arrested. france quickly issued a new arrest warrant with more charges to speed up the extradition but the process may still take up to three months. investigators into the paris attacks now hope abdulsalam will reveal information about the isis network behind him. he confessed already to prosecutors that he planned to blow himself up that night but he changed his mind. prosecutors alsclaim that leading up to the attack, he traveled around europe picking up other attackers and that he was the one who bout hydrogen peroxide to make the explosives. his lawyer said was cooperating. >> there is a cooperation with the belgium justice. let's go further on with that corroboration. i think it's very important that he talks with t judge. >> reporter: aul salam was caught 500 yards from his parents' home. he was tracked down when a friend called the police and

he was using. today the belgium interior minister said he was shocked at the level of support he received while on the run it was a lot higher than previously expected. and now the hunt is on for anyone else that may want to commit attacks. benjamin hl, thank you for. that now let's get reaction to the white house from denis m mcdonough. wewecome back to "fox news sunday." what's the significance of the capture? what is it going to help us do in terms of stopping future isis terror attacks. >> it's important because it sends a very strong message that our allies and we in support of them are not going to stop until we get all the facts of this case figured out. and now i know there will be an intensive process to figure out what he knows an what he did and what he knows about what others may be doing. and that's why it's important that we dig very hard into this case and why the president called the french president and the about belgium prime minister on friday.

we know that he is said some@ stuff to belgium prosecutors. but do we know whether or not in fact he is cooperating, the degree to his cooperation? d what about an electronic trail that he may have left? >> i don't know much about. that. >> what are we learning both from this and the pior investigation over the last four months about the extent of the isis terror network in europe? how many operatives they have? p>> we do know that they say and say. they intend to do this again. we take that seriously. but well trained. we're sharing the intelligence and training with them. that is what we're doing.

attack on paris and abdeslam was involved in, do we believe it was directed and planned by isis people were involved? indication that's in fact that it goes back to some of those folks back in the middle east. but we're going to get to bottom of this storey. but what we're not goi to do is let our guard down. that means staying on offense iraq. that's why we did that over the months. we're not going to sit and wait. we're going to go get this. >> i'm going to ask you stond by for a moment. >> the othererig news this week is the president's pick for the supreme court judge merrick garland. senate republicans have vowed not to hold hearings or vote on the nomination and let the next presiden fill the seat. we'll get mr. mcdonough's reaction in a moment. first, mitch mcconnell junz me from louisville. senator, support for ur hard line on the garland nomination

now said they're going to meet with garland and late thiseek illinois senator mark kirk said this just man up and cast a vote. it's been only four days and it seems like your ranks are breaking, sir. >> senator kirk is a terrific senator. he's gong to be re-elected in november. i think what we need to focus on is the principle, the principle. who ought to make this appointment? you have to go back 80 years the last time a vacancy on the supreme court created in a presidential election year was filled. you have to go back to 1888 when grover cleveland was in the white house to find the last time when a vacancy was created in a presidential year, a senate controlled about it party opposite the president confirmed. the senate has a role to play here. the president nominates, we decide to confirm. we think the important principle

presidential election is that american people need to weigh in and decide who's going to make this decision. not this lame duck president on the way out the door, but the next president. >> you talk about principle, anything that happens in washington involves principle and politics and what we see with mark kirk is a sator or republican senator up in a tough re-election battle and thinking this is a hard line to hold. and i guess i have to ask you, isn't this going to be a hard argument to make over the next seven months? if you're going to say the president can'tdecide something, can't get his nominee confirmed because it's an election year, couldn't you say the same thing about the u.s. senate that you shouldn't pass any laws? you shouldn't do anything because in a sense you're a lame duck congress? >> no, we're following the biden rule.

a on filling a supreme court vacancy if it had occurred that year. harry reid when he was back in 2005 said the president nominates but the senate doesn't have to vote. chuck schumer who will be the next democratic leader said in 2007 they wouldn't confirm. the democrats were in the majority in e senate. they wouldn't confirm a bush appointment to the supreme court if one occurred within 18 moves a presidential election. so all we're doing, chris, is following a long staing tradition of not filling vacancies on the supreme court in the middle of a presidential election year. >> i am going to ask mr. m mcdonough about the biden rule in a moment. frankly, isn't there a fair amount of hypocrisy on both sides here? right now president obama is calling for an up or down vote you oppose. that but back in 2005 when george w. bush was president, you made exactly the same argument that obama's making now.

