community problems. he thought it would be nice to say at least once "get bon jovi on it". martha: he can asolve problems in my community any time. bill: living on prayer! see you friday, everybody. martha: that's right, tomorrow is friday. "happening now" starts right now. take care, everybody. jenna: happening right now, new warnings about terror attacks in the u.s. and europe this christmas season. according to a senior u.s. intelligence source the threats are credible. catherine herridge is live in washington with the latest developments. catherine. >> reporter: u.s. officials tell fox there is something there in that threat stream tied to al-qaeda in iraq. the intent is to broaden its reach and become more of a global player, not merely a regional player in its operations and this is

similar to the trajectory of al-qaeda in yemen. iraqi officials, sources say, have confirmed the plans made by the two insurgents who had this attack by a suicide bomber over the weekend, the u.s. officials say the claims are being actively investigated, though it's unclaire whether the insurgent planned this attack because they had knowledge or sought to capital idaho on the event. with the intent of the bombing at christmas, fak acabdulmutallab, officials say they are more concerned about it this year because the intent of groups like al-qaeda in yemen want to inflict painful strikes and u.s. officials confirmed to fox anwar al-awlaki the first terrorist on the cia kill or capture list was behind al asiri, the underwear bomb maker where petn was found in the undergarment. what is important is the evolution in the threat. there have been three threats, the traditional

threat stream of al-qaeda leadership in the tribal areas of pakistan that still remains intent on mass casualty intents, then the stream from aphiats moving away from being regional players to more global players, we saw that with al-qaeda in yemen, then the third stream, self--radicalized, i would refer to as digital jihadists. when you talk about this heightened environment, in actuality it's a couple of the threat streams coming together, which may well be the case. jenna: we should remind our audience, at this time of year we tend to see an uptick in chatter because of the christmas season. definitely a story we need to watch. >> i have one thing to add about that. we often talk about an uptick in the chatter around the holiday season because these seasons have a lot of significance to us, but history has taught us these groups sort of pull the trigger on plots when they're ready, they don't really do it with a specific calendar date in mind.

jenna: thank you, catherine, and great points made there. we'll be back with catherine as news develops. good of you to join u. i'm jeanne lee. rick: aim rick folbaum in for jon scott. a whole lot of drama on capitol hill as the house takes up the controversial tax cut compromise that was worked out between president president and congressional republicans. debate is expected to get a little heated on this, with liberal democrats pushing for changes to the estate tax provision. jenna: it seems the change is minute by minute here. conservatives republicans also objecting to the deal, some because it's temporary, others like congressman mike pence you're seeing on your screen say it will do little to create jobs. rick: later, more high stakes action on the hill. a little foggy there today, the senate getting ready to tackle a spending bill, republicans are promising to block this because it contains billions of dollars of pork, some of which was inserted by republican lawmakers, but if this bill does not pass, the entire

government could shut down. jenna: is that a metaphor, low visibility on that capitol hill because there's a lot of fog? who knows. the last time a temporary government shutdown happened was back in 1995 when our next guest, newt gingrich was speaker of the house, also author of the best seller-valley forge". speaker gingrich, you are willing to shut down the government in 1995. considering the scenario we're in now, would you be willing to do it here? >> well, let's start with the premise we can't have the president or the liberal democrats blackmailing the republicans. it's fairly easy to have a clean continuing resolution, to keep the government open until the end of february, every republican i think would be willing to vote for a clean resolution, but i think republicans absolutely should stop has centered around politicians taking pork taking your money to

decide what to do with your money, and the fact is the liberal the lost -- liberals lost that and by the largest margin since 1948. there's no reason for a lame duck congress. twelve senators have been retired or defeated, yet they're still voting, in the house, the democrats have lost control, yet pelosi is still in charge. this is fund lenl me, on the day we had the tea party -- remember this, is the anniversary of the boston tea party and on the very day where we basically rebelled against britain because we had taxation without representation, we're being told the defeated representatives are going to rip us off for 8000 earmarks. i hope everyone watching picks up the phone in the next few minutes, calls their u.s. senator and demands they stop this earmark bill and pass a clean, simple, continuing resolution to keep the government open without earmarks. jenna: let's talk a little about the risk that goes on with a temporary shutdown of

the government. taking a look back at seeing what happened back in 1995, would you say it was worth it, it was worth the risk? >> absolutely. jenna: absolutely? why is that? >> for two reasons: first of all, as republicans, no republican majority in the house have been reelected since 1928, when we stood firm against liberals and we say we're prepared to really fight, all of our base said you know, these folks are different, they're not normal politicians, they don't just go to washington to sell out, and we became the first reelected republican majority since 1920. i've always been puzzled why the washington establishment which is liberal has always said it was a mistake. but there's a second reason: the shutdown convinced president clint beyond that we were serious about balancing the budget. as a result, we controlled spending to 2.9% a year, the lowest rate since calvin coolidge in the 1920s, we cut taxes to increase economic growth and the result was we balanced the budget for four straight

years, and paid off $65 billion of debt. they had to believe that the republicans were genuinely serious in order for them to have that kind of negotiation, when there is a liberal democrat in the white house. the result was a bipartisan effort, cut taxes and spur the economy and that ought to be the goal about -- the goal with the next congress and stand toe to toe and say you're not going to intimidate us and blackmail us on principle, we're going to -- going to rely on the american people to see what's happening. jenna: we often veer in these conversations into the political rift because we see the different parties, and the executive branch as well. what about the risk to the american people? the american people that are going to actually see the government temporarily shutting down, not only what that means to us in general to see a government shut down, but also, what it means symbolically, to see a temporary shut down in government because both sides can't agree?

>> but then shouldn't the message be to president obama and senate democrats pass a clean resolution to keep the government open? after all, what they're saying is we have to pay them with 8000 earmarks to keep the government open. why should the american people have to pay off politicians with pork in order to keep the government open? i think our position should be we want to keep the government open, we're going to do everything we can to keep the government open, we simply need a president who said he is against earmarks to actually act the way he's talking and if the president would weigh in and would agree to get a clean continuing resolution, then we could keep the government open without having to pay off the politicians. i think the average american is sick and tired of being told that they get blackmailed by elected officials and the elected officials tell them i'm not going to do thissum i get my pork, i think the average american wants us to stand up and say no, we're fed up with that kind of behavior. jenna: on a different topic for a moment, when we're talking so much about government funding, there's another story that's happening today that's very

big and that's the review of the war in afghanistan and on a day where we have the review of the war in afghanistan and we're questioning whether or not we're going to have government funding there still is no military funding for the year ahead, the defense authorization bill hasn't been passed, you have officers all across this country wondering what kind of funding they're going to get for their soldiers. what do you make of that? with that type of focus being on government fungd and not on some of the essentials for our national security? >> well, i think it's a real shame that they've not been able to get together and pass a defense authorization bill. now, i agree with congressman ike skelton, democratic chairman, who said he wanted to pass t. i know that congress buck mckeon, the next chairman of the house on armed services has indicated he voted for it. there have a whole lot of extras in there, i hope they get it passed in the next few days, although the fact is the appropriations to spend the money is not contingent on this and there will be no cutoff to the defense department. that's already been taken

care of. but i do think they ought to pass the defense authorization bill, and in the form they've made it i believe they can probably get the votes to do so. jen we'll see what happens and we'll check it out over the next few days as we move into the weekend and see whether or not the government stays over. mr. gingrich, good to spend time with you, thank you. rick: a brand new government review of the war in afghanistan, it finds the taliban and al-qaeda militants have lost power and influence over the next year. that should allow president obama to stick with his plans to begin withdraw of the u.s. forces next july, but how many will leave and how quickly? that's still not clear. we expect the president to talk about it in just over half an hour from now. steve centanni is live at the pentagon. steve, good morning. what do we expect to hear from the president today? >> reporter: we already have the overview of the review so we know the basic points the president is going to be talking about as they unveil this strategy review. the strategy is not going to

