>> dickerson: welcome back to "face the nation" for closer look at some of the major issues we're facing abroad we turn to kori schake who is distinguished fellow at the hoover institution at stanford university. her new book is "safe passage: transition from british to american" michael elan lone senior fellow and director of research at the brookings institution is here and he of course is in washington. let me start with you, i tried to get the u.n. ambassador to get sense of why now on jerusalem. why now? >> it's not clear why now. i think the white house is hoping that it will push the peace process forward by -- as nikki haley said taking jerusalem off the table. i think that is unlikely to prove true. i think it's going to make that peace process a lot more

complicated because it doesn't look like they -- doesn't look like they have anything to offer palestinians. it's surprising that other countries in the region care less, in part because they need more cooperation from israel now than before. >> dickerson: michael, what is your people see the violence, how should they see this? big deal, should they be nervous? >> i'm glad that you asked that way because i think it's a medium deal. it's not the end of the world. president trump didn't say that east jerusalem could never be the capital or palestine, didn't make any other such declaration that were out of what we all expect in any kind of final peace agreement. the peace process, kori is righted, that this is not helpful to the peace process it wasn't exactly going any place anyway. i think there are bigger questions about what kind of leverage can we create with both parties. perhaps we need to think harder about that. built i don't see this as more than what my colleague called unforced error, it's not tragic,

probably mistake, probably complicates the atmosphere i'm not sure it really changes the terms of any potential peace deal or really impedes any negotiation it was having any momentum to begin with. >> dickerson: let's talk about place where unforced error could lead to tragedy:is north korea. what is happening right now, americans hear, perilous then issue goes away, how should people think about this? >> i am more concerned about it now. i think what i hear out of the white house parallels pretty closely what the bush administration sounded like in 2003 in the run up to the iraq war. that leadership of north korea is fundamentally erratic and untrustworthy, that retaliation is not a strategy. they're not thinking through quite carefully enough. for example, what asia will look like geopolitically if the united states engages in a preventive war that australians,

japanese, south koriians don't want and might not participate in. >> dickerson: kori, this president said that lead up to the iraq war and greatest blubber in american history. parallels to that, that should make people nerve. >> i this would probably 10:00 0 times more lethal for allied forces than the iraq war. we have to keep that in mind. let's shay north koreans can only detonate a few nuclear. we have couple hundred thousand americans in seoul. leave aside the issues of families of american servicemen should come home, lot of civilians live there doing business. if we were to have a car in korea the estimates are one nuclear explosion over that could kill two or three times a little the nagasaki bomb. anything that leads us towards higher proppability of nuclear war i think is probably a huge mistake. but there is, i don't want to be to scary there is one potential interpretation of what is going on that is a little more hopeful that the trump administration

really doesn't have particular interest at the end of the day in launching a preventive war but by creating the sense that they're impatient trying to persuade china to turn the economic screws more forcefully get us in better bargaining position. i'm not comfort wobble that this because i don't know if what i said is trues the alternative is true we could be in for horrible war. worst since world war ii. >> i heard administration is painting themselves into a corner with the rhetoric, rebound if it is just intended to make the chinese more cooperative. they have actually they are saying that the sand is slipping through the hour glass, we might have to act soon and the military option is the only option if this doesn't work. and that actually i think not only creates a red line that attaches a ticking clock to it. >> the question, too, i agree 100% with kori, what are the military options under consideration. all our preventive war is the extreme, there's also one idea that ash carter and bill perry

two, former secretaries of the defense of democratic party wrote about ten years ago, they're not necessarily articulating it now, but 11 years ago they suggested that we shoot down north korean icbm launch before either gets off the launch pad or out of the atmosphere, just deny north korea the ability to learn more about its missile programs. that's the kind -- very dangerous idea, too, because you don't know what north korea will do in response, that's the sort of idea that may be in play here. >> dickerson: let me step back here for a second ask you all both a question about larger build up of forces. there is in the congress request for even more money than the president has asked for for his defense budget. what do you think will happen with that and do we need all this money? >> i'm skeptical that the congress is actually going to pass an appropriations bill that will give the defense department the $700 billion that authorizes congress have asked for. it looks to me much more likely that we will see series of

continuing resolutions. we're already a third of the way into the fiscal year. i'm really skeptical both because of the way the president's budget teed this up so congress will be adding hundred billion dollars over what the president requested. but i'm also skeptical that they can get deals on the other thing like daca, like the spending distinction between domestic and national security. looks to me like this is likely to drag on. that's actually terrible for the defense department, continuing resolutions present them starting new programs, prevents managerial latitude that dod needs to use the money well. rather than add more money, i would instead give dod the latitude to do a lot more programmatic management. i think that would help them a lot more. >> dickerson: your thoughts? >> we're at a point here in december, two and a half months

