terrorist arrest in the united states and a nasty fight with netanyahu. let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews. up in boston we'll get to those fbi arrests today and what they say about the islamics in this country. even to the point of threatening to kill president obama. but we start with the hottest fight over mid-east dangers between the right wing here and in israel against the democrat tech party of the united states. if you believe in bipartisan backing for israel, the bad guys are netanyahu and john boehner. it's not clear which two of these brazen guys started this fight but it's getting hotter every hour. for whatever reason, this pair decided to get the jump on the president of the united states. they pulled a secret move to have the israeli prime minister speak to a joint meeting of the american congress without ever letting the president know.

who made this decision to keep this secret? did the israeli ambassador ever get assurances that the president would be informed? did he? or is this a quiet deal between the republican opposition and netanyahu's party to attack the president just as he's working to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon? we know this tonight, this fight is escalating. the national security adviser to the president calls the netanyahu speech and the way it was secretly put together destructive to u.s./israeli relations. >> what has happened over the last several weeks by virtue of the invitation that was issued by the speaker and the acceptance of it by prime minister netanyahu on two weeks in advance of his election is that on both sides there's now been injected a degree of partisanship which is not only unfortunate, i think it's destructive of the fabric of the relationship. it's always been bipartisan. we need to keep it that way.

we want it that way. i think israel wants it that way and the american people want it that way. and when it becomes injected and/or infused with politics, that's a problem. >> and secretary of state john kerry is hitting netanyahu on his history of hawkish statements, including one pushing the united states to invade iraq saying how great it would be for the region. it was a very tough shot by the secretary, a sign of how tough this fighting is getting. i'm joined by u.s. congressman charles rangel of new york. you've been around a long time to know, what is boehner up to, cooking this deal in the first place to secretly bring netanyahu into your chamber without ever telling your president? >> well, it's embarrassing for the nonpartisanship that we have between the republicans and democrats but for the republicans to go behind our politics and bring it over to israel and to bring our friendship and our loyalty to that great country and to this type of thing over here, it just doesn't make any sense at all.

you know, i couldn't have figured this out but, chris, when you look at this, it could be an old class b movie, something that woody allen would have had because i didn't find out until recently that israeli ambassador comes from florida. he's formerly a republican activist as his father was. so he goes over to israel and now he's coming back here playing friendship with his republican partners and either to help mitt romney or to help his buddy bibi over there but all of this is at the historic friendship of two democracies that are joined at the hip. it's not worth the little political advantages that they can achieve. >> well, this kind of politics reminds me of the guy he used to work for. that is newt beginning wretch. this seems not just a little

gimmicky but nasty. what's the scene going to be like next week when the prime minister shows up in what seems to be a partisan situation? will members of the democratic party show up? >> well, that's exactly the kind of question -- and i'm glad you didn't use the word boycott because we don't want to be considered boycotting a world leader and certainly not the leader of a country that we affectionately support as being in our national security interests. there's no one that believes that they can injure israel without injuring the united states. you know, we don't -- i could have differences with the president and foreigners could have differences with the presidents but they don't state that with the support of the american people and the united

states congress. you don't do this in the house of representatives. it's wrong to do it. and so a lot of people are not going to be there but i thought -- and i hope it's not over -- that a bunch of senate democrats said, listen, we've got to find some way to get out of this. why don't you come over, we have a private meeting, we talk, and then you go back to israel, get involved in your election and then say you talked to both of us. but don't have it -- it's totally unfair and for someone to want to fight my president in my house of representatives and i've been a long-time friend of israel, not just because i'm from the democratic ideals but because our security in america depends on this security in the middle east. >> well, you sound like a lot of democrats tonight. thank you so much, u.s. congressman charles rangel of new york. >> thank you, chris.

