grisham and washington state's jay inslee. let's pick up where we left off. governor inslee, should a president be able to declare a national emergency in pursuit of a policy goal or not? >> well, not if it is in clear contravention of the law passed by the united states congress. there are provisions where provisions allow executive authority when congress has not been able to act and they're out of town and they need emergency responses. but it clearly is a contravention of basic norms of american democracy for congress to pass an appropriation bill, identify what is legal and illegal, have the president say he disagrees with that and counter-mand the entire authority of the united states congress. we can not allow that to happen. we need republicans to show a little bit of strength of character for the american constitution when they vote on this in a week or so. >> and there is not an emergency at the border. so the effort here on this political punting by republicans

and action by the president is really outrageous, because they're sewing fear, racism, hate and scrimp nation, and it's all based on a president that has no intention of dealing with immigration policy or foreign policy in a productive way. he wants this wall, and he's lying to the american people and that is also a problem. >> brennan: there is no sign that congress would take any action on immigration reform at all when it comes to the question of the national guard troops. you made that call to bring them back from the new mexico border. obviously you're a border state governor. you see what's happening in your state. over 36,000 people in your state signed a petition to impeach you after you made this call some do you think that your constituents' concerns here are being heard? >> let's talk about the folks who are impacted in the counties where we're seeing folks have to migrate because they can't do asylum for humanitarian issues. every single elected official in that county is with us on making sure that we address the

problems that they really have, communication, road maintenanceious making sure that we're providing health care and health emergency services, giving them law enforcement. and if that congress did do that in both its appropriation bill and quite frankly congress did passed a dream act before i was elected to congress on spend some meaningful immigration reform, there was meaningful bipartisan negotiation on the u.s.a. act, but all that this administration said unequivocally, unless they just get a wall, they're not interested in any of those other policies. it's really created huge burdens for states like mine to use evidence-based efforts to secure the border and to deal with real issues. >> brennan: governor inslee, you are expected to potentially make a bid to be the next commander-in-chief. when are you going to make a decision on whether you're running? >> at the right moment, which will be soon. >> brennan: which is when? >> just at the right moment. it will be soon. >> brennan: i think you said weeks, not months. >> we're coming up to another

week. stay tune ?ood are you expecting it this week? >> it could be as soon as that. what we are seeing right now, and i have been pleased by what i've been hearing across the country. peel want a president that will act on a real emergency, which is climate change. we're very proud of nowrm governor who is building a clean energy economy to respond to a real emergency which is climate change. but she and the other governors, look, we're fighting real emergencies, the forest fires that are consuming the western united states, they need a president who will rally the nation to a clean energy economy, jobs by the millions, and save this country from that damage. >> brennan: governors, thank you very much for being in our studio. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> brennan: we turn now to illinois republican congressman adam kinzinger who is in chicago. he's just freshly back from the border. he was serving with the air national guard at the border where he was flying surveillance missions out of tucson, arizona. congressman, this wasn't your first border deployment. it's the first one under the

national emergency. does it constitution a national emergency? >> i think it does. i went down there kind of undecided. i put on my lieutenant colonel hat. it was apolitical, but obviously i'm looking at this, getting the information i can. i think if this was just an issue of immigration it wouldn't constitution a national emergency, but what i saw was really disturbing. let me give you a couple quick exam the presidents. i was a small part of all the operations being done. we found at one point a woman hunkered down in the desert because her coyotes who brought her over deserted her because she wanted to get away. had she not been found but us, i don't know if she would have found her way home. she got picked up by border patrol. she's going to be deported. but that's a way better option of the at least 200 bodies that they find in the desert each year. they found 70 pounds of meth am

felt mean on someone coming over the border. this is my first time on the boarder in arizona, completely different from texas. texas i was there under president obama some the guard's mission on the border is nothing new. >> brennan: but border apprehensions are near a 50-year low. so when you talk about an emergency and you have border state governors tell you that's not what they're saying, how do you jury sending as mump as 6,000 active duty troops? >> i didn't see a low in apprehensions. there were beyond... >> brennan: that's according to customs and border patrol. >> i'm saying from my appearance, there were many, many groups that we would see on technology with camera radar or something like that that we could not go address, because there were not enough border patrol agents. these agents sometimes left to take a truck and then walked two miles through terrible terrain to get to these groups only the have them run while they're already exhausted and they get lost in that chaos. so it is down? maybe. part of that is because now they've understood how to abuse the asylum laws in this country. you have a lot of folks from countries who are not declaring