into the new fiscal year we don't know if the defense budget is going to be $600 bill ton for this year or $700 billion that's a huge gap. that's roughly the range of play. donald trump is in between in his request, i'm sort of in green myself, the congress under sen to mccain have proceed positivessed $700 billion, anything north of 600 billion exceeds the cold war average when you adjust for inflation. i do think we need a bit more money. but i think we need really is clarity and decision, because you can't do proper training, maintenance, can't enter into long-term contracts or do good custodianship when you're this far into the year you don't know what your budget will be. >> dickerson: that's it for both of you. thank you so much. we'll be right back to discuss political news of the week with our political panel. ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ what we do every night is like something out of a strange dream. except that the next morning... it all makes sense. fedex powers global commerce with vast, far-reaching networks... deep knowledge of industries... and, yes... maybe a little magic. ♪ hey! yeah!? i switched to geico and got more! more savings on car insurance!? they helped with homeowners, too! ok!

plus motorcycle, boat and rv insurance! geico's got you covered! like a blanket! houston? you seeing this? geico. expect great savings and a whole lot more. >> dickerson: we turn now to our political panel. molly ball is national political correspondent for "time" magazine. their person of the year was the silence breakers and the me too movement. lanhee chen from the hoover institution and policy advisor to the romney and rubio presidential campaign. also joined by cbs news white house and senior foreign affairs correspondent margaret 'brennan and ed o'keefe. margaret, start with you on this question of jerusalem. what do you make of the decision and timing of it? >> well, this appears to have been a significant foreign

policy and national security decision made primarily for domestic political reason by the president of the united states. he succeeded in touching probably the most sensitive nerve in one of the most intractable conflicts in history and this is going to make for a complicated visit for vice president pence who has to head to israel and egypt within just a week or so. what the president appears to be doing, with all due respect to the ambassador, doesn't do the thing she said. it doesn't move the embassy. keeping the embassy in tel aviv it doesn't for the moment decide the fate of jerusalem if you listen to the national security team who says, actually, we're still up for negotiation on the final status. in fact if you ask u.s. diplomats where the city of jerusalem is located they still won't tell you it's located in israel. it appears to be the sleight of hand that allows the president to say he achieved the campaign

objective without necessarily changing things, any new embassy will take four years or more to fill. >> dickerson: move back to domestic issues. molly, let's to go alabama here, got senate race willing going to come to conclusion next week, where do you think things stand? >> i do not think we know. there seems to be shift in the conventional wisdom toward roy moore, you hear a lot of predictions that he is going to prevail having -- because the beginning of the accusations against him are now several weeks in the rear view mirror lot of alabamaians have had to sort 6 process that. but we have still seen polls that are quite equivocal, in such a red state that is pretty remarkable. what i have heard from my sources on the ground and he'll be in alabama in just a few hours, is that voters are pretty powerfully conflicted. these are voters who generally

want to favor the republicans, all other things being equal, but you have to remember that roy moore even among republicans is a very polarizing figure. there's a lot of alabamaians who see him as an embarrassment to the state. or just as not the sort of person, particularly considering these charges, that they want representing them. so, whether that is enough to put that democrat over the top in a state like alabama is very difficult to tell. >> dickerson: let me ask you about the reaction to the rnc supporting roy moore this week, the president supporting roy moore, there some was talk about and coverage i'm through with the party because they're supporting him. that can get over towards that, hard to know what the level of real outrage, obviously ben sasse said what he said, senator collins was disappointed. how big a deal is this outside of alabama for the republican party where it is now? >> i think that it is a

developing big deal if that makes sense. as we go into 2018 this is not the last time we're going to see some version of this move. in other words, going to continue to see this conflict between different parts of the republican party and, yes, puts alabama in really concerning fashion, a guy like roy moore really flawed. but you'll have contested primaries in states like arizona maybe even nevada next year. that battlefield is just being played outright now. just stepping on to this battlefield. i think to the ex then we're seeing this in alabama now, what we're seeing is a microcosm of the kinds ever battles we'll see through 2018. republicans like myself is very concerning because what you're seeing is a fundamental split and fracture in the party that we known existed for some time now is being played out in very public way and being played out in elections that really do matter and have policy consequences for the last two years of president trump's administration, at least for his first term. >> dickerson: policy implications, president trump was arguing for basically