change. this review says it's still going to be to disrupt, dismantle and defeat the taliban and al-qaeda, and there have been notable operational gains, including the al-qaeda senior leadership is weaker, and under pressure now. so we're making some progress, they say, and we're on the right track. but the timeline remains the same by july of next year, we are going to start a withdrawal, however small the beginning that withdrawal is, and by 2014, we are going to hand over control of the whole operation to the military and the police in afghanistan, rick. rick: what does this review have to say about the problems, the main problems, steve, that our military is still facing there? >> well, of course, the taliban has spread and established control in different parts of the country, and it's posing a problem, a difficult problem rooting them out, especially in the south. they're making head way in the north as well. the intelligence community is finding they're in a more

difficult position than the military is, they have said the road appears longer to the intelligence officials, to some in the intelligence community, according to a recent estimate, than it does to the military. so the taliban, routed into certain areas and along the border in pakistan where they're hanging out in those tribal areas and pakistan has not made a firm enough commitment to root them out of there. also hamid karzai, the president of afghanistan, is he a relyiable partner, an effective partner, is he going to root out corruption in his government, these are big questions that remain big trouble areas ahead down the road in afghanistan, rick. rick: steve centanni live at the pentagon this morning, ahead of the review, the release of that review, and as we mentioned, just about half an hour from now, president obama set to speak live about the afghan war review. we'll bring you his comments live as soon as it happens. jenna: a man hunt underway for a fifth suspect in the murder of border patrol agent brian perry, the

spending bill making its way through congress includes millions for border security, but those earmarks are included in the very same bill as some of the most wasteful projects. how do you pick and choose which stays or goes? we'll look at that just ahead. and the question everybody is asking, will the federal government shut down? that could happen if congress fails to pass a spending bill. we want to know what you think about this and the drama on capitol hill as the lame duck session closes. get on the live chat on the foxnews.com home page or send us an e-mail, fox news.com and we'll air your comments on the program. we'll see you on the chat during the break.

jenna: welcome back, everybody. this is certainly a big topic today and really every day, right? lawmakers are battling over how to cut our decifit. and the question that always arises is how does the government decide what to cut? one example this week shows how challenging some of those choices are. now, we reported on the

murder of border patrol agent brian perry while on duty in southern arizona, which that happens, many americans asks where is the security for our borders? remember security takes money. we looked at that 1900 page spending bill we got this week and found a series of different earmarks for border security, the same earmarks some are calling pork. henry quayor's distribute runs from mcallen to laredo, texas and has earmarks for border security. you want $500,000 in this spending bill. what is this for? >> this is to build a bridge to somewhere, because studies have shown that the more presence you have of law enforcement officials, then of course this will help are border security. not only that but i had about $400,000 also for a hangar there so we could put helicopter there is to secure the border. so i'm focusing on things that are important to border security on this item.

>> why do you think it's worth the money? >> i'll put it this way. our constitution says that members of congress have to run every two years. by the very nature, i think we're closer to the people than the other parts of the federal government. therefore, we know what the needs are, we talk to folks and i'd rather have, quite honestly with all due respect to the administration, i think i can do a better job represent of my district than some bureaucrat in washington, d.c. this is what the local communities have requested and this is what i'm trying to help them with. jenna: so some of your fellow congressmen are looking for funds as well, $400,000 for solar parking canopies in kansas, for example or $277,000 for a potato pest management in wisconsin. when you are both looking at what you need for your own communities, what do you say to your critics who say hey listen, we don't need that bridge in your district, we're going to need something for a potato pest management in wisconsin,

that's actually more important. how do you figure that out? >> first of all, let's look at the big picture. earmarks, under the current administration, that is, under pelosi, we have literally cut those earmarks in half from what they were before, number one. number two, i don't know about what other members do, but i do know one thing, my earmarks are less than $30 million. that s. i'll talking about total amount. some of the other side on the senate side, look who has the largest amount of earmarks on the other side and it's the other party. again, i'm not saying this is right or wrong, all i'm saying is we have to maj our own merits, i ask folks, i ask the nonprofits, the local government, i ask the sheriffings policemen, firefight e. what they want. jenna: i apologize for interrupting, we only have 30 seconds. if we don't cut earmarks, how do we ever cut government spend something. >> earmarks make half of 1 percent of the whole

federal government. there are other ways. and as a blue dog, i'm -- a plu dog i'm looking for other ways to cut government spending but earmarks make up half of 1 percent, that's a -- symbol that is not -- we need to look at other ways of spending. jenna: thank you very much for joining us today, we appreciate it, sir. >> thank you. rick: coming up, countdown to a possible government shutdown as lawmakers promise to fight billions of dollars in earmarks on the bill. we'll be joined by iowa senator charles grassley, coming up on "happening now".

jenna: well, today we're dealing with real fears about a government shutdown as a battle looms in the senate over the massive spending bill just days before the holiday recess,

republicans say there's too little time to fix earmarks in the bill and are vowing to oppose it. but if lawmakers don't agree to a temporary stop gap measure by saturday, the government will close up shop. jim angle is live in washington with this story. jim. >> reporter: helo jenna. senate democratic lead harry reid is determined to bring a sweeping omnibus bill to a vote this week. republicans are fighting it. >> they want to ram this gigantic trillion dollars bill through congress and they're getting -- they're using once again the christmas break as an inducement to vote for it. we all know this is not the twi legislate. americans expect more from congress and they demanded more on election day. >> reporter: so today mcconnell introduced what he called a clean one-page continuing resolution or c.r. which would keep the funds for the government at

current spending levels through february 18th which would give lawmakers time to examine all the spending closely. a member of the democratic leadership calls all the republican complaints about the size of the bill the height of hypocrisy because he says they knew how big it would be because they insist it not go over a certain amount. >> it's true, it's over a trillion dollars, in fact, it's $1.5 trillion in this bill but what hasn't been said by senator mcconnell and senator kyl, that's exactly the amount they asked for. >> many different senators have a different objection, the number of earmarks from both republicans and democrats which one-time -- long time opponent says he's determined to stop. >> 688 at $3 billion, unbelievable. one of my favorites is $300,000 for the polynesian voyaging society, naturally

in hawaii, $165,000 for maple syrup research in vermont. >> many earmarks can be ridiculous examples of pork, but some can be perfectly legitimate spending needs. just as you were mentioning about the border. but when all are thrown into a massive bill and tended to be rushed through in three days, lawmakers don't have time to separate the worthy projects from the greasiest examples of pork. the key is to judge them openly on their merits and not rush them through and some members of congress suggest if they can't find ways to spend taxpayers' money it would fall to the president and unelected bureaucrats. jenna: very interesting dynamics. thank you very much. rick ruck for more on the spending bill and the battle over earmarks, we're joined by senator charles grassley of iowa, ranking member of the senate finance committee. good to talk to you, senator. what's your vote going to be on this bill, sen snore. >> i'm going to vote no, and

i think that it's in response to what i heard senator durbin say on your program, yes, maybe republicans set this level of expenditures, but that was weeks before the election, and very strong messages come through the election, both about the level of expenditure and also, about earmarks. and i think that if we would go along with the mcdonnell approach and extend the existing level of expenditures until february 18th, it gives the new members a chance, it gives us a chance to read this 2000 page bill and it also gives us an opportunity to take a look at the promise that we made during the election, that there wouldn't be any earmarks and new appropriation bills. >> so that cap was put out before the election, other things were done before the election, you yourself, sir, introduced earmarks to the tune of $179 million for your estate. you were for, then, back after theo for them before

the mid terms. what's going to change your mind? if you were against that spending bill, are you against the earmarks now? >> what's changed my mind is the voice of the people in the election, number one, but i also want to make clear to you that i had a different opinion also before the election, because twice, i have voted for senator demint's amendment to not have any earmarks, and of course, that lost, but i think that we ought to have a rule that ought states be treated exactly the same. and so if you don't have any earmarks at all, then all 50 states are treated exactly the same. rick: could you go into this hill before -- bill before it comes to a vote and strip out the earmarks that you had proposed all those weeks back and could other republicans who want to vote, who are promise to go vote against it, just strip those earmarks out, if only for symbolic purposes? >> yeah, you could do that, but then that would be saying that iowans are less important people than the other 50 states. i think the best way to do that would be a general amendment stripping all