asylum in mexico where they should be, because i country where they can declare safety. they've learned how to do that. so now you have this crisis basically of, which i don't think the actual migration or the calling for asylum is in and of itself a crisis, but you now have massive amount of people doing that. what i saw was a lot of people coming over the border, a lot of drugs on the border, and a lot of human trafficking. these coyotes that would get paid a lot of money to bring groups over and then desert them to save their own backside -- >> brennan: am i understanding, the picture you're paint, i am understanding that you believe the president's declaration of national emergency is constitutional and you will not vote to try to block it? >> i won't vote to try to block it. i wish this would have happened a different way. i voted for comprehensive immigration reform. i think republicans and democrats both have good ideas s is constitutional for the president to bypass the power of the purse strings of congress? >> i do. yes. yes. because in this case, like i

said as the beginning, if this was just about immigration, i would disagree. i do think this is a security threat. it's a security threat with the amount of drugs coming over the border. and the human trafficking that i've seen. and again, in arizona, i think they said last year there were 200 bodies at least they found in the desert. it is not compassionate as your prior guest said to basically say, we're not going to do border security, because in essence, it would encourage people to come across the border. it's compassionate to say do it the right way. we're gotology have a secure border. we're going to have an immigration system that is welcoming, which i wholly believe doing it the right way, instead of enforcing very innocent people to pay the drug cartels to, pay the cartels money to, coyote them into a very dangerous part of this country and abandon them when the heat gets too hot. >> brennan: there is plenty of debate whether that would stop demand for drugs or stop people trying to come across, but let me ask you something else you're concerned about, and this is syria. is 400 u.s. troops enough to

leave behind iia to counter all the threats they are going to be asked to face? >> i certainly wish it was more than that. i am glad the president has reversed this decision. i think 2000 troops was a great example frankly of how we're doing war in the 21st century, which is legitimizing the local folks and using our special forces to give them the combat power necessary. leaving that amount of troops there is good for blocking iran's position in syria, for getting intelligence from folks on the ground to see any rise of isis that inevitably will come again. i wish it was more, but i am glad the president reversed his decision. syria is a mess. iran's position there is a mess. i worry about the future, not just of syria, but the future of a potential regional conflict in this area with all these folks t t special operators who are there right now are going to then be transitioned to some kind of murky term, a peacekeeping force, and they will be facing an inordinate amount of risk.

the pentagon seemed flat-footed by this declaration. >> i think there is definitely more risk. our special ops are really good. i doubt they'll be going out and doing combat troops, more likely using the local forces to do what they have to get done. we'll have great air support for them. but any time you have smaller group there, they are put in danger. there is no country that would be dumb enough to attack our forces there, but, of course, we've seen even recently with isis their boldness in attacking american military. that's why we have to stay on the offense. there's going to be an ayatolla ali isis 2, somen qae it's giving hope to the next generation of folks in the middle east to reject that ideology with their own religion. >> brennan: congressman, plenty more to talk to, narrator: in utah, you're livin' on mountain time and there's nothing standard about that. with 10 resorts less than an hour from salt lake international airport,

mountain time means more time on more resorts on the greatest snow on earth. it means more time with the kids and more time away from the kids. ski more, shred more, chill more, cheers more because mountain time is a state of mind that can only be found in one place. utah.

>> brennan: we want the bring in now our panel for some political analysis. edward wong is a correspondent from "the new york times." susan page is the washington bureau chief of u.s.a. today. jamal simmons is a host on hill.tv and ben domenech is the founder and publisher of "the federalist." a lot to get to with all of you. susan, 2020 and the picture we heard, steve bannon, the long-time white house strategist and ally for president trump really sketched out a number of interesting things including the

fact that he thinks there could be a primary challenger to the president from from within the president primary. >> he said there definitely will. he said it will be symbolic. symbolic challenges to republican presidents can be challenging, as george h.w. bush saw with jimmy carter. i think this is a subject that should be of more concern to the white house than it, is because there's not really a question at this time that president trump will retain the republican nomination. but these primary fights can be brutal. >> brennan: and ben, you had governor hogan indicate that he thinks there should be a primary challenger. >> but i don't think bannon is correct about how this would play out. the fact is unlike a situation with george h.w. bush, polling consistently shows the republican party is overwhelmingly in favor of the president, that they back him overwhelmingly. sure, there could be a symbolic challenge in some way, but there is unlikely to be one that could get between the president and the base of the republican party, which is why pat buchanan's challenge, for instance, in '92 was so damaging

to president bush. >> here's what's so weird about it to me: usually when someone runs against the president, they run from the ideological wing of that party. ted kennedy ran from the liberal left. pat buchanan ran from the trump right is what it is. this would be a centrist challenge to a president. i don't know that we've ever seen someone run from the center against a president. what may occur is that that person's job may be to help organize who the anti-trump forces are inside the republican party and identify that person for the democrats that those may be potential democratic vote there's could be won over. >> brennan: then there is a question for the democrats, where is your center, right? >> yeah. >> brennan: because we haven't seen joe biden, who is expected to declare, jump in, or any of the other names. you had governor inslee here saying, oh, maybe this week i'll make a decision. and you have that extraordinary "time" magazine cover this week reflecting what we're see, which is just about everyone is running.