>> thank you to charlie rangel. prime minister netanyahu escalated his attack today on a potential with iran. he said "from the agreement that is forming it appears that they the world powers have given up on that commitment and are accepting that iran in a few years will produce material for many nuclear weapons. they may accept this but i am not willing to accept this." john kerry offered a very direct challenge to netanyahu's credibility on matters on war and peace. now, this is really tough. let's listen. >> the prime minister, as you recall, was profoundly forward leaning and outspoken about the importance of invading iraq under george w. bush and we all know what happened with that decision. he was extremely outspoken about how bad the interim agreement

was during which time he called the deal of the century for iran even though it has clearly stopped iran's program and, more importantly, he has decided it would be good to continue it. he may have a judgment that just may not be correct here. and, you know, let's wait and hear what he says. >> for more now, i'm joined by ron fournier. they are going to fight. he's saying that netanyahu is just another corner -- well, regular hawk like we have this this country and over there who always want to attack and claim nuclear weapons is the issue and here he is in iraq. this is a stone-cold assault on netanyahu. my thought is he better start fighting back because netanyahu is coming here next tuesday to stick it to obama. >> remember, john kerry voted for the war before he was

against it so i don't know if he should be second guessing bibi. >> just a minute. he speaks for our country right now, not for john kerry. >> let's have the president of the united states who called it a dumb war and voted the right way, he'd be a better spokesman on that. politics is supposed to stop at the water's edge. we're supposed to have one commander in chief. there are checks against the commander in chief but none of those have ever been a foreign leader which is what john boehner is letting happen here. letting bibi netanyahu use the well of our house, the well of congress as a sound stage for his political advertisement and i think that's deplorable and i think susan rice in this case is right. it's very destructive for our relationship and it's spiralling even further with john kerry taking the bark off an ally. bibi made a bad mistake here and boehner made a bad mistake here.

what's happened to the idea that we had some bipartisanship around what the commander in chief does. >> here's my question to you because i have a tough comment at the end of the show. i want to make sure i'm right here. if netanyahu thought it was bad form to speak in the country thanks to boehner and not tell the president, why didn't he, the minute he heard that the president didn't know about this invitation say, wait a minute, i'm not coming over there if it's not a bipartisan invitation? in other words, he always had the option of saying, i don't care what boehner cooked up, i'm not coming without a bipartisan invitation and he's never done that since this thing started. he's insistent on this fight. he wants this fight. >> he wants the political commercial that republicans are giving him. he's two weeks away from an election. he thinks this will help him politically. i'm not so sure it will but i'm not an israeli political reporter. there's no doubt what is happening here, he's using the

republican party as a wedge to promote himself politically in israel and to drive a wedge between what has always been at least some bipartisan togetherness when it comes to foreign policy. like i said, we only have one commander in chief. we can't let a foreign leader play us off each other on a situation like this. it's really, really bad form. >> when you listen to secretary kerry and others, you get the impression and my impression is the same, that netanyahu wants all of these talks with iran to go down to nothing. the whole thing is undermined and we end up in that position we never wanted to be in of letting them have a nuclear weapon and going into all-out war. we do you will a of the bombing, all of the hatred of hezbollah and iranian, whether they are moderate or fanatically religious, all of them will hate us. we'll have a permanent hatred all over the middle east against us. my question is, is that what netanyahu wants?

does he really want us to be forced in a position of an all-out bombing of iran? is that what he wants? >> yes. he has decided and i can understand why he's coming from, the worst thing we could do is have a deal with -- i don't happen to agree with him but that's what he think. that's what many people in the republican think and certainly what the speaker thinks. so what they've decided and in this case you would have a republican party in cahoots with another country. i just think that's really bad form here and down the road. what happens when we have another crisis? are we going to let our allies playoff our commander in chief like this? >> i've never heard of an american political party merging with a political party of another country. >> i don't know if the republicans have forgotten, is this how they want to be treated in a situation of war or near war? >> the president of the united states should call foreign visitors to this country. thank you, ron fournier. coming up, the isis threat. three brooklyn men are under arrest for aiding the islamic threat. they were trying to get to syria

or carry out attacks here including a threat to kill president obama. this is serious business. plus, scott walker is up big in iowa. this guy has come from nowhere he won't answer questions about evolution or whether obama is a christian or not. is this the right guy to take on hillary clinton? could be. mitch mcconnell and boehner are not speaking to each other, haven't talked to each other in two weeks. there's a united party. and president party is going on offense pushing his executive action on immigration at a town hall today. finally, let me finish with this crap storm. more than 100 inches of snow here buried this city so far and the second highest total snowfall in history. there's eight feet of snow on

both sides. we'll be right back.