earmarks. rick: the issue of spending in general, senator grassley, the senate voting to pass this tax cut compromise was worked out between the president and republican leaders. this is a package that is going to add hundreds and hundreds of billion dollars on to the federal decifit. i'm just wondering, did lawmakers not hear what voters had to say in november? voters who said we don't want any more money tacked on to the decifit. >> i think it's fair to say it would add about $120 billion to the national deficit, but it's not fair to say that it would add $900 billion to the national decifit, because if the present policy had been made permanent law in two on on one, instead of sunsetting december 31st, we wouldn't be having this debate today. then also, we republicans on june 14th, 17th, 24th, 30th, then early in july, and again this year, we offered

amendments that would offset the unemployment compensation. rick: well, it looks like you have your work cut out for you, you and your colleagues on the hill, during this christmas season. we thank you very much for joining us today, always good to talk to you, senator charles grassley. >> thank you very much. jen well, right now we probably don't need to tell you this, in some parts of the country, specifically, some nasty winter weather moving around coast to coast. this was the dismeen atlanta early. check this out. icy roads, prompting road closures, a day after slippery surfaces caused hundreds of crashes in the mountain row area. really tough driving conditions. also a snowstorm in indiana made for a messy morning commute. we're hearing reports of cars sliding off the roads, plows were out all night trying to get a jump on the storm. the winter storm warning remains in effect for the bloomington area through the early afternoon, so it may be a good day to stay inside and watch a little

"happening now", right rick? >> sounds good to me! jenna: all right. an extremely busy day on capitol hill and one of the biggest decisions at hand impacts your bottom line. we're awaiting the house vote on the tax cut extension bill and getting word on whether or not it's likely to pass. we have that report coming up. we're also awaiting president obama's remarks on the afghan war review. we're going to bring you those comments live when they happen. first we're going to get a reaction on the review from the general who once led u.s. forces in that country during the toughest fighting. we'll be right back with that story.

jenna: we are going to show you this scene now in panama city, florida, we're awaiting a news conference where we're going to hear from mike jones. to take you back to what happened in this school district, the day before yesterday, we saw on video -- we showed this to you, an attempted shooting that took place during a school board meeting. as we get that video we're going to show it to you, as soon as we get it. there it is. you can see duke firing on school board members. just terrifying to watch. luckily, no one was hurt theafs shooting at. the gunman actually shot himself. but mike jones, as i mentioned, is going to step to the microphone and he's the safety direct ever for the school district, he was

part of the efforts to bring the gunman down. he didn't actually kill the gunman, the gunman shot himself but this was the scene a few days ago in florida. we also received into the newsroom the 911 tape when this incident all broke just a few days ago. as soon as we get those tapes ready to go, we're going to share this with you. a developingsation situation, a very scare question -- scary situation. the gunman killed himself, no one else was hurt. rick: we'll go to florida when that begins but first the accused underwear bomb ner a detroit courtroom, umar farouk abdulmutallab, facing new charges in the attempt to blow up a detroit-bound flight last christmas day. steve brown has the latest from chicago. steve, what are the new charges that we're talking about here? >> reporter: umar farouk abdulmutallab face eight charges now where it was previously six. the key one is an conspiracy

to commit an act of terrorism. now, this suggests and so does the indictment that there is a conspiracy at work here, that there were names known and unknown to the grand jury that were involved in this particular plot, and that abdulmutallab traveled to yemen and engaged folks in the al-qaeda cell there to work on jihad and actually tested exploding devices similar to the one that he was found on board the plane, that's what the government says it now can prove, with apparently evidence that they have uncoughed since the previous indictment, which was back in january. rick: do we know where this new evidence, this new information comes from? is it from the suspect himself? >> it is a possibility and that's been a consistent question by the media which the government has declined to ask since his arrest, whether or not he's being cooperative, and he certainly could be a person who would know about his movements but certainly the government has developed, investigators have developed a great deal of information

on this particular case. just if you take a look at the indictment, it shows that he was traveling, different points of travel, it also points that he is testing these device toss make sure that they would explode. so -- and that he received a device, and that, you know, it was made somewhere by someone. so the government says they can prove all these things in the course of the trial so it does confirm what a lot of folks suspected, that abdulmutallab was not working alone. rick: interesting report from chicago, thank you very much, steve. jenna: right now we're awaiting president obama's comments on a comprehensive review of the war in afghanistan. the commander in chief is scheduled to give his assessment really at any moment and we're going to bring you that assessment and those comments. you can see the briefing room on your screen there, as soon as it happens, does the administration review begin the withdrawal in senior? -- in july?

senior officials are impacting that deadline. retired lieutenant general david barnow is our next guest, a fellow at the center for american security. based on what you see, general, in this review, are we winning the war? >> i think the review is more diagnostic than prescriptive in a way. i think it's looking at where we stand right now. the good news in the review is there are clearly signs of progress, where additional troops have been sent, especially in southern afghanistan. the more concerning part of the review, beyond that good news, and that's an important piece of good news, is the recognition that we still have a significant strategic problem with safe havens in pakistan. jenna: let's get to pakistan in just a moment. getting back to the purpose of us being in afghanistan, it had to do with making sure we're safer at home, that we're going to go and hunt down some of the

terrorists threatening our national security. so getting back to the basic question, are we safer at home because of what's happening in afghanistan? >> i think we are. i think one of the reasons we're safer is because we got the troop strength in afghanistan right now, suppressing the taliban, disrupting al-qaeda networks across the region, continuing to maintain capabilities to strike out there in close proximity to the enemy. we shouldn't underestimate how important our position in afghanistan is in terms of knowing what's going on, all across that region. jenna: let's talk about pakistan there. the review references -- i'm quoting here -- growing strategic partnership, and on a daily basis, that can be tough to decipher, our relationship with pakistan. last december the president not only authorized more troops to go to afghanistan but authorized more missile attacks from drones in pakistan. what's your assessment of that in our relationship in general with pakistan? is it a relationship that's actually helping us? >> i think it's a mixed relationship and i think the

report makes it clear that pakistan on the one hand has done a tremendous amount to suppress and disrupt al-qaeda activities inside pakistan, at the same time, almost all observers believe that at a minimum, pakistan tolerates safe havens for the taliban inside of pakistan, and that affects, of course, our troops next door in afghanistan. i do think that the drone program and its acceleration has been the right answer and i think that's putting tremendous pressure on al-qaeda right now and also putting pressure on taliban, and those safe havens in pakistan. jenna: where do we need improvement? >> one of the things we have to do at strategic level is consolidate the gains, determine a way -- and i think that's by sending a strong message of an enduring commitment to the region, that the u.s. isn't going to simply walk out the door as we did in the '90s. i think if the pakistanis come to believe that, if the afghans believe that, the taliban believe that, then that's going to accelerate the end of this war. jenna: there's still a

commitment to withdrawing troops in july, how many, we don't know as of yet. just your perspective on that, that advertisement of when we're actually going to bring combat troops out of the area. >> well, certainly the president made that commitment last december when he made his speech at west point. what's really important news though is the lisbon conference that probably few americans have even heard about that occurred next month now set a date of 2014 as the end of the transition period, full transition being taken on by the afghan government. if the taliban thought they were in the fourth quarter of the football game, there are now three more quarters on this game, that's going to put tremendous psychological pressure on the enemy and that's an important move. jenna: good to have your perspective, especially on a day like today. general barno, thank you for joining us. rick: we are moments away from the president addressing the afghan review. ♪ happens, right here on fox.

