>> we did with osama bin laden.orter: did you tell obama not to go after bin laden. >> i didn't. jesse: when he was vice president he was against the bin laden raid. >> for about four weeks only six of us knew the possibility of where bin laden was. we had to take a decision. the president went around the table with all the senior people and he said, i have to make the decision, what is your bin? mr. president, my suggestion is don't go. we have to do two more things to see if he's there. jess will be joining me, sarah huckabee sanders and charlie kirk. i guess joe has the most foreign policy experience of all the people returning. but it's not very good experience. is it? >> absolutely not. even robert gates who served in the obama administration said joe biden has been wrong on the soviet union, wrong on iran, wrong about isis, he was wrong about soleimani, and he was wrong about the assassination of bin laden. i don't know if he has gotten anything right. i don't know why anyone would want him taking over at rece

to go after usama bin laden?ed radio host. as i said, these two individuals end up running against each other, they are going to be judged by the american people and what they would do in moments like the moment that we had last night. what do you think about joe biden's response a little bit of rewriting history? >> i think joe biden knows what happened in that room and quite frankly he had the experience of being in that room when that happens which i think is very important for somebody who wants to be president of the united states. the experience is invaluable in this president never had the experience. >> why didn't he just say that? "i recommended not to go in, i was part of the administratio administration" -- you cannot contradict yourself like that. >> i wasn't in the room, you weren't in the room. >> martha: i only know what he said himself! he said, i told him not to go. it's been pretty well-documented. >> there you go. the experience matters, that experience would lead him to get his allies on board

bin laden. >> no, i didn't. i didn't. >> he said he didn't. >> that happened yesterday. there's a pesky thing called videotape from january of 2012. maybe when the moment was more fresh for uncle joe. here's what he said then. >> for about four weeks, only six of us knew the possibility of where bin laden was. we had to make a decision. the president, he went around the table with all the seen r i don't remember peopl -- senior e including the chiefs of staff and he said i have to make a decision. what is your opinion. mr. president, my suggestion is don't go. we have to do two more things to see if he's there. >> he said don't go. that was heading into the waffle re-election where the -- 2012 re-election. now he's trying to flip the script, saying i was by his side. i wanted to go in. that's not what he said before. >> he's never going to support the decision because it has something to do with donald trump. there's an inability to acknowledge that the moment deserves celebration and acknowledgement that this s

i do think the difference between the bin laden case and bin ladenani case, did not have a state behindim. he had lost support across a lot of the most the world and therefore -- there were feelers -- there were fears of retaliation. the story i wrote that day said americans were concerned about what would happen as a result of killing bin laden and whether we would be at risk as a result. means you're talking about what the consequent as might be and consequences are important when it comes to arean by any president host: we will go to henry, democrats line, joining us from michigan. >> let me help you out mr. baker. president oak -- president obama was also colored under the authorization of military force that gavefter 9/11 any president the authority to go ahead and use military force against any of the material actors who perpetrated 9/11. in leiden, i was say, was one of those kinds of people. one of the people under that act. also, republicans are keen to use the redline in syria president obama drew to claim he was weak and feckless because he becauseattack syria president obama

they can call soleimani genius and call osama bin laden bin laden genius but osama bin laden had a lotblood on his hand in terms of capability, operation skills and potency than soleimani. he was the head of the outspecial unit for the irgc, islamic revolution guard, took the quds forces from a battalion to a regiment to a division, almost 15,000 forces. every key ambassador that serves in iranian embassies in lebanon and key arab countries in countries in europe where iran has had operations are all quds force members. yeah, you can call him a genius, but let's call it what it is. he was causing a lot of problems. he had organized some of the most antiamerican elements on the ground. and you want to call it fair, legal, illegal, whatever, i wish president trump had called chuck schumer yeah given him a heads up, that would have been great. it is what it is. this was measured. david: very honest description of what happened. i want to move on to bret for a second because one thing that really got under my skin was hearing the media compare him and the quds force which ari just outlined

i have plotted a barack obama when he took down usama bin laden.gusted that these democrats, who want to be commander in chief and replace donald trump, and even stand up for the security of the american people and our allies. remember, we've been at war with iran for 40 years, never recognized -- this is not a state that is recognized by the american government. they are as robe as al qaeda is rogue, and if it's okay to take out usama bin laden, should be okay to take out soleimani. >> may i add, part of the media complaint is that this will be perpetual war. we were told it was going to take 30 years to get rid of isis. it took 18 freaking months. donald trump does not do perpetual anything. he is a businessman. there are end points. the faster you get something billed, the faster you do something, but are for the overall picture of what you are achieving, this is about getting things done. finally, we have a man of action in the white house. >> raymond: before i run out of time, want you to react to fox news is peter doocy today, asking joe bide