a jarring review in chicago where mayor rahm emanuel has been forced into a runoff. he needed 50% to win re-election outright. now he's the runner -- he and his runner up will meet in april in the city's first ever runoff for mayor. emanuel is still the favorite to win, of course, but last night's result is a major blow for a political leader with such a high national profile and high national ambitions. we'll be right back.

welcome back to "hardball." well, three brooklyn men, as you have heard, have been arrested and charged with contempt and conspiracy to provide material support to isis, according to the authorities. two of the suspects were allegedly planning to travel to syria to wage jihad and the younger was trying to board a flight to istanbul.

the third suspect, who is 30 years old, allegedly helped to finance the deal. authorities say they also discussed terror attacks here at home if they couldn't get to syria, even to the point of planning to kill president obama. joining me right now is pete williams. it seems so brazen, pete, what you read, stuff on social media, openly talking about what their plans were? >> very brazen. not clear how well-thought out it was or just sort of popping off something. they talked about putting a bomb on coney island, shooting police officers, shooting people at the fbi, shooting the president. they didn't have any guns. they didn't have any explosives. it's certainly very worrisome talk and, interestingly, chris, we assume that the fbi has a pretty good handle on people that are spouting off about these things in the u.s. but apparently what got this started was a post on a uzbeki language website which one of these men was asking for a dear abby jihad

advice. he said, i'm in the u.s., i may not be able to get out of the country. if i were to kill the president here, would that constitute martyrism for me and would that qualify as jihad? when the fbi found out about this, they sent two agents to his house in brooklyn, to his apartment in brooklyn he said, yes, that's what i said on this website and i believe it. it wouldn't have to be the head of isis to tell me to do that and i would try to assassinate the president. they talked to him twice. even though he realized the fbi was on to him, according to court documents, he continued planning. he and his apartment roommate both plotted, bought airplane tickets to fly to syria and this third man they say financed them. >> was he mirandized when he starts talking about how he's going to kill the president with the agents right there on the record? >> no, he would not have been mirandized because he wasn't in custody.

but according to the prosecutors who spoke today in court, after these men were arrested, both of them said, yes, we did plan to go to syria and they were mirandized then. >> it's allegations at this point and it has to be decided in court but you have the boston marathon bombing and suspects there, of course, are people from the soviet union, the old soviet union. now you have these guys from the old soviet union. this isn't just a middle east situation. it seems like a worldwide potential jihad situation at least in terms of these people. >> well, it is. you're right. the authorities say that folks are coming from all around syria, not just from western europe, not just eastern europe but all over the place, a sort

of global movement to sort of join with the isis group in syria. and the fbi director surprised us a little bit today by saying his agents now have investigations opened in all 50 states for people potentially interested in joining a terrorist organization. >> pete williams, thank you for joining me. joining me is terrorism analyst and fbi profiler clint van zandt and jim cavanaugh, retired atf special agent in charge. clint, we have surprising enemies out there. suspects at least in this case, but there they are, coming from the soviet union and all over the soviet union, nobody thought of them as particularly involved in what looked to be a mid-east conflict in an islamic state. >> we have the boston marathoners, when you look at their background. it's ripe breeding ground taking place. there are 90,000 tweets a day concerning isis, individuals

talking back and forth. whatever latitude we give the nsa, how do you monitor 90,000 tweets between people talking about isis? you know, if we say 80% of them have nothing to do with active terrorism, that's still a lot of people talking back and forth on the internet and these three guys so brazen, even though jim cavanaugh and i would go up to the door and talk to them, they are so brazen or stupid or confident that they continued with their actions and we've seen in new york and other places what a lone wolf with an ax or rifle can do. part of the challenge is it doesn't have to be a large isis cell. all it has to be one or two inspired individuals who go out on the street and buy a $500 handgun. >> fbi james comey said they are