saying, whatever you may believe i want republican in the seat. >> it worked for him. in the last few weeks of the presidential campaign he was running around saying republicans you may not like me but i'm going to appoint conservative supreme court justices and other conservatives to the court, it worked. one in five voters showed up. the supreme court was their top tern. moore making the same exact argument that may work for him. what i find interesting what will be very curious to track in the next few weeksf he wins, how quickly does that ethics investigation begin. how long does it end up taking what do they do if it brings forward information that suggests conduct unbecoming of that senator. susan collins seems to suggest today that would be difficult thing to do to expel him. but the fact that there could be a secretive ethics investigation underway will just hang over the republican party on capitol hill over the course of most of the year most likely. even talking to a colleague who

takes photographs he says, i suspect going to avoid getting in the elevator because they don't want to be associated with him at all. >> those are related to the allegations that he denies, sexual misconduct, he doesn't deny having say that homosexual activity should be illegal. that muslims shouldn't be allowed to serve in the united states congress. there are things that are being set up here that not only highlight divisions you talk about within the republican party some would say the fight for the soul and identity but also position the democrats here, that's what so interesting with al franken resignation to come was that the democrats seem to be positioning themselves around that identity of this is what we are not. >> we are not going to play this role. >> dickerson: i want to get to franken as you say res ignition, still don't know the end date. go back to something you said mitt romney who you used to work for took the position of tall other republicans basically

said, there's no reason to support roy moore it's a stain on the party. then steve bannon came back at him from -- what did you make of that back and forth, does it have any lasting impact and is it mitt romney sort of emerging here as something in the republican party, put a name on it. >> he sort of the sensible conscious of the republican party in a lot of ways. only reason anybody cares about what steve bannon has to say to the extent that people think he is a proxy to the president. to the extent that people think that steve bannon expressing a point of view that the president holds it's relevant. otherwise he's just a political pundit out there with another opinion. the question really will be to what extent the president carries through this argument, if there is a senate campaign to be having in utah for governor romney, for example, to what extent is the president going to go out there prosecute some argument against mitt romney or try to find somebody to run against him. that's only way it becomes relevant. otherwise, it's all just a bunch of blather. it's very concerning blather

because what bannon said was completely beyond the pale, but governor romney putting out a point of view that needs to be articulated in the senate and in the congress beyond the 2018 elections. >> dickerson: just so people aren't confused steve bannon said that governor romney ducked service in vietnam, he was a missionary in france, which is a strange thing to say given that his president trump had many deferments from the vietnam war. momly, switch to you on the question of al franken you wrote about him, he really didn't want to leave the senate. >> he didn't. he saw the speech that he gave it took a lot of pressure to get him to resign and what you saw was, more than half of the democratic caucus had to come out publicly, it wasn't enough -- we knew there was pressure from behind the scenes on senator franken he resisted that fresh that you are was why his colleagues were forcedded to come out publicly all the way up to the democratic leader chuck schumer then finally very

grudgingly franken got threw on the floor and said, he believed it was ironic that he was resigning given the allegations against president trump and against roy moore, this is a sort of what about-ism argument the kind that we hear trump. why it fair that you're percent computing me look what crooked hillaryd same kind of argument. not only did he not apologize for his alleged misconduct he took pains to clarify that he hadn't actually admitted to anything. and he cast doubt on some of his accusers. but he did exceed to this pressure, there is a lot of resentment and disagreement in democratic circles about whether this was the right thing to do. lot of democrats talking about where they're setting the standard and whether it's fair, minnesota democrats, very sad to lose franken the national party sad to lose someone who is probably the biggest fundraising draw for democratic candidates across the country.

and now you have a situation where given that minnesota was quite close in 2016, whoever the governor appoints to fill this seat is going to have to run again in 2018, that could possibly be a tough race. >> dickerson: we'll pause that there. we'll be back in a moment with more on al franken and taxes, stay with us. choose it.

scoop it. pour it. blend it. no matter how you make it, you'll love our endless variety of beverages. baskin-robbins cappuccino blast®. customize your's today.