see when did we have to do this but the killing of usama bin laden?of what is out there in the classified world is that they kept it very tightly, they wrote that pakistan was unwilling or unable to assist under legal principle, unwilling or unable, and they took him out. >> harris: is a different situation obviously, i haven't heard a lot of arguments against why you would not kill him if he could find them. for >> cully: well, my libertarian friends, that, to libertarians, like you, and others, are bothered by that. speaker the question here is still, we don't have the evidence of an imminent threat, we may get it on wednesday. >> cully: we don't need one, as a legal matter we don't need when. >> that's why disagree. >> harris: big reaction over the weekend from the 2020 democrats under the situation in iran. how the candidates are differentiating themselves with a new focus on foreign policy. what does help for heart failure look like? ♪the beat goes on it looks like emily cooking dinner for ten. ♪the beat goes on it looks like jonathan on a date w

son i'm a bin laden was killed by american special forces bin laden was a figurehead and not really an operational commander of al qaeda that is not the case with through the money he's very much as our commentators have been saying an operational leader ok gave the moment thanks very much. you're watching al-jazeera coming to you live from our headquarters here in doha if you're just joining us we're interrupting a normal shuttle of news to get you across the very latest developments on that big breaking story coming to us out of the iraqi capital baghdad the iranian capital tehran and of course washington as well the gentleman you are looking at was a very very well connected commander in the iranian regime according to multiple reports he has in the last 4 and a half 5 hours lost his life along with an iraqi militia commander as well they were both.

and iran is not bin laden. by the time bin laden was done, he was an old guy in a villa. victory lap the president takes and how seriously he's taking the fact at the he could have unleashed something with very serious consequences going forward. >> these days can last a few days. but iran might be in the driver's seat about how and when they respond in a way at the could, to rick's point, not make it look like donald trump is a serious thinker about foreign policy. >> that's right. and there's this idea at the iran is a nation thinking strategically about how to respond. they understand at the they can't get into a military fight a conventional military war with the united states. they can possibly bait donald trump into having him do something he didn't want to do as president. i think there is some liability and democrats are in their own ways have been pointing out at the donald trump isn't ready for this foreign policy fight. president trump, there are at least cynical democrats, saying he-political reasons. the whole news psycho -- cycle the last two weeks was about

>> we did come of the guys is usama bin laden. >> what you telling present

general said this is a bigger deal than killing bin laden. >> the president appears to have decided that it was necessary to shore up deterrents to show we would not accept this. >> the administration understands there is a serious risk of consequences here. they understand it's unlikely the iranian regime will come to the negotiating table. >> the president showed restraint and put a redline outi there. he said if you kill americans ig will respond.

or not, i'm not interested in the debate budget bin laden was kill and -- >> we put the parliament inait for this. how the allies react they will be, i think we will also -- there will be some relevance and how the grief and goes and how the allies react particular the european allies and we can agree, the europeans don't come out until it's a part of us, we can care less what we say. well, i think it has the ramifications and in terms of what we're tried to get accomplished because i would as the separate question after i hear the brief and, what did this accomplish? from the policy and strategic standpoint if the answer is a strong went into compelling one and a convincing one regardless of what the democrats thing, i will be in support of of the president said and did braden spin on protecting the operation, but despite the briefing and the actual embassies on the ground in tehran, they'd got the heads up in which you know, legitimate complaint. standby, four weeks away from the iowa caucus. placed on the campaign trail of next. ♪ reached out before he could even inspect the damage

killing off bin laden, by the time bin laden was done, he was one old guy in a villa.cautious about how much of a victory lap the president takes right now and how seriously he is taking the fact that he is unlike somethea something that we don't know what the consequences will be. >> yamiche, these things in the news cycles might last a few days, but iran is in the driver's seat, they can respond in a way to make it look like donald trump is not a serious on their about foreign policy, as rick says. >> that's right, and iran is a nation that will be thinking strategically about how to respond. they understand, as some of your guests have said tonight, that they can't get into a conventional military war with the united states. but they can put pressure on american soldiers. they can possibly bait donald trump into have to do something that he didn't want to do as president. there is some liability there for the president, and democrats are in their own ways trying to point out that donald trump simply isn't ready for this foreign policy fight. the other thing to note