investigating potential terrorists in all 50 states. let's listen. >> we have people in all 50 states radicalizing. this is in ways that is very hard to see because it's highly unlikely that it's going to be a federal agent that will first hear or see about someone acting in strange ways to social media. it's going to be a deputy sheriff, a police officer who knows that neighborhood. >> jim cavanaugh, what do you make of this customer? the guy says he wants to kill the president, maybe he wasn't mirandized yet but he must have known he was talking to police and he's incriminating himself. >> right. well, chris, people talk.

when you sit down in an interview like that, this guy is buying into this jihad talk and he's talking to the agents. like clint said, it's a noncustodial interview, just like pete described. you don't have to give them a miranda warning but who is he, what does he want to do? maybe he wants to help law enforcement, maybe he wants to quit doing this. he's a young man. he could have taken any path there but he went right back to the killers and that's what he decided to do. one of these three guys' mother took his passport and he's lucky because what happens when they get to syria, isis takes their passport. >> how many people are still suspect -- still susceptible to this? because we like to believe that we're pretty good at asimmulating people yet these people were more transitional. they didn't really become american. how many people are saying here on their way to the jihad rather than to become part of this country?

your thoughts? >> well, there's a smaller number but we always saw these numbers, you know, in the joint terrorism task force. the fbi did a fabulous job here, the joint terrorism task force by looking at this over the long period, taking the interactions with the guys, seeing that he was predisposed. he was most likely picked up by the nsa overseas and ferreted into the joint terrorism task force. once they committed the overt acts, like catching the plane to go to syria, the arrest was made. >> i can't believe that anybody would tell anybody that works for the government that he's out to kill the president. it's pretty brazen. up next, is scott walker the front-runner to take on hillary clinton? the numbers are astounding. the republicans want new and right. it looks like that combination. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

i got a chance to talk to your new senator, i've talked to her a few times before and i appreciate the fact that you've sent somebody who is not only a midwesterner like i am but a fellow harley-davidson rider like i am. that means she knows how to castrate a hog and ride a hog as well. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was wisconsin governor scott walker testing out his midwest appeal in iowa and castrating senator and -- shows him the governor of wisconsin, you don't see leads like this this early. rand paul is a distant second at 13 and followed by ben carson,

mike huckabee and jeb bush way down there with bush. it's not just the mainstream that likes him, the tea party likes him, too. 30% of tea party republicans like him. bush again near the bottom at 3%. i think the dog doesn't like the dog food. he's hitting a sweet spot in the gop between the tea party, evangelical and establishment wings. he seems to hit all of the buttons but shows the weakness, dare i say, of one jeb bush. nicolas is a political reporter for "the new york times." john, you first, i believe in this poll for one reason. i am seeing now the pacer bunny way out in front of everybody else which tells me that somebody they don't really know, they like to profile. executive tough on unions, tough generally, evangelical, christian, you will, and young.

he seems to be what they want, a younger version of somebody who shares their values without becoming part of the establishment. he seems to have this sweet spot. what do you think? >> throw in the fact that he has won three elections in a state that goes presidential and democratic elections and the fact that he just beat a pretty strong female candidate for re-election, he's a strong looking candidate. we don't know much about walker yet and there are 11 months to be spent on defining him and other candidates to be defining themselves, jeb bush included, i think he's a guy that has a chance to combine the conservative base and the establishment and he's going to have a whole lot of money. he's able to tap into that koch donor base, the anti-union efforts he's had. i think scott walker is looking pretty good right now, chris. >> it seems to me that we agree

here, he has -- i always think of elections in two stages. first the profile, the guy's general description, he matches what they want. and then as you say, john, you have to fill in and see if he can measure up to his profile. what is it, again, so everybody watching gets it, what is it about walker that puts him so far ahead of the pack right now starting off? >> you know, i think he's a guy who's got conservative credit depositions. he has an authentic connection to evangelicals in a state that is an important part of the process and he's fought a good fight, as far as they are concerned. they have basically taken on and defeated democrats and unions in what was once their strong hold. he's won a purple state, as jonathan said, he's won three elections in four years. these are all things that voters care about. they are all looking for a winner this year. >> let me ask you. you stay with us, nick. is it possible that bush -- you

