>> from washington, "the mclaughlin group" the american original, for over three decades the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. john: issue one a complex relationship. >> he is going to help me fill out my bracket. >> he is going to teach me

john: four years ago president barack obama and british prime minister david cameron bonded over basketball. the special relationship seemed both personal and strong. but in 2016, the special relationship is a little more complicated. enter everygoldberg writing at "the atlantic" magazine he quoted president obama as lamenting mr. cameron's intentions toward libya. mr. cameron, mr. obama said will become distracted by a range of other things. brittons react the angrily. still "the mclaughlin group" spotted the tensions before most. during our december 12, 2014, episode we noted growing disagreement between the u.s. and u.k. over defense spending while those tensions are now resolved u.k. and u.s. relations

what is wrong here, pat? pat: i think, john, first off the president of the united states even if that's the way he felt shouldn't be saying that to mr. goldberg of the atlantic giving his feelings on relationship with one our oldest and best and most reliable allies. the reality is since the ends of the cold war the interests have begun to diverge and no doubt in the middle east everybody with the french, british, americans were hot to intervene in libya then walked away and it has gone to hell in a hand basket. so i guess that the president of the united states is miffed with cameron. but i don't think you say those things to journalists, and say them especially about an ally like the brits but there's no question when it comes to defense effort and rest of it the two countries are moving gradually apart. eleanor: i think that is a pretty mild rebuke and the relationship between cameron and

on libya, the british parliament is investigating the british involvement in libya because they were in the forefront of the effort to overturn that regime and afterwards the brits were in charge of basically training the libyan military and then abruptly pulled out. so, the parliament is investigating how libya became such a catastrophe not only to the libyan people but the british interests. after qaddafi was ousted david cameron visited libra twice taking basically a victory lap. so i think what the president said maybe he should not have said it but i think he spoke the truth, that mr. cameron has gotten distracted. among them is keeping the u.k. in the european union. and the president really is behind him on that.

big rift here. john: what are principal tenets of the obama doctrine as articulated by president obama to the atlantic's jeffrey goldberg. >> the most basic is the don't do institute r dispute -- but to try to promote leadership by regional actors. i don't think it works out that way and i think the middle east is a testament to the failure of that viewpoint. but i think the -- i agree with pat and eleanor to some degree president obama shouldn't have said there to jeffrey goldberg. i think he regrets it. but he has understandable and legitimate points of grievance in terms of european allies saying one thing and doing another and not pulling their weight on defense. britain is better than most but not good enough. germany is the worst example. but the agree they play games

and complaining that the united states must do more but with britain a big point of contention is with china and asia investment bank where the british government is more closely aligned with china than the obama administration would want. on the british side more annoyed about the real point of grievance about the falklands where the administration through john kerry seemed to suggest that was open to negotiation. i think this will be washed away. >> libya is a special frustration because he elected to get us out of wars in afghanistan and iraq. this was a war he got us into with the best of intentions trying to do something to save people from being massacred by qaddafi. he was overthrown but it turned into a mess because england not being there when we needed them, at the same time the u.s. got tied up in iraq and other middle east problems.

president obama because his doctrine such as it is, is to try to work with partnerships and not be aggressive with our unilateralism. that is not going to work unless you can get countries like england -- pat: he went in for humanitarian reasons to stop qaddafi from overrunning benghazi and perpetrating a massacre. we should have held him up 48 hours and said you are on your own. we went in for humanitarian reasons and left a humanitarian disaster for everybody in that place. hillary clinton is responsible, the brits and french are responsible. the president is responsible. if there is an archetype of what a disastrous intervention is. eleanor: it was a nato operation and everybody took great pride in the fact that nobody died on the nato side and this was accomplished so well.

the day after and month after and year after. i think that was what was behind the president's remark in that interview. tom: i do think conservatives have to be criticizing the president too strongly because people annoyed with the europeans are the u.s. military because the europeans claim a lot of credit as in iraq and syria but the missions and refueling all of that is manifestly with the united states military. absent that it would fundamentally be incapable. pat: as somebody said the brits fired about two dozen cruise missiles then had to go back whom and get some more. tom: that is embarrassing. the special forces the union is very strong and british lost a lot of policeman in afghanistan and -- people in afghanistan and iraq. john: has president obama

