as revenge for our ridding the world of terrorist leader who had just killed an american and many others not to mention all of the people in his lifetime including recently hundreds of iranian protesters. his already attacking our embassy and preparing for additional hits and other locations. problems for many years. any americans or american assets, we have targeted 52 iranian site representing the two american hostages taking by iran many years ago. some are a very high level and important to iran and the iranian culture. those targets will be hit very fast and hard.

usa wants no more threats. my open is coming up in a few minutes. first we are joined by president trump's national security advisor, robert. thank you for being here. i'm sure you had a busy day but what caused the president to tweet tonight? >> i think we've seen various threat from iran in the region. threats made to the united states and against american citizens, are soldiers and marines take a very serious the. the president is making it clear that this stuff very bad path for them to go down. we caught him in the act of plotting and planning to kill americans. he was illuminated in a precise

operation carried out by the u.s. military. we said that's the end of it. the iranians decide to escalate, that would be a very bad path for them. >> as many weight to see the response of iran, there are more troops in the middle east, correct? >> there are more troops, air assets in the region. the u.s. is fully prepared to protect citizens and diplomats in its military. >> president trump, as you said, soleimani had been caught red-handed and today he's formally notified congress and i know you can't disclose this because it classified about the strike but how credible was the information the united states had before the strike soleimani?

>> i can tell you it was very solid intelligence, solar money was traveling around the region working out of plan to attack americans with his proxy allies with iran's proxy allies and syrian and lebanon and iraq. we have the intelligence, we knew he was in the process of planning please attacks and we acted to defend american lives. the president said he will always act and defend american lives with terrorism. >> what you say then if you can't give us any more specific information, what you say to those people who say this was an unauthorized use of military force, this was a declaration of war. something about the sovereignty of iran. this is a high government official. in truth, he was terrorist, was

he not? >> there's a man who led a terrorist organization. he was traveling in violation of a un travel ban put in place in 2007 because of his efforts to gain nuclear materials for the regime. this is a man who was personally responsible for killing six to 700 american troops during the iraq war and naming many, many others. any time you seen an american soldier without a leg or an arm in iraq fighting, it's most likely they were wounded or maimed by weapons provided by general solar money. it shown a propensity in the past to attack americans and kill americans. he just did it recently december 27. he ordered the attack on the military base that killed an american contractor and he was

in the midst of plotting attacks against americans. that's what the president had to make the decision to launch the operation. >> so it was preempted strike, what you say to those in congress who think we should have been notified that, what you say to them? >> this is common practice in these sorts of operations. close timing and sensitive intelligent and efforts, those things take place. congressional leaders very shortly after the strike took place, the president went in

congress today within the 48 hour period and will continue but when they get back into session, and return to washington next week, will continue and brief them on these issues. >> you believe this was the 2002 authorization for the use of military force act, correct? >> rights. there were numerous grounds for this judge. commander-in-chief, it's well accepted the president has the inherent authority to defend american troops when they are subject to attack. i don't think that's anything in question. there is no dispute here that solar money had been very recently involved plotting against american troops or you mentioned in 2002, solar money was an enemy combatant in the field, operating against the

u.s. this was an absolutely operation, the d.o.j. and otherwise. so we feel very good about the legal basis for this military operation. >> the whole concept and of course, the president is responding to the threats if they don't realize the consequences of their mistake not only today but in years to come. so what do you anticipate will happen? do you think this is all out war or do you think they realize they don't have the ability to fight on the level weekend? or am i wrong? >> no, i think you are right.

i think if you go back and look at what just happened in the past several months, the president of the u.s. has shown incredible restraint in the face of terrific provocations. they shot down two american drones. they attacked the oil facilities in saudi arabia and artillery from a quarter, rocket attacks on american basis iraq. they finally killed an american and wounded others december 27. the president was very restrained in his approach to the iranians. it finally crossed a redline and when they went to baghdad to plot further crimes against americans, that's when his time ran out. the iranians should be very careful. this guy was caught red-handed. we've said we would consider it if they decided to move forward against the u.s. there will be severe consequences.