know the whole story about the dog won't eat the dog food no matter how good the label or the advertising, the dog doesn't like the taste of the dog food. i haven't seen any evidence yet of an appetite for another bush in the grassroots. actual people in iowa. his numbers our bismol. 3%. >> look, he hasn't had actual contact with voters for a decade and a half. that's a long time to be out of that seat. he's got to prove he can do it. he'll be at the conservative political action conference. we'll see if he still has his chops. look, i think people remember the bush years, even in iowa and remember a lot of the concerted dissatisfaction with the gop establishment began in the bush years. there was a lot of criticism of government spending and eventually the war in iraq. there are memories there of how his brother handled the presidency. they are not that great for

conservative voters. >> let me go back to john. it seems to me i thought he's somebody that is not hillary. >> that's somebody who the party is looking for, somebody who excites the grassroots. george bush when he ran in 2000, he had the star power and was trying to make sure that he got the moderate republicans that john mccain had been winning over, some of the independents. jeb bush is like the elder bush, trying to win over the the real passion voters. it's going to be hard to do but certainly he's going to have a lot of money to do it and certainly has a lot of money to do it. >> i think the read my lips line will be repeated again. thank you, jonathan. i noticed that jim baker the other day said he liked the old man and jeb but never mentioned w. i think we all know why. up next, republicans are

fighting go homeland security. mcconnell and boehner aren't even speaking to each other. what happened to the republican majority? the republican-led house and senate. anyway, you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. there's nothing more romantic than a spontaneous moment. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache.

to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com

welcome back to "hardball." well, it's chaos inside the republican conference right now. house speaker john boehner told his caucus today that he and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell haven't spoken to each other in two weeks. the hardliners out there seem to be waiting for a revolt. this is after the department of homeland security is two days from running dry. mitch mcconnell is trying to rally support for his plan. he wants a clean funding bill and a separate bill to counterman the president's action on immigration. it's a plan that would likely need a huge number of democratic votes to pass in the house. well, boehner swallowed that embarrassment. today he refused to show his hand when facing questions from the reporters. >> and to stop the president's

overreach on immigration. and we're waiting for the senate to do their job. we're in a wait and see mode. i'm waiting for the senate to pass their vote. i'm waiting for the senate to pass a bill. i don't know what the senate is capable of passing. >> is congress going to avoid a shutdown of dhs? >> it's time for the senate to do their job. >> well, it's mickey mouse time, obviously. peter king said he told reporters we can't allow dhs not to be funded. people think we're crazy. there are terrorist attacks all over the world and we're talking about closing down homeland security. this is like living in the world of the crazy people. with me, danny vargas, chairman of the republican national hispanic assembly, jennice fuentes, chief of staff to democrat congressman and a reporter with "the huffington

post." they seem to be against illegal immigration. once they've made that point, how do they want to end it? how does the republican party hope to end this process where the way people come in this country is coming in here illegally? i don't see how it got to there if they don't have a bill to do it. >> well, you know, as you know, chris, the republican approach in the house of representatives is to go with the piecemeal approach. what they do want to move forward with is something that the american people broadly accept and agree, that we have to have increased control and security at the border, they see too much lawlessness at the border, they want to make sure that we have an approved legal immigration process because they

are looking for jobs. >> everybody is for that. that's a good thing. the problem is their method. why do they ever think they'll get the democrats to stop on immigration until they deal with the people here that they need to be taken care of? how do they deal with that? if they don't deal with the 11 million here as a comprehensive process, the democrats can't sign on to any tough new employment checks to make sure people here are legally working here. the democrats won't agree to any of that as long as you don't take care of the people here. >> and i think that's the bone of contention. what to do with the 11 million. i think republicans by and large can move forward with a process by which they might become legal. it's the path to citizenship that is the thorniest issue. many republicans are saying it can't be on the table.