rick: to the white house and the president in a minute but right now we are awaiting a crucial house vote bill, coming down to the wire, whether or not american workers will see a tax hike come january 1st and 1 house democrat who's been critical of the deal says it's likely to pass, new york congressman anthony weiner. take a listen: >> i'd like for us to have done more but i understand the wisdom of trying to find one thing we can try to get a change on, but it seems pretty clear the handwriting is on the wall this is going to pass. rick rick chris stierwalt is digital politics editor. let's chat before the president steps out, give us the lay of the land, this vote coming up, the vote that happened yesterday. politically speaking, where do things stand? >> well, the senate has served up a large holiday feast for house democrats, and it looks like they're not going to have any choice but to eat it all.

the tax deal that the president hammered out with republicans is something that most democrats don't like, but they probably don't have any choice but to vote for it because if they make any changes to this legislation whatsoever, it pushes back the time frame for freezing the tax hike that you mentioned that would affect every american. so the senate has been pretty clear, this is a big quote that -- 81 votes, in favor of the plan, which is unusual for a bitterly divided senate. they pass the plan and they've made it clear to the house, eat it all or eat nothing, we don't care because we're not changing. rick: the democrats' biggest upset, i guess they have a list but the biggest seems to be over the estate tax and perhaps want to go make changes on that. nancy pelosi last night, the outgoing speaker, promising to make a point with this vote in the house later on today. what was she talking about, and is that going to happen? >> well, it's a symbolic action. i think what we've come down to is house democrats

looking for a moral victory. they know they can't win an actual victory. they narrowed their scope. at the beginning they were threatening to block the whole legislation and blow everything up and undercut the president's power to negotiate and be the leader of this party. they've come way down from that hot plateau they were on and said let's just change by a point and a half, by 1 1/2 million dollars, the size of estates that would be subject to what republicans call the death tax, the inheritance tax. now it looks like they may not even get that. but the speaker would like to pass something so there is at least a symbolic victory. rick: i bonder -- wonder what the average voter thinks of all this. certainly there are folks like you and your loyal readers who love all of this back stage politics stuff but most of us just want to know if our taxes go up in january, right? >> that's why you have us, that's why the political squad at fox is working for you, because we'll tell you if there's a problem and if something bad is about to

happen to you and you're going to lose a bunch of money, because right now what it looks like this is sort of kaboo civment e theater in the house, that they're going to have to pass this legislation that the president hammered out, but if your taxes are going up, i promise -- i promise, we'll let you know. rick: we'll switch to the president in a couple of minutes on the afghan war review about to be released, we're also awaiting the defense department to get its budget approved. give us the political landscape when it comes to the wars in afghanistan, our continued presence in iraq and how this plays into this presidency. >> it's really interesting, the president is getting high marks from many conservatives, many on the right are applauding the president who has shifted his timeline on afghanistan. originally you recall a year ago when he spoke at west point, he talked about 2011 as a pivot point when the u.s. withdrawal would begin. we see essentially that 2014

is the new target, 2011 is still there but it's an incremental evaluation, not a hard pivot, so the right is happy with what obama has done on it but the left is very unhappy, this war, along with probably guantanamo bay and now this tax plan, all points of serious upset. rick: got to cut you off. >> the president of the united states on the review in afghanistan. let's take a listen. >> -- last december, i directed my national security team to regularly assess our efforts and to review our progress after one year. that's what we've done consistently over the course of the past 12 months in weekly updates from the field, in monthly meetings with my national security team, and in my frequent consultations with our afghan, pakistani and coalition partners. and that's what we've done as part of our annual review, which is now complete. i want to thank secretary clinton and secretary gates for their leadership.

joint chief of staff chairman is in afghanistan, i'm pleased we're joined by general cartwright. our efforts reflect the efforts of ambassador holbrooke, whose memory we honor and work will continue. the tributes for richard from across the board speak to the enormous impact of his life and broad international commitment to our shared efforts in this critical iran. i have spoke with president karzai of afghanistan, as well as president carr darie of pakistan and discussed our findings and the way forward. today i want to update the american people on our review, our assessment of where we stand and areas where we want to do better. i want to be clear. this continues to be a very difficult endeavor, but i can report that thanks to the extraordinary service of our troops and civilians on the ground, we are on track

to achieve our goals. it's important to remember why we remain in afghanistan. it was afghanistan where al-qaeda plotted the 9/11 attacks that murdered 3000 innocent peep, it is the tribal regions along the afghan-pakistan border from which terrorists have launched more attacks against our homeland and our allies and if an even wider insurgency were to engulf afghanistan that would al-qaeda more space to plan these attacks. that's why from the start i've been clear about our core goal. it's not to defeat every last threat for the security of afghanistan because ultimately it is afghans who must secure their country and it's not nation building, because it is afghans who must build their nation. rather, we are focused on disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al-qaeda in afghanistan and pakistan. and preventing its capacity

to threaten america and our allies in the future. in pursuit of our core goal we are seeing significant progress. today al-qaeda's senior leadership in afghanistan is under more pressure than at any point since they fled afghanistan nine years ago. senior leaders have been killed. it's harder for them to recruit, it's harder for them to travel, it's harder for them to train, it's harder for them to plot and launch attacks. in short, al-qaeda is hunkered down. it will take time to ultimately defeat and it remains a ruthless enemy bent on attacking our country. but make no mistake, we are going to remain relentless in disrupting and dismantling that terrorist organization. in afghanistan, we remain focused on the three areas of our strategy. our military effort to break the taliban's momentum and train afghan forces so they

can take the lead, our civilian effort to promote effective governance and development, and regional cooperation, especially with pakistan, because our strategy has to succeed on both sides of the border. indeed, for the first time in years, we've put in place the strategy and the resources that our efforts in afghanistan demand. and because we've ended our combat mission in iraq and brought home nearly 100,000 of our troops from iraq, we're in a better position to give our forces in afghanistan the support and equipment they need to achieve their missions. and in iraq, this also means there are tens of thousand fewer americans deployed in harm's way than when i took office. with those additional forces in afghanistan, we are making considerable gains towards our military object i was. the additional military and civilian personnel that i ordered in afghanistan are now in place, along with

additional forces from our coalition which has grown to 49 nations. along with our afghan partners we've targeted the taliban and pushing them out of their strong holds. as i said when i visited our troops in afghanistan, earlier this month, progress comes forward, and at a very high price in the lives of our men and women in uniform. in many places, the gains we've made are still fragile and reverseible, but there is no question we are clearing more areas from taliban control and more afghans are reclaiming their communities. to ensure afghans can take responsibility, we continue to focus on training, targets for the growth of afghan security forces are being met, and because of the contributions of additional trainers from coalition partners, i'm confident we will continue to meet our goals. i would add that much of this prorks the speed with

which our troops deployed this year, the increase in recruiting and training of afghan forces, and the additional troops and trainers from other nations, much of this is the result of us having sent a clear signal that we will begin the transition of responsibility to afghans and start reducing american forces next july. the sense of urgency also helped galvanize the coalition around the goals that we agreed to at the resonateo summit in lisbon, that we are moving toward a new phase in afghanistan, a transition to afghan-led security that will begin early next year and will conclude in 2014, even as nato maintains a long term commitment to training and advising afghan forces. now, our review confirms, however, that for the security gains to be sustained over time there's an urgent need for political and economic progress in afghanistan. over the past year, we've

dramatically increased our civilian presence, with more diplomats and development experts, working alongside our troops, risking their lives and partnering with afghans. going forward there must be a continued focus on the delivery of basic services, as well as transparency and accountability. we will also fully support an afghan political process that includes reconciliation with both taliban who break ties with al-qaeda, renounce violence, and accept the afghan constitution. and we will forge a new strategic partnership with afghanistan next year that will make it clear that the united states is committed to the long term security and development of the afghan people. finally, we will continue to focus on our relationships with pakistan. increasingly the pakistani government recognizes the terrorist networks in its border regions are a threat to all our countries, especially pakistan. we have welcomed major

pakistani offenses in the tribal regions, we will continue to help strengthen pakistanis' capacity to root out terrorists. nevertheless, progress has not come fast enough. so we will continue to insist to pakistani leaders that terrorist safe havens within their borders must be dealt with. at the same time, we need to support the economic and political development that is critical to pakistan's future. as part of our strategic dialogue with pakistan, we will work to deepen trust and cooperation. we'll speed up our investment and civilian institution and projects that improve the lives of pakistanis. we'll intensify our efforts to encourage closer cooperation between pakistan and afghanistan. and next year, i look forward to an exchange of visits, including my visit to pakistan, because the united states is committed to an ensuring -- enduring partnership that helps improve security, development and justice for the pakistani people.