>> in a democracy, an up or down vote should be given to a president'sjudicial nominees. it's not complicated. it's simple. it's fair. it worked foror 229 years. and it has served us well. >> senator, if an up or down vote for a judicial nominee was simple, fair, and a principle that has served us for 229 years, i guess over 230 years now, if that's true then, it is still true? >> yeah. we're talking apples and oranges. that comment was not in connection with the suprem court vacancy an sichlt. they're not the same. the supreme court very different from the other courts. what we're talking about here is a supreme court vacancy in the middle of a presidential election year made by a lame duck president who is on the way out the door and the impact that will have on this court for the next quarter of a century. that is the issue before us

>> some of your republican lleagues are already suggesting that if your side, if the gop loses the election in november that perhaps they would consider judge garland in a lame duck session because, in fact, he might be more moderate than, let's say, hillary clinton's nominee would be. here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, , hen i think we oug to push him through quickly if we can. senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge.

whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people a choosing their next president and their next president should pick thiu supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. just to make it clear. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? yououe going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate would want to confirm in a lame duck session a nonee opposed by the national rifle association, the national federation of independent business that represents small businesses that have never taken a position on the supreme court o pointment before. they're opposed to this guy. i can't imagine that a republican majority senate even if it were assumed to be a minority, would want to confirm a judge that would most court dramatically to the left. that's not going to happen.

>> thank you. >> now let's bring back the white house chief of staff denis mcdonough. president obama is calling now for an up or down vote on the nomination of merrick garland. back#in 2006, senator obama participated in the filibuster of sam alead yoeowe lead yoe's nomination. he said the senate should not consider a supreme court nomination in an election year. let's watch. >> the senate judiciary committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over. >> question, aren't obama and biden making exactly the opposite argument now from what

>> chris, you said justice oledo. >> who has been it is sitting on the supreme court forhe last ten years. him. >> so he's been on the court for the last decade. to a hearing. did not object t t private meetings, and did not object to votes in the committee and senate. >> he tried to filibuster him. >> whether you think of vice president biden and the r le he played as chairman of the senate judiciary committee, nine supreme court justices came before him when he was chairman. everyone was given a hearing, meetings, a vote, and even when they were tl were not enough votes in the committee to pass him with that justice with majority vote, they still went to the senate floor this vote at the full senate. we think that's what should happen here. >> but a lot of those things happened either in spite of or over their opposition. >> on the contrary. he was chairman of the judiciary committee. thing don't hppen in the judiciary committee over or in spite of the objection of the chairman.

chairman makes it happen. vice president biden ensured that every one of those justices had a hearing, including, by the way in, 1988, an election year when president reagan proposed a republican president, proposed a democratic senate a supreme court justice. and in fact, justice kennedy who has now been on the court since 1988 was passed unanimously by the senate. we think the same thing should happen for judge garland. >> do you think that the senate has a constitutional obligation? >> we think that it is quite clear in the constitution that when there is a vacanc they propose the nominee and we think as been the practice for decades, in fact, centuries in the senatete that advise and consent means meetings, public hring where that judge in this case judge garland is willing to go unr oath on national television and answer their questions and then a vote in the comttee and a vote in the senate. that's what should happen here. >> "the washington post" did a