the entire world book mike wanted to take out usama bin laden and we saw those two towers fall. the whole world was with us and everyone cheered when that man was killed. i didn't see the whole world cheer when -- >> neil: if barack obama had taken this guy out, and he did, would you be as offended at that as you are now at this preside president? >> if barack obama did it and didn't have an explanation and gave a 15 minute speech on a maga path the night before, then yes. >> neil: if barack obama had done this for the same reason that the president decided to do it, would you be whining to this degree right now? >> i'm not whining but i did see a plane shot down -- >> neil: this where it gets to be a cheap debate. when people play politics with this, what i see of the situation here, it's something that really, really is bad, it's awful. the consequences of trying to deal with terror. but if you are afraid of the consequences that might develop from the enemy that you seek out you will always have terrorists win. >> there is no mystery to soleimani, how evil soleimani was. and

the loss of the gener is e equivalent of the loss of was me of bin laden tohe -- osama bin laden to ethat they represent. the general has been a brilliant strategist. he has beenli the contr entity within iran for two decades. this is a huge loss for the national security apparatus. weno -- i know we often talk about someone coming in behind him but it wil not be someone that has the same kind of capability. reporter:mi i am ed that the general would go to moscow, beirut, damascus -- the fact at he could do that means that iran has the ability t what is the most likely iranian response given how high profile he was to the country? >>xc if they respondsively, they could risk losing their heads. for the iranian regime, what is prominent is their survival. the supremely do is 80 years old and haseen ruling for 30 years and is not a gambler. iran has plenty of means at its disposal to respond regionally and internationally. they like to have plausible deniability. especiallyn these days of cyber attacks and drones. thold expression is revenge is a dish best. served co i do not think they

biden with his own story urging obama to delay the killing of usama bin laden. >> but you have to userike to take out a terror leader, would you pull the trigger? >> we did. his name was usama bin laden. >> digging yourself tell president obama not to -- >> i didn't. >> i said, you have to make an opinion. my suggestion is, mr. president, don't go. we have to do two more things to see if he's there. >> interesting stuff there. judge judy saying she's now backing michael bloomberg and hit the campaign trail for the billionaire. >> to define michael bloomberg as just another rich guy is one of the greatest injustices of this political campaign that we are in. because michael bloomberg is the only one of the candidates who has experience governing and managing. >> what does she have, 10 million people a day watching her? does that have a big influence on michael bloomberg's possibly is run? >> was that ruth bader ginsburg? took me a second. what's interesting about her, judge judy, her audience is literally suburban women who are the be-all and end-all for political consultants in this p

. >> the fact that the ciaam trained bin laden, for example. that was fact-checked. >> yeah, the cia -- c >> no, t funded the mujahideen, but they didn't train osama bin laden. big difference. >> well, he was one of the and you can't get around that by saying, "we gave money to the mujahideen," which he's a part of and one of the leaders of, and say, "oh, no, we had nothino to do wima bin laden." >> well, i don't know. the fact-checkers came back and saidhat was a stretch. >> he's an unintended consequence of theact that -- >> that's closer f that's closer t. >> before you assassinate the top general of a country, you should pause and think about the unintended consequences of that. before you invade iraq, whh had nothing to do with 9/11, you know, you should stop d think abouthat. and the consequences of that. and so, naturally, wput out a film like "fahrenheit 9/11," i mean, everything they've at me with but the fact of the matter is, is thapeople don't w with helping to fu verying to do thing that eventually gave us 9/11. >> so, i think, get

rubenstein: so you led the effort, among others, to get osama bin laden, but was it frustrating that he escaped from tora bora, and do you think if you'd had redifferent military struc more troops there, you could have captured him? rice: if anybody had said to president bush, "osama bin laden is at tora bora, and we need the following to get him," they would have gotten what they needed. the tora bora ghost that people talk about of osama bin laden, there was never really, from our point of view, actual evidence that he was there, and by the time that anybody knew about it, it was too late, and so, yes, it was frustrati, and it was frustrating that we couldn't get him, but what we concentrated on-- and i think it worked-- was taking that layer out of the field generals for al-qaeda because they were operating like a pretty socated organization, and the field general for north america was khalid sheikh mohammed, and when we finally captured khalid sheikh mohammed, we felt we knew their battle plan and what was coming next. it was the first time anybody could actually sleep at night,