>> dickerson: we're back with our political panel. ed, senator durbin said there was no political calculation in the al franken decision, do you buy that? >> no. not at all. it was a total political calculation. we know that the week before he resigned he was already facing pressure from his colleagues who were asked to hold off. and that the morning that the final allegation surfaced they all got together by e-mail and text and phone calls said, this sit, we got to do this. the party wants to make democrats want to make a competency and professionalism argument in november. believing that that is the way they can take back the house and the senate. they got to purge all these guys in order to do that because you can't sit there and have alleged bad actors in your party if you're trying to suggested that you would run the government better. more broadly, i think viewers deserve to know this.

it's no secret for those of us who cover congress that we have all, one way or another, been contacted by lawmakers or aides in recent days, privately asking what else do you have, who is next. they are terrified of this story line. they know the consequences of it now could lead to much bigger problems for their party, maybe for piece of legislation they're working on, maybe the chance of the party holding together through the election. but members in both parties, aides in both parties are very concerned that more is to come. i think it's safe to say more is to come. we don't know who, carefully reported, but it shows that you they are so scared now because they realize so quickly people are disappearing. think about it. you saw guy served more than 50 years kicked down. we saw parties top fundraisers kicked outed. a social conservative warrior, trent franks 'hid to reseib sign about his behavior. we've never seen this purge since the civil war.

>> dickerson: switch to taxes here. that is big thing that's happening, president wants it done by christmas. what do you make of his salesman ship of the tax cut bill relative to health care. because the tax cut bill according to the poll and gallup has only 29% support in the country. that is a president whose key skill is marketer but that's not very popular for that legislation. >> he's marketing something that seems to be different than what the product he's selling. the message from the president even just on twitter his constant focus on stock market appears to be that he sees stocks and corporate as proxy for success of this bill, ultimately his end goal. even though on campaign trail, when he goes out to sell this he's talking about benefit to the middle class and working class who helped support him. it's not clear that these pieces at this point add up to a benefit for those people. at this point, though, to say that this would be a boost to corporations undoubtedly it would to take corporate tax rate from 5 down to 20%.

you're not legislating how corporations spend those profits, right? you're not necessarily forcing income growth. you're not making that worker take home more pay as a result. you can't possibly force that. you also can't force broader employment. so, this gamble of how this will ultimately pay off to the broader economic benefit of the country is something that the president seems to be focusing on, whether you call it trickle down economics more something else. >> dickerson: lanhee, what did you make of senator rubio, should look at 1977 speech by president reagan or not president then governor reagan where he said the republican party has to worry about having a country club big business image. >> yeah, i think there's a point that he's making. senator rubio and senator lee had an amend tomorrow the tax bill that would have made the child tax credit fully refundable which would have been a huge boon to lower middle class and lower income families. unfortunately that was voted down by the senate. i think that point of view, though, suggests that what we're

seeing in the tax bill now to republicans, this is more of a feature not a bug, right, that they're actually looking at lowering the corporate tax rate. somebody republicans, mainstream have talked about now for years if not decades. this street relatively conventional tax bill. the difficulty is selling it how do you translate corporate tax cut into what it means for the average middle class worker. there is a strong argument to be made, this will boost growth and booth wages into the pockets of middle class taxpayers. that's not the argument. that is a middle class tax cut, a little bit of dismissal that have to get straight, it won't inhibit them from getting it through to the president's desk. >> dickerson: do you agree also do democrats have any opportunity here to take advantage of this tax process? >> if you believe democrats that they are extremely excited about the political opportunity afforded by this tax bill, it's similar to what happened with health care, republicans were between a rock and hard place. they wanted to keep a campaign promise particularly to their own base that republican primary

voters who they told were going to repeal obamacare and reform the tax system. but the bill itself was broadly unpopular and really is not clear whether what was worse for them politically, passing the bill or not passing the bill given how disliked it is, so -- what do you hear officer republicans they feel they have to do this because they think it's a good idea to cut taxes. and also because their base will be so disspirit understand they don't get anything done this year. 3 >> dickerson: we'll be right back. we don't just help power the american dream. we're part of it.

feel the power of thenew power...smax. ...to fight back theraflu's powerful new formula to defeat 7 cold and flu symptoms... fast. so you can play on. theraflu expressmax. new power.

for the nv real estate academy's fortunes in flipping system. are you ready to learn how to make money and achieve your financial goals through real estate right in your own backyard? imagine being your own boss while building wealth and financial freedom for you and your family. if that sounds good to you, then listen up. over the course of this program, nick vertucci, self made real estate millionaire, is going to show you how to get all of that and more by investing in real estate. - hi, i'm nick vertucci and for the next 30 minutes you're gonna meet some of my students, hear about my systems, and hear about some great opportunities for you and your family. so sit back and enjoy. - [announcer] as one of today's most trusted real estate experts, nick has been featured on television, in print, and was the host of la's number one real estate radio show, the real estate investing hour. over the years, nick has coached and advised some