they actually gave that idea that there is a constitutional obligation, they said first of all the constitution says nothing about a votete it says advice and consent before a confirmation. and secondly, there has been a long history, mostly in the 19th century that the senate has decided not to act in a number of cases. >> look, chris, we don't need to jump back to the 19th century or the 1800s. we're in the21st century. look at the precedent over the course of the last many decades and as was the case on vice president biden was chairman of the committt, every nominee got a hearing, got meings, got votes and committee and got a vote on the floor. there is not difficult. this is the way they operate in the senate the this he have not reached back to the will 1800's. >> as we discussed with senator mcconnell,,everal republican senators are now saying that they're willing to meet with judge garland and illinois republican senator mark kirk is

up and vote. how big an issue do you think that you can make this in the november election? how much heat do you think can you put on senate republicans? >> well, like we don't think there is an election issue. we think this is a straight up governance issue. when senator mcconnell -- >> wait. the president, you, you're all meeting and mobilizing various groups on your side. there is nothing wrong with it being a political issue. i mean, you're trying to put heat on these people. >> you just asked what -- how big an issue it will be in the election? this can be resolved. the average time from announcement of nomination to election is 67 days. they indicated to us that they'll meet -- the republican of maine -- indicated she'll meet with judge garland after the senate gets back from the two week break. we think that's good progress. we'll continue to make this

this shouldn't be anssue in any election. they can resol of this in plenty of time and in the time they have. we believe there is consistent with the comments that senate mcconnell made when he took over the senate. he wanted to get congress working again. well, getting congress working again would an just obviously giving him a hearing, a vote, and getting this ton. not taking this unprecedented step. >> one final question. some republican senators say, look, if the democrats end up winning the white house in november, let's say hillary clinton, well, then maybe we'll consider judge gar landland in a lame duck session. has the president made a commitment to garland that he'll stand about it nomination or might he, let's say clinton wins in november, might he pull the nomination and let her pick the next supreme court justice? >> the president wiwi stand by his nominee. this is an unbelievably qualified, extraordinarily decent man who comes to this nomination with more federal court experience than any

he led our effort into the investigation and prosecution for the oklahoma city bombing, the unabomber and he's just as you've seen in the stories, an extraordinarily decent man. we'll stand by him froro now until he is confirmed and he is sitting on the supreme court. >> through the end gf the president's term? >> that's correcec >> mr. mcdonough. thank you for coming in. always good to talk with you. >> thank you. >> up next, we'll bring in our sunday group to discuss judge garland's nomination and what you would tlik as the panel about theheupreme court bat snl just go to facebook or twitter

the air. this week. >> that was judge merrick garland. now time to introduce george will, lisa leer and kristen soltis anderson and bob

your opinion about the nomination. >> the republicans have two reasons for taking a posiion. one is to demonstrate to the republican base something that they very much doubt which is there is some reason to want the republicans to control the senate. ttey can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stata up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz slgzling is they all said he'' support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have jicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufgsslifications are fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch

follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you forquestions for the panel. and following up on the point that george made, we got this from rob danger. he tweeted this. will senate majority leader mitch mcconnell keep his word or fold like he usually does? kristen, at a time,,ant to pick up on this question of trying to keep faith with the base, at a time when grassroots support for the republican leadership here in washington is at all time low, when can you just see t`is

they trusthat the d.c. estalishment is going to stand up for them, is this an infective wayinfect ive effective way for him to mobilize the base? can he keep the soldiers in line? >> remember that mitch mcconnell came out with a strategy pretty much the day that vacancy came open. he knew th if there was even a hypothetical that this would be the sort of thing where senate republicans might entertain the president's nominee, might allow the court to move to the left, that there would be outrage. he wanted to shut that down right away. look at the members of the senate who are beginning to say i would be willing to have a meeting with the nominee. they are republicans up for re-election and they are in purple state. there are states that unlikely to vote for a republican nominee in a presidential election. and maybe to differentiate themselves from the national party narrative so at the same time their state is voting for a democratic canddate at the top of the ticket, is still sending them back to washington f frther