policy for the better or for the worst, pat buchanan? pat: i think it is a combination. his reluctance to intervene is good but libya is a disaster and he should not have put the red line down. so, i think overall i don't give him high marks but his fundamental idea that we go in, we go together and get out and come home is right but the application has been very poor. eleanor: he recognizes that we can't go in alone and the american people don't want to go it alone and he tried to engage the world. he had some notable successes. i would put the iran nuclear deal and opening of relations with cuba on that list. >> i think american influence and the idea he seeks the best practice you have to show consolidation at certain points that are clear and it will be a big stain. 250, 250,000 dead. >> i think he added a much needed caution to overseas

we are going to go in and solve other people's problems and install democracy overnight. we learned those hard lessons. what to do now is more complicated. john: threats from isis and al qaeda have multiplied under obama's watch. so, our foreign policy is worse because of obama's transformations. relations with russia and china are worse. and america is less trusted by its allies. what do you think of that? >> the problem with isis came about because he underestimated their ability to grow as they have and their aggressiveness. we learned those hard lessons. he turned the table on isis. they have lost ground more recently and less organized. but it is still going to be a long hard slug. john: what do we have in the

>> we have to defend our interests and that is the primary element. eleanor: to make sure we don't get involved in another land war in the middle east. that is why we have a defense department. john: why don't they keep him informed? >> they do. eleanor: i think the president is acting on his understanding of what american power can do and american power military power is not going to solve what is happening in the middle east. john: when we come pwabgback trade voters. >> did you find the flashlight and batteries? >> yes. >> did you make sure we are not missing anything in the first aid kit? >> yep. >> did you go through the thing with the kids again?

>> the more you prepare today the more you can reduce the devastating effects of a

ou john: issue two. life boat for lula? >> home to energetic soccer the amazon rain forest, 2016 olympic games and 200 million people, brazil is a vibrant nation and with an annual g.d.p. of nearly $2 poeu $2.25 trillion it is increasingly wealthy. but led by president dilma rousseff, brazil is in political crisis. that is because already facing impeachment for possibly concealing government budget deficits president rousseff has

corruption scandal. fearing for their democracy, millions of brazilians are taking to the streets to demand justice justice. note this. another target of petrobras corruption investigators former president luiz inacio lula da silva silva, known as lula, has just joined rousseff's cabinet. while a judge has put a hold on his appointment, lula's rationale seems obvious. under brazilian law lula's government office will shield him from easy prosecution and because lula is lightly influential in brazil's congress, rousseff hopes he will prevent her impeachment. question, why did former president luiz inacio lula da silva take a position in rousseff's government. you want to try that, eleanor?

because under brazilian law a member of the cabinet can only be tried by the supreme court and apparently that takes months and years so in effect it put a cordon around him that he could not be prosecuted. but there is a huge betrayal of the people of brazil especially poor people. they revered lula. this is a huge blow and the people in the streets tends to be not the poor but the more well off people who are angry about the collapse of the government. but it is the poor people who have been betrayed here. you have brazil going in and they have the olympics coming, they are battling the zika virus virus, it is hard to see how this government performs. it is essentially paralyzed. pat: this is worse tan -- than watergate. not only is the president caught up in scandals this is the predecessor leader with two

cover him and given him a measure of immunity from prosecution. and judges are going after the government. i don't know how the government survives too much longer and as eleanor mentioned you have the mosquito borne disease down there that people read about all over the world. then you have the olympics coming up this summer, i guess. so, i think brazil is in very tough shape and wouldn't surprise me to see the government thrown out either legally or by the crowds in the street. eleanor: they have a huge economic recession to add. >> i think three lessons. first it is the lesson of what happens when you have a socialist government structure imbued with economics. it is ripe for corruption. that is why i think we should be careful having politicians talking about infrastructure spending without oversight. eleanor: that is ridiculous. >> government has political insulation of itself.

in brazil is you have poor people and frankly you have to governor the government credit. most of the programs have a poverty program with a lot of research and good effect. and with there moment of crisis with the judiciary providing scrutiny it will cause the beginning powerful institutions like the f.b.i. that we have, uncorrupt uncorruptibles who will address the issues. but it will be hard. you see similar things in south africa. that is why you need a strong independent jew dish share. >> those institutions are very important but this is fundamentally a personal corruption that is going on here here, the present president was a protege of lula and so crony inch comes in on top -- cronyism

eleanor: i want to say that i think corruption is blind when it comes to ideology. you can find people across the spectrum. >> not dealing with politics. pat: you mentioned south africa, you take the famous bricks, the emerging companies, brazil, russia, indiana, china, south africa and turkey. turkey has a horrendous problem with almost a dictator. five years ago a country what we had friends in every direction and now we have virtually enemies will every direction. involved in the battle in syria, fighting against the kurds. the world is in a very bad place. eleanor: how did we get from brazil to turkey? pat: one of these emerging powers. >> one of the positives i give

things in foreign policy outstretched africa in terms of rule of law. he is focused on that as it develops and china has the same cronyism problems. i think it is a greating of why people should look to the united states for a rules based system. eleanor: what about the special interest and control and best congress money can buy? i won't put the u.s. naturally above every other country. >> i will. >> i will say president barack obama looks to mandela in africa. >> they betrayed the legacy. pat: south africa is in a disaster with the zumaya practice character and they have the people waiting or basically very hard liners waiting for power. >> one thing that has kept them at bay is strong institutions