until we get to that point -- >> how can it not be on the table, danny? i'm going to keep fighting with you on this. people here for 20 years are not going to be kicked out of the country. it's not going to happen. >> i speak to folks on undocumented status today and almost every day and they say, as long as i get to stay here legally and provide for my family and make sure that my kids get an education, citizenship is not anywhere on their priority list. so if we can find a way for them to stay here legally, get out of the shadows, provide a legal pathway for them without citizenship, many of them will applaud for that. >> what's the democratic goal? is it truly to deal with a bill that deals with illegal hiring? people come to this country not to do bad things but to get a job. if you start to get illegal hiring, that's comprehensive. we all know that. i never hear the president make the case for enforcement. i hear deportations are raucous

and terrible and inhuman in many ways but he never talks about a process to stop illegal immigration. he never talks about it. that's why republicans never want to help him, because he doesn't want to help them make their case this was a serious bill passed by the senate a couple of years ago, a truly comprehensive bill and should be enacted. >> exactly. and they bring it up on the house side. danny is talking about comprehensive or piecemeal. there hasn't been a stomach to bring it out on the floor. what is happening is, quite frankly, they should understand that the money is going to be controlled. they cannot use that money for the executive action. why not just celebrate that moment instead of bringing us to this peril, the moment of crisis that we will not have. >> how come they never talk about enforcement?

i never hear a democrat talking about enforcement. >> the democrats do talk about enforcement. >> who? who? >> president obama has deported more people than both bushes combined. >> this is a joke because people are still going to come here to get a job if they can get here illegally and what have democrats ever done anything about enforcement? unless they get serious about enforcement, the republicans are never going to go along with any deal. >> i don't know why you say we're not serious about enforcement because we are. if deporting -- if grabbing mothers from the workplace, a mother state -- >> we're not getting anywhere. people are going to come here illegally forever the rest of our lives -- >> that's not an enforcement question. that's more of an economic question. they are coming because there are jobs and -- >> and they are illegal jobs. >> half of them pay and they pay social security under somebody else's number.

to say that they are here, they are not making money, they are not paying taxes would be incorrect. they come here because they can find the jobs. the enforcement needs to be the workplace. >> okay. i'll ask the question again 100 times because this is why we never get immigration reform. the one side doesn't want to deal with the reality, the democrats don't want to deal with the fact that as long as we have illegal jobs here, all of the walls are not going to stop. we'll be right back. round table is staying with us. i just want a law that ends this conversation. "hardball," the place for politics. we're the most connected but i think this solo date will seal the deal. sure! i offer multi-car, safe driver, and so many other discounts that people think i'm a big deal. and boy, are they right. ladies, i can share hundreds in savings with all of you! just visit progressive.com today. but right now, it's choosing time. ooh! we have a winner. all: what? [chuckles] he's supposed to pick one of us. this is a joke, right? that was the whole point of us being here.

well, we showed you that scott walker's got this big lead in iowa and look at this, he's surging in texas as well. according to the university of texas, ted cruz is on the top with 20% of the vote and walker in close second in texas at 19. he's right on cruz's back. in fact, back in october, walker had just 2% of the poll and he is moving up. jeb bush and ben carson are further back, of course, and former texas governor of rick perry falling down to fifth. he's not going anywhere. texas will vote at the beginning of march so it's going to matter and walker is doing well down there in texas, even against cruz. we'll be back after this.

we're back. just minutes away right now, we're going to bring you our exclusive presidential town hall on immigration hosted by my colleague, which was taped just a few hours ago today. president obama called out jeb bush by name to get his party's leadership in the house to act on the bipartisan bill that the u.s. senate passed in the last congress. here he is. >> i appreciate mr. bush being concerned about immigration reform. i would suggest that what he do is talk to the speaker of the house and the members of his party. because the fact of the matter is that even after we pass bipartisan legislation in the senate, i gave the republicans a year and a half -- a year and a half -- to just call the bill. we had the votes. they wouldn't do it.