>> bob, i thought that the white house chief of staff made some news in our interview here. went further than the white house has so far in saying that obama is going to stick by the garland nomination even into a lame duck, even if, let's say, hillary clinton is elected president that he would s sck by the garland nomination. kind of interesting that he's saying, you know, i'm going to stay by him and if hillary clinton, even if he'sust been lekted ed elected president, if they want to nfirm my nominee, so be it. >> this is all about politics. this is pure politics on both sides and as you pointed out, hypocrisy on both sides. >> both sides argued exactly the opposite side. >> exactly. and what mcconnell, the senate majority leader is saying, hey, look, we -- and it's the advice and consent provision in the constitution. we can do it any way we want.

there is nothing in the constitution that says you have to do it in a t tely fashion and so forth. so this -- this -- the issue is whether you can make the court a majority liberal body. everyone concedes that if garland goes on the court you're going to have five votes on the liberal side. what is interesting and george has pointed this out. galand is an extraordinary judge. he is somebody -- i did a book years ago on the supreme court and tried to follow it since. and he's exactly the sort of person that should be on the court. he's reasonable. he stens. he is not really partisan in any way. >> wait a minute. wait a minute. you know what a aot of pep are going to say is when it comes down to a decision and it's 5-4, he'll end up being with the liberal judges as opposed to the

>> he will. look,step back. there will be liberals and conservatives on the court and if you are going to have some liberals have the sensible -- have rational person, i mean, like lots of people said about scalia, they didn't agree with him. he served an important function on the court. that's the way it works. u have to be a consensus builder and garland is somebody like. that but i don't think he's going to make it. i don't think he's going to be confirmed. >> lisa, let's pick up opop this from the political side of the democrats. democratic aspect, they clearly found that this argument, do your job. you're there. you're there for anoer eight months or whatever it is. and the idea that you're simply going to refuse to have a hearing, refuse vote, when you talk to the sanders and clinton camps, do they think this is effective and will move votes in the fall election?

denis mcdonough say it's not a election year issue. they think it is an effective issue. they'll need to do two things in the fall, rally their base and pull over independents. they think they ca allow them to do both. it's a strong emote vathe motivator for base democrats. they also think if trump is at the top of the republican ticket, they may be able to pullll over some moderate republicans who may not like the idea of donald trump next -- picking the next supreme court justice, particularly as democrats like to point out, he said that his sister would be an excellent justice and she has a record of being very pro abortion rights. sosohey think this is an area where they can make a really strong political argument. the politics get a little more complicated once you get into a lame duck session. because ququte frankly, merrick garland is not the nominee that i think hillary clinton would like to choose. >> she would pick someone more liberal. zbh a lot of the liberal groups

that's why you see them focusing on the need for a vote and not really talking all that much about the nominee and certain not saying whether they would keep himimnd renominate him should either hillary clinton or bernie sanders win the presidency. >> so george, in less than a nute we have left in the segment, what about the lame duck scenario? that hillary clinton wins or donald trump wins and some of those republicans say, you know what? merrick garland doesn't look like such a bad nominee. >> if president crewsuz is president-elect, you wait for the nominee. if trump is esident-elect, you have to guess who will be the nominee. let's say the present says i know what mcdonough said to wallace, but let's adhere to the mcconnell rule. the mcconnell rule is that

president after the people have spoken. the peoplelhave said mrs. clinton and mrs. clinton says, fine. let's draw mr. garland and appoint a 43-year-old, not a 63-year-old, not a moderate but a 43-year-old firebrand, certainly republicans are right. >> all right. we have to take a break here, panel. see you later. up next, governor john kasich is hanging his hopes on a contested convention. we'll ask the presidential candidate about his path to the nomination, plus what do you think? wold an open convention divide the republican party? let me know on facebook or twitter@ twitter. and can you explain why you recommend synthetic over cedar? "super food?" is that a real thing? it's a great school, but is itthe right one for her? is this really any better than the one you got last year? if we consolidate suppliers, what's the savings there? so should we go with the 467 horsepower? ...or is a 423 enough? good question. you ask a lot of good questions... i think we should move you into our new fund. sure... ok.