>> retaliation some say could be a cyber attack of some sort. possibility of that? >> the iranians have advanced cyber capabilities. they may attempt to do that. they may attempt other things. we discourage them from doing that. the president has warned them again and again. his tweet yesterday and today, he's one iranians, this is not the path you want to go down. we put a stop to your killing americans, let's leave it at that. if they move forward down this path of retaliation and escalation, it's one they can't afford or win. >> ] national security advisor, thank you for being here. i'm looking forward to the weekend. we have guests including house minority leader, mccarthy and fox news military analyst, david hunt. go on all deck but first --

♪ thank you, mr. president. the killing of iran's revolutionary leader soleimani needed to happen. resident donald trump did it. everyone knew americans bloods was on his hands. the murder of more than 600 american service members and thousands of others whose blood and limbs were spilled and left on the sands of the middle east. he invited expose of devices capable of piercing through our american armor. the reign of terror celebrated and legendary against americans, our allies and muslims would have continued had this monster not been stopped. the president did not risk a single life in his effort to eliminate this beast who, according to all in history was

a clear and present danger to america. folks, you know the president means what he says and says what he means. he's not interested in war. he is interested in america. and protecting it and in so doing, he will take swift decisive and strategic action and take no prisoners along the way. whether they'll admit it or not, all americans should be thankful. our allies should be thankful. indeed, the world should be thankful for the removal of the world's most dangerous terrorists. folks, this day, it's been 40 years in the making. i told you last year that iran was determined to provoke us and indeed, was provoking us and to all those who criticized the president for not trying, this president has repeatedly tried

diplomacy, steps back, talked about restraint and refuses to takes action when ironically, criticized for not doing so. take a listen. the last month, iran has reacted to the economic stranglehold on the suffering because of the sanctions president trump has put on it. a far cry from the rollover reward of $150 billion obama gave them. it was used to fund terrorism throughout the world. iran is responding with extreme provocation. oil tankers. when an american drone is as wide as a 737, brought down by intervening missile, it seemed iran was determined to provoke us. the president was ready to conduct strikes but pulled back because, as he said,. >> they shut down and unplanned

drone, planes, whatever you want to call it and here we are sitting with 150 people and i didn't like it. i didn't think it was proportionate. >> in the last two weeks, iran has been are responsible for the attack on the embassy in iraq where an american was killed. remind you of ben ghazi? the parallels are frightening. soleimani actually helped plan the benghazi attack when americans were killed in our last president never bothered to respond. they said the massacre of americans was due to video. this president trump took swift and precise action. his response for an american being killed was immediate. yes, indeed. those days are over. gone are the days when the u.s. beat iran, brings her to the

table to give $150 billion and an additional 400 million on an unmarked plane as the united states let out the detainees to return to the battlefield. we now have a president who negotiates strength, not from weakness. tremendous restraint while constantly being provoked by iran. his redline was the killing of an american and true to his word, it was only then that he responded. he tried everything and sanctions were imposed. they recognize the appropriate responsible action in the spectrum of diplomacy and yet, they continued to poke the eye of the tiger. the president even tweeted iran will pay a very big price for any damage or loss of life.

this is not a warning, is a threat. so rollover and kill us? can we decide who should they kill first? or how many of us we will tolerate being killed before we act? should we allow further casualties? it's not an act of war. it's not an authorized force when the commander-in-chief is depending americans from imminent deadly harm. for those bozos who favored the president to distract us from impeachment, he could have done this on any one of the last 1079 days because they've been trying to impeach him since day one. chuck schumer says this -- >> this action may well have brought our nation closer to another endless war. exactly the kind of endless war

president promised he would not drag us into. >> so for chuck and all you snowflakes who say this means war, i've got news for you. we've already been in the shadow war with iran for decades. they haven't confronted us with conventional military action because they are weak and we have superpower capabilities thanks to president donald j trump prosecuted their war against us but primarily nonstate proxies like hezbollah and lebanon. yemen, the jihad's. as well as the shiite militants in iraq, syria and lebanon. so iran denies response a buddy as they conduct our shadow war relative impunity taking

hostages and blowing up the marine barracks and killing 221 marines, rolling up our embassy in 1983 and attacks on oil tankers in an attempt to knock out world oil production in retaliation. soleimani himself was quoted in saying, it's time to take our swords out, impeach them teach them a lesson. we put the iranians on notice that if you have proxies no longer protecting those who plan or give orders for attacks against us. they personally will be held responsible. trump was precise. he avoided a needless loss of civilian lives. does this mean inevitable war?