again, none of these challenges that i've outlined will be easy. there are more difficult days ahead. but as a nation, we can draw strength from the service of our fellow americans. on my recent visit to afghanistan, i visited a medical unit and pinned purple hearts on some of our wounded warriors, i met with a platoon that had just lost six of their teammates. despite the tough fight, despite all their sacrifice, they continue to stand up for our security and for our values that we hold so dear. we're going to have to continue to stand up. we'll continue to give our great troops ands the strategies and resources they need to succeed. we will never waiver from our goal of disrupting and dismantd ling and hopefully defeating al-qaeda, we will forge enduring partnerships with people who are committed to progress and to peace, and we will continue to do everything in our power to ensure the security

and the safety of the american people. so with that, vice president biden and myself will depart and i'm going to turn it over to secretary clinton, gates, as well as vice chair man cartwright and they will answer your questions and give you a more detailed version. thank you very much. jenna: that was the president was review, as he mentioned, an annual review, highlighting a few key parts saying it was, quote, a difficult endeavor but on track to achieve goals, that's our mission there, he also said in pursuit of goals we are laying out, we are making progress, the few points he went after, our troops have been able to go after al-qaeda, key members, in fact, and really put the terrorists on the run. he also talked about the focus of training afghani forces themselves to make sure they're able to take responsibility for execute of their country and deem emphasis on the relationship between united states and pakistan, the president

mentioning his visit there in the year to come and really emphasizing the united states' commitment to work with other countries that are committed to peace. just a little bit of context here. we remember, last december is when the president announced an additional 30,000 troops to be sent to afghanistan, it's also when he announced more missions, drone attacks, if you will, in certain areas of the country, so this is the progress report, as he said, a very difficult endeavor, but we're on track to achieve our goals. rick: fox news alert, and we are just hearing the so-called christmas day underwear bomber umar farouk abdulmutallab in court right now would not admit or deny guilt in an attempt to blow all flight from am deroo amsterdam to detroit last christmas. he's facing eight charges, including a new charge of conspiracy to commit terrorism. federal prosecutors are saying he did not act alone in this plot. we'll have more as we get it

jenna: certainly a lot of action today on capitol hill. of course we just heard the president talking about a war overseas, but of course, we also have a battle going on right on capitol hill. as we go to the house now, we're awaiting for a vote on the tax bill that passed yesterday in the senate. president obama is urging democrats to fall in line and pass the bill without delay. over in the senate, debate is underway on the new start nuclear arms treaty or agreement with russia. there is a growing battle over the huge omnibus bill, the one that's 1900 pages. the senate needs to pass a bill by this weekend or the government will be forced to shut down. for more on -- on all of this, connecticut senator joe lieberman joins us. do you think a shutdown is on the way? >> i sure hope not. we always manage to avoid it and i'm sure we will find a way to continue to fund the government by the deadline, midnight saturday.

jenna: how are you going to do that? how do you think it's going to be achieved? >> i must admit i can't say yet, but look -- we have two alternatives, one is to essentially pass a new budget for the rest of the fiscal year, until next september 30th, the other is a continuing resolution, which is what we're operating under now, which continues the government at the levels of spending for last year, with a few slight alterations. so in any case, i imagine if there's a breakdown in the process, people in both parties will get together and agree to pass a resolution, perhaps to continue the government to at least a week or two, but maybe on into next year. that's possible, too. jenna: as an independent, who do you think is to blame for what's going on in d.c., is it the republicans' fault for slowing down this bill passing through the senate or is it the democrats' fault for trying to force through spending initiatives before they lose power?

>> as usual, i'd say both parties are to blame. and maybe that's what an independent has the right -- andent has the right to say that. we shouldn't have been at this point on appropriations, we should have gotten them done earlier before the end of the fiscal year, september 30th. we're now a couple of month intos a new fiscal year and we don't really have a long budget. so i think it's a process that has too much politics, and not enough compromise with one another to get the station's business done. but i don't believe we're going to let the government close down. too many people depend on us, even though some people are not happy with the government. jenna: you know, on that, our viewers have that question, senator, of why and how we even keep getting into these situations, and the question that comes up, is this a flaw in the process, the procedure, in the way that congress actually operates, or is it a flaw in the people that are elected to government?

>> it's probably both. it's a flaw in the system in that there are too many ways to stop and delay things in the senate. there's a lot of talk among senators about changing our rules, to make it easier to do business. whatever your point of view, you'll be able to vote but not simply to hold things up for the sake of holding things up. maybe too many people here are drawn into this spiral that is so intensely partisan, that you get focused more on how you're going to make the other look bad instead of how you're going to make the country look good or do something good for the country and that's where we have to get and i think that's part of what the voters are saying in november, and what they're going to be watching very closely in the next couple of years. jenna: senator lieberman, you're the chairman of the homeland security committee and obviously there are a lot of different stories that have to do with our national security today. we have the review in afghanistan, we have a

passage of the don't ask don't tell in the house, maybe ending up in the senate, we also have threats we're hearing about potential terrorism attacks on our land or maybe in europe over the christmas holidays. we're also awaiting any passage of the defense authorization bill that would actually give funding to the military for the year ahead, the military still doesn't know what kind of funding they're going to be receiving. how do you bring those things together and how do you prioritize that type of list and what are your thoughts? >> you've got to do them one by one. the first most important thing, i say this as chairman of homeland security is protect the american people from terrorism, and i can tell you, i see a lot of classified intelligence information, the enemy is out there, and the enemy wants to attack us, and they struck last christmas day with the bomber on the plane over detroit. we're just lucky the bomb

didn't work. a couple of weeks ago in oregon, an individual was arrested for attempting to set off a bomb near a christmas tree lighting. so they're not only attacking america, but they're looking to attack us at times of religious holidays, and i think we've got to have our guard up. i guess the one thing i'll say without saying too much is that i can tell you that our homeland security agency and all the associated agencies of the federal government are working very hard every day, using extraordinary new devices. we have information sharing and the like to protect the american people, working particularly with our intelligence teaght, so that's number one. i forgot what else it was. defense authorization -- i think that was -- >> jenna: i'm sorry, senator, we're going to have to wrap it up. quickly, with the start treaty actually on the floor of the senate being debated now and the repeal of don't ask don't tell and the lack of a budget for the military, when you look at those priorities, what's on

the top of your list? >> you've got to do the budget for the military first. i would go after the budget to repealing don't ask don't tell, because it's urgent, secretary of defense says we've got to do it right away. if we don't do it a court will order it and it won't happen in a process that the military can control, and i put start after all of those because if necessary we can do start ratification next year. if we can do it this year, great. jenna: always nice to see you. >> you too. thank you. jenna: we begin our second hour of "happening now". i think we're eight minutes in! rick: better late than never. jenna: a lot going on on capitol hill. we want to bring you the latest perspective, as always. there's the deadly gun battle on the southern border that was a breaking story we've been following. rick: that's right, these were suspected bandits in arizona who killed a u.s. border patrol agent in a shootout. this week, homeland

secretary janet napolitano will meet with border agents. the man was in an area with three other agents, and he died doing what he loved best. t.j. bonner is president of the border patrol council. good to talk to you, sir. wish it was under better circumstances. we just heard from senator lieberman, talk about the department of homeland security and the job it has to protect the american people. does the department do enough to protect the border patrol agents who work under that department? >> obviously not. when you have a border patrol agent murdered in cold blood, about a dozen miles into the united states by armed criminals who are running around with impunity there. rick: you know, there's some irony to this story, is that the criminals who killed the agent were actually there to prey upon illegal immigrants, crossing into this country, so that they could steal from them, the