a look outside the beltway of salt lake city ahead of this week's caucuses there. governor john kasich won his home sta of ohio tuesday. even though it's his only victory so far, he saiaithat's enough to keep him in the race for president. i spoke with kasich who was campaigning in utah. >> governor, let's start with your strategy to win the republican nomination. right now donald trump has 678 delegates, ted cruz has 423. you have 143. even if you win every one of the remaining delegates, 100%, you would sttll be short of the 1,237 majority you need. so what is your path? how does the republican convention turn to you? >> well, first of all, chris, nobody is going to have enough

we are going to go to a convention. it's going to be open. and let me also tell you that for the first time in this race in the last 2 1/2 or 3 weeks, i received more national media attention in the last three weeks than i did in the last six months. and we're rising. our rallies are strong. we are raising money. we're bringing more people in to our effort. aa we're going to get to the convention and i've been to a convention that was contested in 1976 as a young guy. but let me tell you,u, when you get to a convention, there are two considerations,,one, who can win in the fall? i'm the only one that can win in the fall. and then there is a second issue, i know this was a crazy one. who actually could be president of united states? i think that kind of matters, too. so i see the convention as nothing more than an extension of this whole politic process. and i'm very comfortable with heading to that convention with momentum and more delegates and we'lllet the people there make a choice.

to keep him from the 1237, some people questioning why you're even campaigning in utah because the fact is that if ted cruz were to win 50% of vote, he would get all of the delegate but you by campaigning there are splitting the anti-trump vote. i want to put up what mitt romney said. he'll vote for cruz in utah, explaining, a vote for governor case nick future contests makes it likelyyhat trumpism would prevail. your response, sir? >> i don't agree with him. secondly, people tried to get me out of the race and said that rubio should be the pick. and i didn't stayed in the race and won in ohio, trum whop have won both florida and ohio. but i want to make something clear to people. i'm not in this to try to stop somebody. i'm in this to tell people about my experience, my record, my vision, and my ability to bring people together and to be a successful president of the united states.

into some sort of a political science class with a bunch of pundits trying to play a parlor game. i'm not interested in that. chris, my entire lifetime has been to bring about change. do you knn how many people in the establishment i made angry whether i reformed the entagon? do you know how many people in the establishment i made angry when i balanced the federal budget? do you know how many people got upset what wh i brought change in ohio? i'm a change agent. we're seeing the establish. people one more time trying to stop me. i'm interested in iproving this country and being a good president and that's precisely why i'm running. and people are beginning to understand my vision and my message because finally people re beginning to allow me to be heard. >> well, i want to ask you about being allowed to be heard. fox news was scheduled to hold a debate tomorrow in salt lake city. trump said, number we were still going to hold it with you and ted cruz.

people by saying you weren't going to participate in the debate including charles krouthammer. >> he complained sec ignored, pnot getting enough time, whining about it again and again. he and carson. and here he is being offered two hours without the interruptions of trump to him and cruz. he can present his case and he turns it down. >> governor? >> i'm disappointed to hear charles say. that he says that i was whining? let me tell you "the new york times" had a piece the other day that showed that donalal trump received $1.8 billion worth of national media attention. and i was like tenth. look, i'm not going to go to a debate where we don't have everybody involved in the race involved in the debate. so what am i doing? i'm using my time to campaign the most effective way i can. i have never thought that these debates were the best way to pick a president. if somebody wants to sit down with me for an hour and interview me and ask me any question about my record, my