what do you make of the field? where is the center? >> well, here's why democrats should be thankful to bernie sanders, because bernie sanders showed that there was a real passion on the democratic left to find somebody who was going to not argue about how much we should cut taxes for the wealthy but maybe we should be raising taxes on the wealthy or maybe we should figure out, how do we cover more people with medicare or get more expanded daycare. so he's opened up that entire lane. now, what could also be true is, you know, facebook wasn't first social media company. there was my space and there was friendster before that. bernie sanders might be the my space and friendster of the democratic party, right, where he's helped show us that there is this path, and then what comes after that is a kamala harris or elizabeth warren or somebody like that who takes advantage of the opening. >> but the effect is you've had all of these candidates, including ones who could run to the center, tacking to the left in significant ways. the fact is the majority of the democratic cast endorsed the green new dale.

the majority of the democratic cast is completely backing abortion policies on the stated level that are widely out of sync not just with american but with pro-choice americans. that leaves an opening for the president to do the kinds of things that he did in the state of the union, which is to frame the democrats as the party of the extreme. he's going to continue to do that, and that's going to be frankly a way to keep those types of centrists that you talked about within the g.o.p. who might be open the a democratic candidacy away from them and loyal to the republican party. >> there's an ideological debate in the democratic party. there are centrist and people that support the green new deal. but one thing that united states the democratic party is they want to win in 2020. there is no issue they care about more than that one. >> brennan: ed, one thing we see lacking on many of the resumes of the candidates is important policy experience. you haven't seen a lot of views on what they think america's role in the world should be. crisis in venezuela is sort of forcing people to take a stand.

possibly this north korea summit may force some of these candidates to describe a foreign policy. what is it that you're seeing out there? >> well, i think there are certain issues that candidates will be forced to address. security is one of them. they will criticize trump i think for his take on north korea or for the fact that we haven't made much progress on north korea and its nuclear program since the first summit and they'll question why we're holding these series of summits when kim hasn't promised -- hasn't met the promises that he set out. the other question -- another big question is china and trade. i think that we'll see talk about whether his approach to china and to the trade deficit and to other issues related to the economy is the right one. >> brennan: and you have that march 2nd deadline looming in terms of the president ramping up tariffs potentially and that extraordinary change in the oval office where you saudi slides between the president and his chief negotiator over laying out the terms in front of the chinese. >> right.

my read on that was the chief negotiator, lightheiser" is nervous the president will undermine the american negotiate ing of what an mental ram yum of understanding means. i think there are debates about whether the president or lightheiser was right about that, but having the president go against the trade negotiator in front of the television cameras is not good for the american negotiating position. >> my first -- >> brennan: or diplomatically. >> my first job was working for u.s. trade representative mickey cantor. i can't believe bill clinton would have ever upbraided mickey cantor in front of the negotiator. >> the chinese negotiator laughed. >> that's not what he's doing. he's not giving us the strongest happen. people yesterday think kamala came out for temporary protective status for venezuelans in this particular crisis. >> i think the exchange you saw over memorandums of

understanding and china was a red flag to the diplomats who are concerned about the summit t does not pay attention to what he sees as diplomatic niceties, that diplomats see as absolutely crucial. and some concern you heard articulated in your interview with senator markey that he will agree to a deal that looks good in the moment, helps him in the moment, but isn't really sustainable, doesn't have verification, offers the north koreans too much for what they give us. this might be a sign of something to come. >> the north koreans are not going to give up their nuclear program. they just aren't. >> brennan: you agree with u.s. intelligence then? >> the thing to understand is that you can -- when it comes to this summit, you can take the under. this is not going to be something that produces a massive breakthrough. it is going to be something that's going to be spun in the public, you know new york a lot of different ways, but terms of our expectation, they have to be tempered by the reality of what's going to be really on the table when it comes to the north koreans on

offer, and frankly, they're in the driver's seat. >> brennan: ed, you have reporting on this. l expectatio. you say now that he's doing it publicly, you're reporting on what hess saying privately. what is that? >> right. he's saying privately that within at least his time in office, maybe the president's time in office, they might not get to full denuclearization. he tells others he talks to off the record. i think that might be the realistic outlook of where we can get to with north korea. there might be very minimal work on a nuclear program. there might be some work but not full denuclearization. the big question that we have to ask is whether at what point would the united states publicly accept a nuclear north korea and acknowledge thatt accepts israed other countries having nuclear weapons. >> brennan: normalization of denuclearization. not a poo pa rya state. >> trump said he fell in love with kim, so maybe.