very people that the border patrol agents were also out trying to catch illegals crossing over into our country illegally. i mean, really, when you look at this story, this scenario and how it all played out, what is of most concern to you? >> of most concern is the fact that our borders remain out of control. after all of these years, we still don't have a handle on this problem. millions of people literally, every year, attempt to enter the united states illegally. and drug smugglers and other criminals have the upper hand. they control many parts of that border. yes, we have some control over small portions of the border, but by in large, it's incredibly easy for anyone to enter the united states illegally. when i say anyone, that includes a terrorist. rick: secretary napolitano, as we said, heading to arizona today to meet with border agents, her office

issuing a statement after the murder the other night, calling it an unconscionable act of violence against the men and women of the border patrol who serve our country. she went on to say we will honor his memory by remaining resolute to the task of securing our borders. your message for secretary napolitano as she heads to arizona today: >> my message to secretary napolitano would be let these border patrol agents do their job as they know best. they are the experts. they are the men and women on the front line. allow them to do their jobs. don't put them in fixed positions and tell them just sit there and watch the border. let them patrol the border. give them the resources and support that they need. rick: a loss of one border patrol agent is a loss for your entire organization, as it is for the entire country, and our condolences to the family of brian perry. t.j. bonner, president of the national border patrol council, a retired agent

himself, thank you very much for your time, sir. >> thank you. jenna: "ing right now on capitol hill, we're awaiting the house vote on extending the bush era tax cuts, hopefully it's a little clearer inside than outside. as know this tax bill includes unemployment benefits, extending the bush era tax cuts, it has the new estate tax amount that we're looking at as well, all wrapped up in the white house compromise wrapped up in the senate. that's why we're looking at the house today. chief political correspondent carl cameron is live on capitol hill. i guess it's a loaded question but a simple one. what can we expect today? >> reporter: eventually the house is expected to vote and is expected to pass the tax package. exactly what's in it is the critical question and when they get around to it is a less by equally critical question. right now we have a house floor live shot that says they're working on a motion to adjourn, this is an exercise by republicans to complain that they've not

been given an opportunity to offer up enough of their own amendments, and it will be dispatched shortly and will get back to the actual debate. the two critical things we're waiting for today, the outcome of a proposed change to the senate package by a north dakota democrat, earl pomeroy who wants to tweak the estate tax. right now it passed the senate, 35 percent on inheritances over $5 million. pomeroy would make that much bigger and ultimately if that passes it changes the deal which could scuttle it, so it's expected his proposals will be defeated and clearing way for peage around dinner. jenna: we'll expect that around dinnertime. thank you very much. rick: another important story coming up when we return, the number of people losing their homes to foreclosure, dropping to the lowest level in months. but we could be in for a tidal wave of more record foreclosures. that's ahead. plus, we want to know what you think about all the hot topics of the day, and there's no shortage of them today, jenna. join us live in our chat

room, foxnews.com/happening now, to join in the talk, and we'll be right back.

jenna: house lawmakers are set to take up the spending bill we were just talking about, this the final days of the lame duck congress. the package is stuffed with more than $8 billion in so-called earmarks. so what will all these pet projects cost you, the american taxpayer? we've got a bottom line for you because it's all your money. william la jeunesse is live in los angeles with more. william. >> reporter: it is our money and we're counting dollars, but washington is counting noses. the political question is who is it going to affect, who's going to sell out, how many republicans will jump ship and will any democrats cross over. voters may be outraged over the polynesian voting society, roads to nowhere. washington is not. this is what they do.

sources say this deal was hamedered by daniel inouye of iowa and cochran of mississippi. not only are they the joint chiefs of the senate appropriations committee, they are also the reigning kings of pork n. this bill, $420 million for inouye, 560 million for cochran. how much will it cost you? go to foxnews.com/your money, check out the taxpayer calculator. if you making under 15 grand, it's going to cost you 34 cents. if you're going to make between 50 and 100, $13, if you're going to make about 100-200, $98, if you make over two 50rbg it's going to cost you 979. you can also vote and tell congress, is this how you want your money to be spent. already, we've had 10,000 people vote, 93 percent say no. so the disconnect is while republicans want to take earmarkers to the wood shed many believe in congress bringing home the bacon is good politics, inouye and

cochran are popular, patty murray has led by a wide margin. right now we know of three defectors, bennett of utah, vin voif of ohio and kit bond of missouri and at least three noncommitted republicans, murkowski, shelby. the omnibus contains more money for the military. >> senator inouye wouldn't want to bring the bill to the floor and senator reid wouldn't let him if they thought they would get the votes so they clearly have republicans lined up that are going to get them over the top. >> on the democratic side there are about 23 senators up for reelection in two years, so they might think twice about making this vote. they would cross over for some. jenna: we'll see what happens in los angeles. you've seen how the calculator works, check it out for yourself, put in

your in corks find out how much of your money is going to be, well, spent and allocated for spending in 2011. it's a fun game. rick: it is fun. you know what else is fun, it wouldn't be the holidays without terror -- without terror threats, right? i'm kind of being facetious. fbi, homeland security, warning local law enforcement about possible al-qaeda attacks on the homeland during the holidays. doesn't this happen every year? we'll take a look at the latest terror chatter that is raising alarms in the u.s. and in other parts of the world, too. don't go away. business network r

and he said next year will be the year of the turnan and he may very well be right but the problem is foreclosures. most experts are predicting we're going to see a pickup in foreclosures, only because people are -- or banks are playing catchup, they didn't foreclose on as

many homes as we talked about because of that freeze, that temporary moratorium put on them by a number of banks so, they'll have to catch up, so the first quarter of the year, foreclosures should spike. the question will be after that have we gotten the worst out of the way and maybe the rest of the year will see improvement. jenna: when foreclosures spiked, that means prices can overall go down further. good if you're a buyer. >> a buyer's market. >> wherever those buyers are. kono -- conor, always nice to see you. rick: u.s. counterterrorism officials, warning about threats to the homeland from al-qaeda and other affiliated groups during the christmas season, following similar reports out of iraq based on confessions from terror detainees. joining us now from london, peter neumann -- actually from washington, a terrorism expert at king's college who is in -- which is in london. thank you for joining us. last year, it was abdulmutallab, the underwear bomber, who tried to strike around the christmas

holidays and now we're hearing about more threats. is this something that we should just expect every year around this time of year? >> i think generally speaking. of course, al-qaeda would be happy to strike any time, but i think they realize that at christmastime in particular, western societies are very vulnerable, maybe the guard is a little bit down, people are traveling and of course, they're always attacking transport targets, so that makes it particularly attractive to strike at this particular point in time. and of course, there has been a lot of chatter coming through jihadist forums, there's been a lot of chatter from detainees in afghanistan, now in iraq, and that seems to indicate that there is something going on here. rick: i know you think there's a renewed sense of purpose on the part of al-qaeda. some confidence as well. why do you say that? >> well, for al-qaeda, it's not that important -- of course, it would be better if some of these attempted attacks had actually succeeded, but for them,

even a failure is a success, because terrorism is about creating fear, and some of these attempted attacks have definitely succeeded in creating fear. the base is mobilized because they sense that al-qaeda is, again, attempting to attack the west. it's no longer getting bogged down in places like iraq and other muslim countries in the middle east. it is attacking the west and that's what they are looking for and why they are so confident now. rick: we just saw a couple of explosions right in the heart of stockholm which is sort of a new target, if this was in fact the work of al-qaeda. what's your read of what happened in stockholm and what that might mean for yearn wurp and -- western europe and the united states? >> we still don't know enough about that particular case. if it really turns out this was a lone wolf, this was someone acting on his own, that would be indeed fitting the pattern of what we've seen over the past few months in the united states, but also in europe, namely