experience, my domestic policy that. but, you know, i love charles krouthammer. he's a good guy. maybe smimd peopleometimes people just don't understand the way i wosh in politi. i'm not a plodder or schemer. i look at problems and try solve them which i've done all of my career, creating jobs in washington, creating jobs in ohio. not me creating them, but creating an atmosphere and having the experience to run this country. >> you have talked, as you say, about running a positive campaign. you also have criticized donald trump for creating a toxic atmosphere when it come to violence for speaking in what you consider objectable ways about women. what do you think of trump and the campaign he's running? >> well, you know, look, i heard yesterday that his family was threatened. and that disappointed me. there is no place for this kii of back and forth in violence. so from that regard, i was disappointed to hear that people

that's a disgrace. t i also have pointed out at times when i thought his language was inappropriate like if i don't get nominated, there is going to be a riot. what kind of talk is that? but i have to tell you, chris, i've done more town halls and more interaction with all the voters. i take questions from the crowd. you guys follolo it. and at the end of the day, i rarely ever rarely mention anybody else's name because i spend my time giving them the answers about what i want to do, what my vision is and that's the way i really proceed. >> let me ask you about a specific question and the time we have remaining. i want to explore your position people in this country illegally. you have called them a critical part of our ssiety. you called them good people. they're not criminals. >> well, look, chris, what i've said is that, you know, reagan tried to fix this whole thin in 1986. and it didn't work. we didn't finish the border.

once it's nished, people cannot sneak in. they shouldn't sneak in now. they have to be sent home. we should have a guest worker program. and for the 11.5 million here & who are illegal, if they didn't commit a crime, i would give them a path to legalization, delay in any kind of benets they get. i think that is a reasonable approach approach. but not a path to citizenship. my position has not changed. the idea that we're going to frpg people out of their homes and leave kids crying on the porch, that's not what we're gogong to do. that is more promises that will never happen and the people will become more cynical. i don't make promises, by and large, that i can't keep. i try to keep what i s. i'm not deviated from this position at all. >> but you know what ted cruz calls that. he calls it amnesty. >> he can call it anything he wants. to i'm just telling you my position@and i believe that position will be accepted by the american people and that

i lay this out in every town hall meeting. if somebody asks me, i tell them. look -- >> in the 30 seconds we have left, what about theargument they did break the law? they came into this country illelly. >> they d. >> and you're letting them basically -- be ableeo stay in the country despite that. >> chris, chris, i know that you don't believe that we can go house-to-house and block to block trying to track these people down to ship th out. you know that. come on. the people know it, too. that's just silly. you know what? i'm in this race to t t to fix things, not to go out and make crazy promises that are not going to happen that, are going to further aggravate the american people. so, look, you know, people don't like that position, that's okay. i'm cool with it. but i'm not going to change my position because i think it's reasonable and this whole problem is fixable. reagan tried. job. >> governor kasich, thank you. always good to have you. >hank you. i enjoyed it to day, chris.

>> it was fun. up next, will bring back the panel to discuss the republican party's stop trump movement. it is too little too late? your path to retirement... may not always be clear. but at t. rowe price, we can help guide your retirement savings. for over 75 years, investors have relied on our disciplined approach to find long term value.

retirement journey takes you, we can help you reach your goals. call a t. rowe price retirement specialist or your advisor ...to see how we can help make the most of your retirement savings. t. rowe price.

protesters shut down a highway before a donald trump event yesterday. we're back now with the panel. there were protests not just in arizona but also in new york city outside the trump tower on fifth avenue. you can see the protest there. and all of this adding to concerns among the republican establishment and movement conservatives about donald trump actually winning the nomination. kristen, every day there is a new story whether it's a bunch of fat cats have dinner at some club here or now there i i a new story about a third party and tom coburn, the retired senator from oklahoma running as a third party cancandidate. how seriously should we take this talk? >> the stop trump movement may have run out of time. there is so much time spent last fall attacking donald trump and be insufficiently conservative. those attacks fell flat. most voters don't like him because they think he's