no one can predict. the iranians have multiple military and economic interests in america, which they can target. however, they now know their use of proxies will not insulate them personally from retaliation and preemptive action. the president's thinking on this has not been from a hit. it was sent strategically in motion this past april. the revolutionary guard and its commanders were labeled terrorists, that was the game changer. it served notice to iran's leaders, particularly those in the iran's revolutionary guard. that they themselves will pay the price in planning an attack

on america, they make wake up on the receiving end of an american plan to preempt them. thank god for president donald trump. that's my open. let me know what you think on my facebook and twitter # judge jeanine. congressman mark meadows still on deck tonight. next, live to the middle east to check in with reporter jordan. also ahead, the president's bold decision this week. you are watching a busy night.

welcome back. we've been telling you,

president trump taking to twitter tonight, threatening to hit iran very fast and very hard if any americans are attacked in the wake of the airstrike that took out iran's top general. kevin mccarthy joins me in just a moment to talk about all of us but first, fundament is with me live from tortoise georgia. >> one of a thing tonight, if iran might retaliate. it's not if they would do so in the next three days but sometime after that. it was at that funeral where you get a sense of the sentiment he stopped across the region. people in the crowd bang for blood. america is a great satan. his body is heading to iran

tomorrow and they are calling for revenge. they posed a threat to the u.s. and plan to attack america throughout the region. the iraqi parliaments, tomorrow is the future of u.s. troops in iraq. the expulsion of the 5000 u.s. soldiers there. at least 35 euros targets including worship have been identified for strikes. the white house as an attack could happen within weeks. u.s. dispatched another 3000 troops and scaled-back operations to boost preventive measures. no more of your strikes are expected from us iran does something for it. it's rather when, if it is

thought to be when, not if and miller question, how big? >> thank you for joining us. let's get reaction out of president trump's tweet tonight. what's your reaction? >> the president made the world a little safer because this individual killed more than 600 american. shut down the u.s. drowned, bound to tankers and they are also going after saudi arabia's must not forget why they reacted. after our embassy. if you kill un-american, we will react. the drone went down, when u.s. americans were killed, this individual soleimani was planning to do more. this president acted. >> is an article that basically said he's quoted in saying

taking out swords on us and he is obviously the master for so many of the other proxies and attacks around the world but my question, i want to move from that, before i go to impeachment, what do you expect when you go to congress in terms of the information that the president has said to congress that classified information regarding his reason for the attack on soleimani. who gets to see that? >> i was with the president the attack on the night the attack went public. it was active and we did kill soleimani. what happened was, he had all authority to do this. he is protecting american servicemen and women and congress welcome together, i imagine pompeo and others welcome in and read the entire congress.

the president has the authority to protect our men and women and he acted on that. also remember, what had taken place in that. the fear of what was going to happen -- >> we are going to go to a break but what i'm asking about is what will you guys see, will everyone in congress see this? >> what i think we will see, they will give you a briefing on it and it will be rather detailed but there are certain things you could not sheriff to all. that probably will be shared more in the game day for today will be briefing the entire congress and congress will be able to ask questions. >> stay right there. the white house formally notified congress of it strike on soleimani. the reason for it in fact sure to rile up the macaws. we want to get your take on the and more after the break.

back to justice. ♪ >> the president tweet threats against iran, the white house normally notified congress strike on the money. let's get back to kevin mccarthy to talk about that and more. thank you for staying with us. i want to talk about, i don't have that much time though, i want to talk to you about impeachment. so pelosi and peaches the president. i'm not quite sure if she did or didn't because it's still in the house and it hasn't transferred to the tenant. we are going to get this done by christmas, they get it done by christmas and they are slow to

get over to the senate. what's going on? >> nancy pelosi thinks she has more power then treat us. it will go to the senate but just yesterday in the district court of appeals, pelosi's house attorney made the argument before a judge and they could offer another article of impeachment. to try to impeach this president. you've heard it from so many other democrats, it's only goal in what they are continuing turn try to do. she doesn't want to send over because they'll vote against it. >> she wants to add another article to the two articles. we don't know because they are just in limbo right now. that's like me -- go ahead.