>> they got rid of the skorpcorpionscorpion. john: is that brazil's equivalent of julian assange. pat: nothing like it, john. nothing like it. john: he is frequently as long's he stays beyond the reach of the law. pat: he is not some character that released documents. eleanor: if you much putting money on whether he can dodge the bullet when it comes to legal prosecution, i put my money on lula. >> assange was involved in something larger than just himself here. and we are talking about sanctuary of sorts being offered by the law there in brazil. after that the similarities fade. john: brazil is depending too much on trade with china. issue three, hackers beware. >> my budget includes more than $19 billion for cybersecurity

john: hackers. whether stealing personal information like credit card or social security numbers or pilfering the innovative developments of u.s. companies, or copying u.s. government secrets, hackers are waging constant war with the united states. some of these tackers work -- attackers work independently, some for criminal organizations, others for governments like china, iran and russia. president obama responded to criticism that his administration has done too little to counter lookers so he requested $19 billion to defend the u.s. government's information technology infrastructure infrastructure. funds he says are crucial for the nation's security. what is the most effective response to this kind of hacking, more security or more cyber deterrence? there you go, clarence.

chasing the hackers is specially complicated because they are always coming up with new techniques and methods so we need to be guarded in both ways, both preventing them from getting in and also being able to detect what they are doing and be able to use it to our advantage especially when overseas governments try to hack it. john: cybersecurity didn't stop 22 million o.p.m. files from being hacked by china. cyber deterrence should be tried. is u.s. counterhacking policy today anal analogous before 9/11 to rely on law enforcement? pat: when you are dealing with china you are dealing with governmental hacking. you have to have the ability to counterattack what they are doing. but given the proceed live

of i.t.'s and the rest of this and ability of young kids and people to break through it, i think there is an enormous problem ongoing and something in which i think the united states and russia and other countries we are all going to have an interest in preventing and blocking and protecting what we've got going in these countries because the most advanced countries are the most vulnerable. eleanor: it is a new frontier for defense spending. i think the administration's response now is to let next who are doing it know we know they are doing it and you kind of send back little pledges but to avoid getting into a full cyber warfare. tom: the problem is we have to take more response to attacks because the chinese are place for a joke. the president signs an agreement with them and they break it. john: is president obama's $19

request too little, too late, yes or no? pat: i think it is far more than it was and i think it is accurate but i do not know. eleanor: i think that he ought to be able to get it if he gets anything. tom: we need it and tpwhraoed people to stop using personal e-mail. clarence: it is like donald trump's wall should it be 10 feet or 30 feet. spending shouldn't be wasteful. how about that for the purpose an answer? john: i buy that. we will be right back with predictions. >> looking for these? you drive buzz it could be one expensive ride. first you have to make bail. then pay me to get your car back. >> your insurance premiums will go through the roof. >> and my legal fees keep adding up. all told it can cost you

>> buzzed, john: prediction. hillary clinton will secure the necessary delegates to lock up their party as nomination before republican frontrunner donald trump and trump will lock up the nomination before the g.o.p. convention. pat. pat: the hillary clinton is already there if she can defeat f.b.i. director. but with regard to the republicans i did believe that despite what everyone says that trump will have enough delegates to go over the top before he arrives at cleveland for an exciting convention. eleanor: yes to literal and maybe for trump. tom: yes to hillary. i don't think trump will but the

out his writing. clarence: i say yes on both. john: double yes. she gets the delegates first and

bye-bye. [ male announcer ] the following is a paid presentation for nutrisystem. [ amanda ] being a single working mom, the biggest challenge is not running through the fast food because we're rushing from point "a" to point "b". i don't want to end up like my mom, and i don't want to end up like my grandparents, who struggled with weight all their life. and i don't want my life to be about my weight. i thought that i would have a belly like this. i was always proud of my flat belly. so when i couldn't suck it in anymore, i was very ashamed of myself.