the time has eehe lachsed. if you like donald trump, it's unlikely you'll be persuaded to chafrpg your mind. so i think at this point the math or for anybody to stop trump before the convention becomes ve hard. he'll pick up delegates in arizona. we'll move forward into a state like new york or the last poll showed him upup by 50 points. this looks pretty good for him for the next month and a half or. so it's going to be very difficult for folks to stop him from winning the republican nomination. >> do you agree with that, bob? >> yes. i mean, first of all, if you try to excavate this, you realize the only way for trump probably now to get the nomination is for him to withdraw. and that is not going to happen. if there is one thing that trump does, he never quits. and so, you know, he's got -- he's the heavy in this. and there's something that he's

that those of us who try to understand this don't understand. i was going to ask you about. that you covered a lot of campaigns. a lot of candidates. can you put this -- i'll ask george the same thing, in any kind of historical perspective? do you compare it to, you know, some people are saying richard nix none nixon in '68. what do you compare trump to? >> you can't compare him to anything. and i think there are p pple out there who just kind of say let's repot the plant. let's give somebody else a chance. it's not just angerr or disappointment in their lives. it's the sense of let's shake this up. and no one is shaking it up as much as trump. >> george? >> stylistically, trump is in the george wallace tradition. there is too much dignity in american politics, we have to have more meanness. wallace got 36 electoral votes

he has support all er the country. the problem is this, not only are his negative 61% almost doubled d s positives, 32%. but he's appealing entorely to white people. now, in 1988, george herbert walker bush got 59% of the white vote which is high. that translated in 426 electorate votes. mitt romney in 2012 got 59% of the white vote that, translated into 206 electoral votes. romnenegot 17%, that is all, of the nonwhite vote. trump by every measure would do worse than that which means he would have to get not just the 65% of the white voto to win that reagan got sweeping 49 states, he would have to get 70% of the white vote. a, it won't happen. b, it would destroy the republican party by making it the party of white people. >> now, i'm sure that clinton

look at exactly that same demographic and say that country, the democratic face -- demographic facest country is changing. on the other hand, you do hear talk, lisa, about trump reshuffles the electoral deck. that suddenly the rust belt, the industrial midwest, pennsylvania, michigan, states, wisconsin that have gone reliably for democrats for several election cycles, something would be in play. how seriously do they take that? >> smart democrats, the ones that i'm talking, to at least are not overly confident about. this and in part that's because trump ip so wildly unpredictable. like, yes, they agree on the demographics point. they're certainly going to try to boost support a ang the latino voters and women. but with trump, he had the republicans had obviously a lot of f ouble taking him out. and you just don't know what you're going to get. you don't know -- he doesn't play by the standard rules. so that makes a lot of democrats a little nervous, particularly given that hillary clinton by r own admission is not the

but the case is basically three cs, credentials, charactr, and controversy. so they're digging through the business recors. they're going to highlight deals that went badly. they'll bring back the statemenen about latinos and women and all those things and talk about his temperment. is this someone you want with e finger on the button trying to pull over moderate republicans particularly women and the swing states. >> it's'smportant that the people in the clinton campaign and as you called smart democrats are worrrred. and that, you know, this is a serious worry. and just from the polling perspective, whaha are there almost half the people don't vote, right? and trump is getting some of those people. the polls -- there are good number on that. that!s maybe why people are worried. >> let's face it. if trump is aarget rich environment, so is hillary clinton. and lord knows there is plenty

i want to ask one more thing here, kristen. trump is going to be in washington tomorrow. he's going to meet with apac, the pro-israeli lobby. he is going to have a meeting with a lot of mainstream republicans. how possible is it that he could, having taken this dance to get this far in the primaries, change his tune. i mean not change it completely but become a much more mainstream figure and somehow make an accommodation with the gop establishment? >> i believe there are many who will want to co-op donald trump, make peace with him, find a way they can still show their face at a republican convention that is nominating him and call themselves republicans and get through the next couple of months. but i think there is going to be a big division for folks consider themselves hard core conservatives who care deeply about things like limited government, who oppose someoeo who sounds like an authoritarian and wants to expand executive power. they're troubled by him and says if he define what it means to be