>> i'm back at the roundtable. do you think the president wants the issue of immigration in favor of the hispanic community especially and other liberals to get a better break in this country, or does he want the bill to pass? is he really out there helping the republicans buy into this thing or enjoying the fight? because it's good politically for him. >> i think to a large extent, this is a winning political issue for democrats, and that's part of the message that you get from this administration. they obviously took the executive action far too late in the eyes of the latino community. they believe they have the superior message to republicans who haven't acted at all to pass the bill. the president was throwing punches out at jeb bush who is a contender in 2016. he knows this is a winning political issue for him. and for democrats. >> what's the president going to

do in the supreme court -- it's republican now, 5-4 at least -- what happens if they strike down all the executive orders on immigration? >> this one in particular, the circuit court judge put an injunction against it for procedure matters. it wasn't even a question of constitutionality. it was because he hadn't filed with the federal registry with enough time for public comment. i think that's a procedural hurdle that the administration has to overcome. but more politically, the american people do want to see a fair and sustainable solution to immigration reform. what they don't want is amnesty, but they also want compassion. i think the democrats keeping this as a political football for their advantage, i think at some point that political football has a shelf life. i will tell you that president obama had, when he came into office he said he would tackle

immigration reform. he had a majority in the house, a super majority in the senate. he did absolutely nothing about immigration reform. i think it's a little cynical to say the president is now coming to the table talking about immigration reform when he could have done it then. i think we need to move forward as a nation -- our security, our economy and our nation as a country. >> i want to ask all three of you. do you think we can stop illegal immigration with legislation? stop talking about it, just deal with it, like we do other issues? >> yes, i think we can absolutely take steps to take care of the problem. >> can we end illegal immigration? >> of course we can. of course we can figure out a way that people don't have to come undocumented and stay. a lot of the immigrants don't come here necessarily want to stay here. people will say, no, of course, i want to stay and have american children.

you want to go back to your country if you can. you want to come here and work and go back in an easy, efficient, reliable way. >> danny, are you optimistic we could some day, in the next five, ten years, sit down, both parties, a chance for people who have been here for a while, to stop the illegal hiring, the whole bit? we know what it is. >> here's the three or four things that need to happen. we need to do a better job of securing our borders. we have operational control. number two, there needs to be a legal viable system by which it meets the needs of our economy. it works really well, that allows folks to come in, take seasonal jobs, and be able to go back to their home countries. that is the way to stop the need for illegal immigration. i'll be honest with you, i know that along the border we've had two signs, one says keep out, and the other one says we're hiring. >> i know. >> but a guest worker program,

labor unions in this country are against the guest worker program. that's the problem. >> i know. >> everybody was coming here documented, is not necessarily coming in through the border. we have to make it clear that our problems of undocumented immigrants are not through the mexican border necessarily, they're through the airports and they overstay their visas. >> i want to stop the illegal hiring. thank you danny, janice, and sabrina. we'll be back right after this.

0

let me finish tonight with this storm that netanyahu started. all he had to do is speak out. that's what he could have done, speak out the second he heard that the invitation that he had was not issued by at american president. he said i will come if the invitation is bipartisan. just say, i don't like the way this thing has been handled. i have no intention to do this under the table. no intention of disrespecting the president of the united states. even if we disagree, i will not abuse the historic ties between our two countries, with democrats and republicans alike. here's a thought, the prime minister can say at the front of his remarks next week that he didn't know. nobody told him that the president was not duly informed of it. if mr. prime minister you knew

from the outset this was all to blindside the president and humiliate him, that's the problem, isn't it. thanks for being with us. stay tuned right now for our >> good evening from south florida. tonight the stakes could not be higher. right here on this stage, president obama will be joining me. the topic, his executive actions on immigration and the serious fight over funding homeland security. tonight, from the campus of florida international university, an msnbc and telemundo exclusive, a town hall with president obama. >> i have the legal authority to take it as president to make the immigration system work more fair and just. >> executive action or executive overreach. >> we don't believe the president has the authority to do what he did. >> the president taking questions from the audience in