>> brennan: you had it at 60% of demands. >> that's what pompeo has told some people. >> brennan: that seems pretty high. >> north korea has 30 to 60 nuclear heads. every six months it makes enough fissile material for another nuclear weapon. it will be hard to get it fully dismantsled. >> we should consider the withdrawal from the imf of being part of this. >> brennan: the arms control agreement with russia. >> i know that was mostly framed in the context of our relationship with russia, but the overwhelming agreement on the part of our european allies is russia has been in violation of this for years anyway, and much of that is restricting us to what we can do vis-a-vis the asian situation, both with china and with north korea. it could be something that could be interesting potentially down the road in terms of the types of responses that we could put in place that would have been banned under the i.n.f. >> brennan: susan, last word to you. "a real meat grinder" is how steve bannon tribes next four to five months. >> yeah. >> brennan: what should we be

girding ourselves for? >> we say this every week, but in is really going to be a crucial week. we have a north korea summit in a split screen with michael cohen testifying in front of congress and robert mueller is standing in the doorway with his report. it's going to be a markable few months ahead. >> let's not forget the underlying question: did the president collude with the russians. >> brennan: we have to leave it. there we'll be back in a moment with a report on the catholic church's sex abuse summit.

when the engines failed on the plane i was flying, i knew what to do to save my passengers. but when my father sank into depression, i didn't know how to help him. when he ultimately shot himself, he left our family devastated. don't let this happen to you. if you or a loved one is suicidal, call the national suicide prevention lifeline. no matter how hopeless or helpless you feel, with the right help, you can get well. cbs cares.

>> brennan: over the past four days, senior bishops gathered at the vatican for a landmark sumentd on clergy sex abuse, convened by pope francis. it comes after years of controversy for the catholic church. cbs news correspondent seth doane is in rome with what was decided. >> pope francis spoke of the abuse of power that lies at the center of clerical sex abuse turning priests into tools of satan. the brutality of this worldwide phenomenon becomes all the more grave and scandalous in the church, the pontiff said, for it is utterly incompatible with its moral authority and ethical

credibility. francis widened the scope of the problem past clerical sex abuse to include the many threats to minors, including child pornography and child soldiers. he add, "no abuse should be covered up, as was often the case in the past." the pontiff presented a list of eight so-called best practices, including sparing no effort in protecting children, pure fight the church in part through training and seminary, strengthening rules, supporting victims, and being aware of threats in the digital world. the pope's speech today, can you give it a grade? >> disappointing. incomplete. you know, i was hoping for something more forceful. >> reporter: father thomas reese is a senior analyst with religion news service. did we learn anything new, anything concrete in this? >> i don't think that people in america if that listened to this

speech would find anything new. remember, this meeting was primarily focused on parts of the world where they don't think they have a crisis. >> reporter: rules are already in place for priests, so one of the big questions here was how to close the loopholes in laws for the higher-ranking bishops, accused, among others things, of carrying out or covering up abuse. >> how do we hold accountable bishops. that's what american people want to know. where is the system? how do we punish bish shops who don't do what they're supposed to do. >> reporter: do we have new bern answer centers. >> not at this meeting. not yet. >> reporter: all along the vatican has said follow-il be the k they said to expect more details including a document written by the pope and handbook for bishops about how the handle cases of abuse. >> brennan: seth doane in

boss: it's a big responsibility.

employee: oh, it's huge. i know, it's huge. boss: and the salary... employee: oh my god, yes. i was literally about to move in with my parents and right before... yeah, so this saved me. boss: i really believe in you. you know? employee: thank you. it's nice to hear that from someone. boss: these are cool. did you...um? where did... armando: i am a veteran, i lost both legs in vietnam. announcer: as america's veterans face challenges, dav is there. armando: my victory was getting my benefits and a good education. announcer: dav helps veterans of every generation get the benefits they've earned. wade: i'm a veteran, i didn't want to admit it, but i have ptsd. announcer: so veterans can reach victories great and small. wade: my victory was finding help and learning that i wasn't alone. announcer: support more victories for veterans, go to dav.org.

>> brennan: that's it for us today. thank you for watching. i'll see you this week for north korea's summit coverage from vietnam. for "face the nation," i'm margaret brennan. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org the new 7pm news

weeknights on kpix 5

♪ tonight a winter wall. minneapolis declare as snow emergency. >> stay home, get off the roads. >> while deadly flooding and storms. pthe president's emergency lock declaration. >> this is an unconstitutional action. kim jong-un heads to vietnam for another high stakes summit. pope francis calls for landmark summit. >> words are meaningless unless there's some type of fight to those words.