that, al-qaeda is happy for people to just go out and strike on their own, they don't necessarily have to have a very sophisticated organization, they don't have to have months of prayingal planning, they can do this and al-qaeda is happy for them to do that. and that, of course, is dangerous. iraq rick last question for you peter. we know how important the airplane passengers on board that flight with abdulmutallab were last christmas when he attempted his attack. what advice would you have for travelers this christmas? >> well, i mean, it's very difficult, because, of course, you don't know when they're going to strike, and where they're going to strike, and terrorism still remains a rare vane. so rather than not traveling to your family's, staying at home, locking the doors, i think that there realistically is nothing anyone can do to prevent the terrorist attacks so go ahead and plan to do whatever you plan to do. rick: and enjoy the holidays peter neumann, thank you

very much for your time and happy holidays to you. jenna: speaking of the hole dateses -- holidays, are you ready to see a white christmas? unless it look like this, a deep freeze in the deep south and treacherous conditions on the road. very dangerous conditions. janice dean on where this storm is heading and a look at your weekend forecast. maybe she'll give us a hint about christmas, too. a new phase in afghanistan, a lawmaker says he doesn't just believe in progress in the war on terror, he's seen it, and he's our guest next. @ñññ÷ç]/wçó/>v@ññ]o

. .

[ male announcer ] you know her. oh, my gosh. [ male announcer ] we know diamonds. oh, my gosh. [ male announcer ] together we'll make her holiday. that's why only zales is the diamond store. where you'll pay no interest if paid in full by january 2012. or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today.

rick: well that same wicked weather that froze roadways down south now zeroing in on the mid-atlantic states bringing washington with the first real snow of the season. janice dean in the weather center. the roads are very dangerous especially down south where people are not used to driving on this kind of stuff. >> absolutely. we had video earlier on slip-sliding away in the south. temperatures are warming up. things will get better on the roadways. you're talking about the snow in d.c. it is so pretty. it is like a big snow globe. let's look at the capitol hill shot. it is snowing, with light snow. temperatures around 23 degrees. i think we have the white house too which is very impressive. there is your light snow. there is your christmas moment. new york city hasn't gotten any measurable snow yet, but,

we could see some snow on the sunday into monday. we're watching a storm system. it might be too far offshore to get measurable snow. but i promise you guys this if we get snow on sunday, live on "happening now" we'll do a snow angel, okay? rick: we'll save the tape. >> i will need help up, that's for sure. here is where we're seeing the wintry mix you guys were talking about across the southeast parts of virginia and north carolina. that's where we see the icy roadways. north of that where we're getting measurable snow. d.c., one to two inches. some areas could get three to six. across the midwest it is mainly snow across minneapolis and chicago. we're hoping for that. i'm hoping for a little bit of snow sunday into monday. we'll keep you posted as we fine tune those computer models. back to you. rick: speaking of the snow globe thing, given how things happen in washington people might not mind putting everybody in a globe

and shaking it up real fast. >> no comments from the weather girl. rick: thanks very much, janice dean at the weather center. >> some new information on the war in afghanistan. with the white house releasing a year-end review that says we're making headway against the taliban and al qaeda but the pentagon warning those gains remain fragile and reverseable as well. virginia congressman rob whitman, a republican at armed services committee. he was actually in afghanistan a few weeks ago. congressman, you say you see progress and progress is so hard to define with many we talk to about the war. what does this progress looks like? >> progress looks like areas that are safer now than they were before. it is really due to the great work of our men and women in uniform and civilians there. they're doing a fantastic job weakening the taliban. we really owe that to them. that is where we are right now. we've seen areas before inabilitied by the taliban that are now safe. we walked around a village

without worry about the taliban being there and we walked through the bazaar there where people were doing business. in my time from trip in april to november i've seen progress in weakening of the taliban in more areas are safe for the population to come out and do business and to be able to live safely. jenna: there is a price for this war. we're reminded on that on a weekly basis. we showed this picture to our viewers yesterday. it is faces of six soldiers that just died a few days ago. none of them are older than the age of 25. some of them 10 years old when this war started. and the question our viewers have and i'm sure families of these soldiers are asking, especially this christmas, is it worth it? is this war worth the cost that we're paying? >> well, i believe that it is. you have to believe that we must maintain the safety of this nation by pursuing terrorism wherever it exists. we know afghanistan was a

breeding ground for al qaeda and terrorism that sprouted from al qaeda. making sure that we pursue those terrorists around the world. making sure they're ineffect tiff, unable to perpetrate harm against the united states has to be worth the cost and my heart goes out to those families who have given so much. who have given their loved ones. they have to be assured this nation must make that sacrifice in order to keep ourselves safe. jenna: what kind of message do you think is coming from d.c. with the fact that we do not have the defense authorization bill passed yet? we do not have the military funding yet for next year. what kind of message do you think that is sending the troops? >> i think we need to get that done. i don't think it sends a good message from the troops. they have to be confident we're making the commitment to support them, giving them resources they need to be successful there so this has to get done. there are many things in the national defense authorization act that have to happen for all of our branches of the military to function properly. that is why this is critical we get this done in the

coming days. jenna: can we do it alone, sir? so much is made of our relationship with pakistan and how essential that is. do we need that relationship or can we actually win alone? >> no we have to have pakistan's cooperation. i was just in pakistan in april. there meeting with the leaders impressing on them how important it is they cooperate with the united states and they themselves pursue the taliban into the areas of pakistan, whether it is in the northwest tribal regions, federally administered tribal areas. they have to be active in pursuing the taliban. we can't be successful in that region if they are not cooperative partners with us. they have to do their job to help us defeat the taliban. jenna: you're going back to afghanistan? do you have a trip planned in the future for the new year? >> i love to get back there in the new year. i love to go back. it is great to sit down with men and women in uniform especially on the front lines. they're doing such a great job. you really understand what it takes when you talk to them and you understand the high level of morale they have and focus they have on

accomplishing this mission. it really lifts you up when you go there to visit with them. jenna: speaking with you makes it feel closer to them and we appreciate your perspective sir and look forward to talking to you again soon. >> thank you, generics when we come back, tensions are mount mounting between the u.s. and iran. why one general in iran, a military leader is threatening the lives of our top military brass. that is coming up next. police in southern california asking for the public's help in a brazen attempted murder. it is developing and today's must-see moment. we'll have that for you coming up.

>> hey ebb everybody, i'm megyn kelly. harry reid tells republicans not to give him sanctimonious lectures about ruining christmas as he threatens to force the senate to work over the holiday but whose fault is that? we will have a fair and balanced report. plus a parent suing mcdonald's in a class action over its happy meals.

whatever happened to parental responsiblity? and a jilted bride sues the guy who dumped her four days before their wedding. can she recover the wedding costs? kelly's court takes a look. and a shocking poll just breaking. we have it. we'll have it at the top of the hour on a new low for president obama's approval ratings. see you in 15 minutes or so. a little bit more. jenna: we've been showing you this incredible video over the last few days. a gunman taking school board members in panama city florida, hostage. as you're watching on the screen, firing on them at point-blank range. incredibly no one was hurt except the gunman. mostly thanks to mike jones. the director of security, for the school board. and he fired the shot that brought the gunman to the floor. the shooter then took his own life. jones was not hit by any bullets but he was hospitalized with some chest pains. he is just out of the hospital now and spoke to the media a short moment ago. >> anytime you do these

things, locate, isolate and neutralize the threat in rapid response. i just didn't have a shot to take the shot because all the board members were sitting straight up. i just didn't, had the time to snatch the door open to get a clean shot. i was waiting. when he shot, i thought he shot the superintendent i had to engage no matter what. i could hear the sirens coming. that is what i was waiting on the backup and fellow officers coming and once he shot the superintendent, the gunfight was on. i didn't have a chance. jenna: a lot to be thankful this time of year. i'm sure a lot of folks in panama city, florida, thankful for mike jones and his actions. here on the screen is clay duke. he was the shooter and he did take his own life. rick: an iranian military leader threatening to kill american generals. it is a story first seen exclusively on foxnews.com. the brigadeer general saying that americans will be targeted for execution in retaliation for attacks on two of iran's leading nuclear experts.