>> her attorney made the argument the court of appeals in d.c. yesterday before a judge when the judge questioned why the are even asking for this to deal with the mueller report because impeachment is over. he said could there be another impeachment? yes, nancy pelosi signed off on that, we could go to a third article of impeachment. they have nothing else on their agenda. while this president is making america safer, they are trying to take the president out. >> this is infuriating. here we got this rush to get impeachment, get it done by the end of the year. she goes to court and it's like petty larceny and saying hey, i'm going to indict him for murder, too. we don't need a vote on it.

but more important, the fact that right now, she said she doesn't want to send it over until she sure it will be there in the senate. i'll tell you what i would do. i would tell mitch mcconnell that he ought to automatically dismiss it. there's got to be a default. a speedy trial if you are entitled to, if there's a statute of limitation, there should be a default judgment. what is mcconnell waiting for? >> i think what mcconnell is seeing your fairpoint back in session. we we'll be back in section session next week. that's when pelosi should name the managers and send over. she does not have a right to dictate what the senate will do just as the senate didn't have it right to dictate in the house. she did not allow the minorities to offer any witnesses. she did not give this president any procedures we had given to

clinton and nixon. she changed the whole dynamic and she forced us to finish the weakest and fastest impeachment in history. the only bipartisan vote was against impeachment. she knows it's week. >> why can't the senate dismiss it out of hand right now? the senate does the actual trials. i make a motion to dismiss for not prosecution, failure to have a speedy trial. all that don't even go along with that raid. it's a showcase. >> it shows very clearly 51 sanders, i hear you completely. which mcconnell, you should be upset. you should be very upset with nancy plus.

listen to what schumer is asking. he's asking for witnesses that they would not allow the minority. now they know their case is so weak, this is outrageous to the whole american public. here we are with so many other forces, we know this will fill in the senate. the 51 senators got together, based on what pelosi has done, they couldn't dismiss her. i believe pelosi does not move with the managers in the next week. >> should have been done january 1 but what she's doing is holding her fingers in the way, hoping something will increase the chances of impeachment to get a few extra senators in the senate so she can win. this is a sad commentary on politics in america. >> it's very sad about the speaker of the house.

look at her position. 600 americans, she would rather stand with hollywood. that is an abuse of power. >> indeed. thank you. military strategy in a few moments. live from the nation's capital.

welcome back, drank me now with more insight on the situation in the middle east, mark meadows, thanks for being with us tonight on justice. happy new year to year. the news was so scary.

i want to start with you. the president tweet tonight, according to an essay national security advisor, o'brien, he said was based on intelligence they were getting but they were threatening an ally. he says, this is what i think it is, he said let this serve as a warning that if iran strikes american assets, we have targeted 52 iranian site representing the 52 american hostages taken many years ago. they are important to iran and iranian culture. the president is ready to go. what you think iran response to this is going to be? >> they better take it serious. one of the interesting things, this is not just on tweet. everybody was talking about the president and he made a decisive action, an action that should have been taken. we've now taken out two of the

top terrorists manipulators and generals in the last three months. it's because this president has been willing to take action. when we took out this general, we had already identified targets. this is not just on tweet. everybody's talking about retaliation and we should be vigilant and cautious. the risk of not doing things is certainly greater the risk of taking action that the president so rightly took. i can tell you, who should be worried about this is the iranians. this is not about our regime page but if you talk about double digit unemployment, the economy is employee, is what we do. we will strike back appropriately and we can do it without putting boots on the ground. >> we may, donald trump in terms

of impeachment, i'll talk about in a few minutes but donald trump by his efforts of diplomacy and economic sanctions and taking out soleimani, there may be our regime change from within because of the last of the regime because of the civil unrest in iran because they know $150 billion in assets they got from america used to proxy for terrorism all over the world. i have to imagine this regime is a little frightening itself and it can't go toe to toe with us. >> it can't go toe to toe with us. if you include intelligent military, we spent twice as much every year as their entire economy. i'll put our military up against

anybody, anywhere in the world but more important, as we look at this particular aspect of dressing around, the president has done more to address iran in the his first three years in the previous presidents combined. when we look at what happened, the iranians understand one thing. they understand power and resolve. they've got a message. >> the iranian people are good people. the civil unrest there is incredible. soleimani and all the stuff he was doing is one thing but the people themselves are good people. i've got to go to impeachment. i can't deal with this. nancy, i found out from mccart mccarthy, minority leader that she went to court to add more impeachment without getting a vote in the senate.