anymymre. >> george? >> i think it's a big, big tent can expand to include donald trump at least through november or isthis a -- stretching tight far. >> it cannot expand that far and remain a conservative party. which means it would be -- if he's the nominee, there would be no conservative running in the race and the republicans who are coming to terms with -- as collaborators with the takeover of their party have to understand that. >> and do you see a third party under those crcumstances? >> possibly. are you going to lead the ticket? >> no. i would vote for it. >> you would vlte for it. >> certainly. >> all right. wow. i think we made news ourselves. thank you, panel. see you next sunday. next, our

tested with allen. week, no not about it presidential race or the new supreme court nominee, someone more important stole the nation. week. >> hundreds of thousands of eaglette hatched. en i got caught up. how is the eaglette doing? >> almost all the way out. >> birddwatchers have been minding the nest since mid

eagles laid two eggs. excitement turned inin anticipation when the first crack was seen late wednesday on one egg. and friday, just after 8:00 in the morning, a fuzzy wing flopped out and d.c. had the latest star. the eagletteeas quieted first but quickly pepped up. the proud parents nicknamed mr. president and the first lady first nested there in 2014 when they gave birth to one eaglette. they take turns, one monitoring the nest while the other gets food often a big fish. the hatchings trending on facebook and the arboretum's eagle cam is getting millions of clicks. and on this first day of spring, we have a big happy announcement, the second baby eaglette was bo this morning. forget march madness and check out the legal cam link on our website, foxnewssunday.com. be sure to watch fox news

must see prime time lineup, interviews with all three republicanresidential candidates starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern. and that's it for today( have a great week.

sunday." president obama touching down for his first trip to cuba. we are looking at his first day on the island and what else he has in store.

voices heard taking to the streets. and people in south florida protesting the president's trip. a big music festival in south florida over the weekendnd taking a tragic turn after a university of miami student loses his life. good morning. i'm diana diaz. >> and i i ashley jones. five hours of today in florida start now. real-time closed captioning provided by u.s. captioning company. and there is a live look outside o north bay village studios on this monday morning. still dark out there. let's begin with a quick check on the weather. >> diana: meteorologist vivian gonzalez is in the weather center with t forecast. >> vivian: hi there, ladies. it was rather wet over the weekend. if you step out the door, you're going to notice a little bit of a change in the air. we have a front on the move. until sunrise, there is potential of seeing isolated showers so have the umbrellas with you just in case. after that, gradual clear

cooling will be felt as early as tonightith temperature readings dipping down in the 50s and then back to toasty by the middle part of the week. as far as temueratures are concerned right now, instead of the 70s, we are in the 60s so we have a mild feel underway. 65 in fort lauderdale to 68 degrees in west kendall and key west. your day planner is going with slim rain chances in the forecast and whole lot drier tonight. that's when we're expecting temperature readings to drop down. as far as your morning commute is concerned, we have a lot of clouds around and we have some showers that are approaching western broward county. as far as the keys are concerned, we are dealing with ower activity around marathon and upper matecumbe key. i'll be back with the complete forecast in a few minutes. history made in havana. president obama touching down on cuban soil for the first time ever.

this morning, it's being met with praise and protest. >> ashley: we have live 7 coverage all morning and begin with 7's alex diprato in havana where mr. obama will meet top leadership today. >> reporter: wheels down, history in ha va nachl air force one touching down at the airport on an a cloudy, rainy sunday afternoon just after 4 p.m. we heard from president obama via his twitter account. what's'sup, cuba? just touched down here. looking forward to meeting and hearing directly from the cuba people. then umbrellas emerged and the president stepped down in the history books. the daughters and their grandmother was cuban foreign minister to meet them.