one of them was killed. the other one wounded. jim walsh is an iran analyst and international security expert at the massachusetts institute of technology. always good to talk to you. thanks for being here. who is this guy who made these threats and how seriously should we take them? >> first of you will it is unprofessional conduct. you would never hear a u.s. general make those sort of the comments that is the bad news. the good news here this guy is a leader in the revolutionarily guard. he leads the group of civilian militia. thugs recruited from the countryside brought into the revolutionary guard after the contested election in 2009. they're professional. they do domestic enforcement. this is not a part of the revolutionary guard that would organize that sort of attack. this guy is talking out of the side of his mouth. rick: my question is how much weight does this man's statements carry within the military and how likely is this threat to be carried out? >> well within the revolutionary guard there are different divisions.

the division that would carry out executions, that has carried out executions in the past on foreign soil is the kuds force. they were active in iraq, causing problems in iraq during the iraq war. that group would make that decision. there is nothing to indicate that the leader of that division endorses this idea at all. i think it is unlikely. it is also unlikely that iran doesn't want to pick a fight and give the u.s. or israel a excuse to launch an attack on the nuclear facilities. i don't think they will look at doing some provocative because it is not in their interest to do so. rick: what role does israel play? when you talk about iran the conversation has to include israel. what do you think israel's reaction might be in this and what role do they play in the statements of this general? >> it is a great, question, rick. of course israel is at the center of this conversation. most likely the assassination was done by israel than the united states.

why do i say that? israel in the past used targeted assassination of nuclear scientists. they did it in 1960's against egypt's nuclear program. wouldn't surprise me if they are part of this i don't think anything this guy says carries any weight in tel aviv. they will make their decision. rick: you're only person that i know gets invited to sit down to dinner with rogue countries around the world that cause us such a headache. it seems to me as an outside observer the more isolated these countries feel, whether we're talking about iran or talking about north korea, sort of the more they ratchet up the rhetoric, am i right? >> rick, you're absolutely right. you're killing me by the way talking about my dinner guests here. you're absolutely right. the more isolated they become i think the more likely it is they act out. in fact part of that is if they become isolated the guys who are really let bad guys, they tend to be more powerful in that situation. when these countries are engaged with the world. then people who want to be

engaged with the world, who live in those countries have more power. when they begin to pull back, it is the bad guys who have more power and that's when they begin to act out and try to draw attention or do other nefarious things. i think you're right on the money. rick: we'll have a civilized dinner, you and me, next time you're in new york. >> look forward to it. rick: always good to talk to you. jim walsh at mit. take care. talk to you soon. jenna: major breaking news just as you were talking with jim. get this. we're getting from our white house producer saying the house tax bill because they're taking up that bill today is in real trouble. as chad describes it the house is sitting in paralysis right now. procedural things are happening right now. house tax bill could be in real trouble. we're going to have more about that right after the break. plus making waves and creating energy off california's coast. adam housley has more on the story. adam? >> reporter: these waves are beautiful and majestic and enjoyed by surfers up and

down the golden state but are they enough to power your house? we'll have an exclusive look coming up live on fox news.

jenna: we have breaking news out of london the release of julian assange. greg palkot is live covering this story. greg, what do we know? >> reporter: jenna, we're looking at a live shot of the door of the high court of britain here in central london. "sky news", our sister network here in the u.k., is reporting that julian assange, the wikileaks founder, is a free man. a free man with strings at least. he is being released on bail. this after a judge earlier today decided to reject an appeal against that bail, which had been granted at an earlier session. it was decided by the judge that julian assange was not

a substantial flight risk. the judge also said that he was satisfied with the restrictions, the conditions put on him. that would include something like a $300,000 plus equivalent in bond money. also limits on his movements. he is going to be, going to be brought to a rather stately manner house about 115 miles northeast of london. he also has to wear a tracking device. there is also cure fews. the judge also, as we wait for julian assange, i might ad for him to come out, the weakness of the sex crimes case that he is facing in sweden. this is really what this is all about his extradition to sweden on those charges. it has nothing to do with what the folks in washington and others are very concerned about, his website, wikileaks, that release of thousands and thousands of classified documents. this release has been delayed for a couple of hours right now and we're told now it will come in about five minutes or so.

it was delayed, jenna, because of problems with the money coming up with the money, confirming that the money was there. and dotting the is and crossing the ts on this. but again, we expect to see him in the next couple of minutes. then he will be in house arrest or as they say, manor arrest, jenna, outside of london. his next court date, january 11th for those extradition charges. again we expect to see mr. assange out on the street in just a couple of minutes. we'll bring that to you shortly. jenna: just to add our very own mike emanuel asked robert gibbs about julian assange and about wikileaks about the bail, apparently no one from the white house could comment on anything that's going on, even secretary of state hillary clinton shook her head no, no comment on anything have to do with wikileaks as we await again, as greg palkot was telling us about his release in jail. quickly, greg, we'll have to run to some capitol hill news.

are there any reports about efforts from the united states to bring charges against this man? >> reporter: there have been reports today. interesting stuff, jenna, the united states, the justice department is trying to come up with at least a conspiracy case a collusion case that could bring sass sang in with the pf c-manning fellow. i talked to swedish authorities. they say however if the u.s. tries to extradite they have to get the okay from sweden. a lot of hurdles. jenna: thanks very much, greg. we have to run to some other breaking news we're having down in d.c., rick. rick: that's right, in washington, d.c. possible trouble for the tax bill. chief political correspondent carl cameron live on the hill walk of watching the action for us. what is the latest? >> reporter: once humerus and potentially very disturbing. the house has fallen into legislative trap. just seconds ago house democrats pulled the procedural debate from the house floor. they were debating the rule,

which is essentially just the parameters for the debate, how the process goes forward and in that debate just of the rules, the process of the debate they were unable to go forward and democrats have yanked it. if you don't have rules for the debate, you can't have a debate. if you don't have a debate you can't pass the bill. so at this point the house of representative on what was one of its top priorities for this lame-duck session is utterly stalled. nancy pelosi and house democrats charged by the president to pass a tax cut and unemployment extension don't appear to have the votes. now the proposal that came from the senate is opposed by the house. this could be because of some sort of tactical maneuver. but the only reason to stop it like this because they don't think it can pass in any shape or form right now. rick: carl cameron with the latest from d.c. we'll go back to d.c. of course. and we'll be right back after a quick break.

another heart attack could be lurking, waiting to strike. a heart attack that's caused by a clot, one that could be fatal. but plavix helps save lives. plavix, taken with other heart medicines, goes beyond what other heart medicines do alone, to provide greater protection against heart attack or stroke and even death by helping to keep blood platelets from sticking together and forming dangerous clots. ask your doctor if plavix is right for you. protection that helps save lives. certain genetic factors and some medicines, such as prilosec, reduce the effect of plavix leaving you at greater risk for heart attack and stroke. your doctor may use genetic tests to determine treatment. don't stop taking plavix without talking to your doctor as your risk of heart attack or stroke may increase. people with stomach ulcers or conditions that cause bleeding should not use plavix. taking plavix alone or with some other medicines, including aspirin, may increase bleeding risk,

so tell your doctor when planning surgery. tell your doctor all medicines you take, including aspirin, especially if you've had a stroke. if fever, unexplained weakness or confusion develops, tell your doctor promptly. these may be signs of ttp, a rare but potentially life-threatening condition, reported sometimes less than 2 weeks after starting plavix. other rare but serious side effects may occur.

at pso, we set out tot your dog to discover the science inle. some of nature's best ingreents. we created purina one with smartblend. new, delicious shredded morsels and crunchy bites, with real meat, wholesome grains and antioxidants, for strong muscles, vital energy, a hethy immune system, and a real difference in your dog. purina one improved with srtblend. discover what one can do. rick: live pictures from