talk about wallace. >> what she's trying to do is convince the judges that she needs to be able to go on another fishing expedition. i don't see additional articles coming. she's trying to do is say we don't have enough evidence. we should get the grand jury material and be able to subpoena don mcgahn and have him come in. this is all about nancy pelosi saying she had a constitutional duty to remove the president of the u.s. and hold on, put on fast stop and say i'm only going to do half of my constitutional duty and not send the right rest to the senate. i think everybody sees it for what it is, a political stunt. >> part of it is, they could have had the vote in the house. they decided not to so good to see her.

>> it is you mark i'll get the strategy behind the airstrike that took out one of the world worst terrorists. ♪

welcome back. we've heard from politicians and critics but let get the military man. military expert and combat veteran, david hunt joins me now to talk about the airstrike iran. thank you for being on. the president taking out soleimani was appropriate? >> he needed to die a long time ago. he may the -- he was one of the top four terrorists in the

world. he was the second most in iran. it was a big decision because we are waiting on the consequences. soleimani was a very bad guy to a lot of americans. he tortured thousands of people and this was a statement to make by killing him in iraq along with the head of the iraqi militia. this was a big deal and yeah, it should have been done. >> he also said it should have been done a long time ago. why do you think all the other presidents didn't do this? >> it's a political will. lack of political will. people worried about consequences. they made a bad call. this was high wire call because

iran has a big world reach, very organized, very capable of operation. we are a wide open country as opposed to iran. the sky, it was the right thing to do but you have to consider other things. the other presidents in this push opted not to do this. i think this was a tough call in the right call. >> you've got this president taking out the top terrorists in the world. in a matter of a couple of months. let's talk about the region and the soul money and i talked in my open about we may not be at work, it was a shadow war. it's proxies after american asset so this was something

going on for years. so the question was, we could have done this for a long time. in the end, it took donald trump to do this. this was a tough decision, no? >> absolutely. this is a game changer in the relationship with iran. this is an aggressive act and it changes the board. we just killed the second most in the iran. i'd like us losing cia director and secretary of state. this is a very powerful influential guy. >> but now the riskiest thing that any president could do was not succeed. and he did. he pulled the trigger with unknown consequences. iran is battling right now and

they believe an eye for an eye and that's why he's issued these direct tweets. what you think? how do you think they are going to respond? >> first of all, it's gotta be between the embargo dropped in the military who wants that. we don't know who will win the argument. iran has a great offense of capability from tiger to direct action and the problem is, we are wide open and have assets all over the world. they have a big chance to make a statement. the problem is we are going to counter it. my argument is then, we want to get at iran, and make it harder

blockade and that would bring them to their knees. >> where? >> absolutely. at the coast of iran. we don't have to fire a shot. all i'm saying is if we do an eye for an eye as you and i have discussed that can be a dangerous game. what they have done is a very big deal. >> david spunt it's always good to see you and happy new year. judge jeanine:

judge jeanine: that's it for us tonight could follow a me on facebook twitter and instagram. you want to have fun go to judge jeanine.org and you will see t-shirts that say and that's my open or impeached this, or are you stupid? thanks for watching. i'm judge jeanine pirro advocating for truth justice and

the american way. "the greg gutfeld show" is coming coming up and i will see right here next saturday night. >> have a very good relationship with kim jong-un. i know he is sending out certain messages about a christmas present i hope his christmas present is the dutiful face. that's what i buy, base. [laughter] greg: kim jong-un jong-un better get him something nice after this week. [applause] if there's one thing we have learned in three years that trump will always respond. if you ask a dump question trump's going to reply.