-- >> no, the cia funded the mujahideen, but they didn'ttr n osama bin laden. big difference. >> well, he was one of the leaders of it.t and you cat around that by saying, "we gave money to the mujahideen," which he's a part of and one of the leaders of, and say, "oh, no, we had nothing do with osama bin laden >> well, i don't know. the fact-checkers came back and said that was a stretch. >> he's an unintended consequence ofheact that -- >> that's closer. that's closer to fact. >> before you assassinate the top general of a country, about the unintended think consequences of that. before you invade iraq, whh had nothing to do with 9/11, you know, you should stopth and think abou. and the consequences of that. and so, natully, when i put out a film like "fahrenheit 9/11," i mean, they're gonna come at me with everything they've got. but the fact of the matters, is thapeople don't want to hearhat we had something to with helping to fund the very thing that eventually gave us9/ . >> so, i think, getting back to how you choose to tell stories, i'd like to show you

the 2001 aumf specifically authorized our going after osama bin laden.e is the example of congress getting involved. that was the authorization to get osama bin laden in pakistan or any place else. and that's what we're trying to assure here. that things aren't just happening, that there is actual authority. osama bin laden is the wrong example because we gave the authority to go after him. i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. frankel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. frankel: thank you, mr. speaker. as the mother of a united states marine war veteran, i came to congress with the promise of never sending someone else's child to a war that could be avoided. this war powers resolution says no war with iran without congressional approval. while still ensure defense if there's an imminent threat. while we do not mourn the death of iran's commander of terror, americans and our allies worry about the ramifications will make us less safe. the fight against isis has been diverted. regional protests against the irania

along with al-baghdadi, along with osama bin laden. and to those americans killed and maimed and to your families, you are not forgotten. because some justice has been served. and to those who play politics with this, with this defensive action of americans and american interests, and to those who stay that this is an overreaction, it's an insult to the american lives lost, it's an insult to those that have been maimed and permanently damaged, and it trivializes the american lives that have been spared by this action to take out a terrorist that was ready and willing and prepared to act to kill more americans. . thank you very much. s. cheney: thank you, dr. wenstrup. now, i'd like to turn things over to our colleague, the gentleman from texas, mr. crenshaw. mr. crenshaw: thank you. iraq twice.o went to afghanistan once. deployed back to the middle east and bahrain. iranian threat network closely. i have seen what their export of eapons does to our soldiers in iraq. over 600 killed by i.e.d.'s, i.e.d.'s that were exported therefrom the

not one republican went after barack obama for take out osama bin laden. >> where is the curiosity ofhe cnns of the world, msnbcs to question where are you paying terrorists off in cash, where is the cure osity for that? you don't maintain your freedom from being weak. donald trump has taken out right any so, the terrorists who have taken away our freedom not only for us but the iranians and our friend israel who we have to help out. trish: not only did he take out the terrorists. today we saw them come forward and announce more sanctions. if i'm iran i am saying this one bad administration. i better be pretty darn careful. >> he's sending a message. this will pay dividend for the freedom in our country. where are the accolades for not being dependent on oil and natural gas for the middle east. whenever there is any disruption in the middle east, we were beholding to them for oil and natural gas. we are the number one exporter now thankful to donald trump. trish: we are the number one energy producer in the world is the usa, which is why the president says we don't need these guys. co

the killing of bin laden, by the time he was done, he was one old guy. vote in this thing. we should be cautious about how much of a victory lap the president takes and knowing that he has unleashed something with major consequences goes forward. >> iran might be in the driver's seat about when and how they respond in a way that could not make it look like donald trump is a serious thinker about foreign policy. >> the thought that iran is a nation that thinks about how to respond. some of your guests saying they can't get into a military fight or war but they can pressure the military or bait donald trump to do something he didn't want to do as a president. there is liability there as a president. democrats have been trying to point out that donald trump isn't ready for this fight. the other thing to note is that president trump apart from having military reasons for doing this also had political reasons. the whole news cycle was all about impeachment and the idea that the president was facing a political crisis there. this strike takes the conversation

i once de blasio announcing on high alert after bin laden?ayhem, iran threatened to retaliate warning of criminals after the americans that killed the general in baghdad. the penchant bringing the global new year's rally across the day. tonight, new worries over whether iran will attack middle eastern accents. payback and president trump repairing today that soleimani was trying to stop the war and warning that they were prepared for any response. they were imminent and sinister attacks that the

joe biden said that he advised obama not to go after usama bin laden.nges during that period when you have a man that is responsible for the deaths of this many americans, this is a bad guy. it was good to take them out. of course, we are going to have to see. by november, for example, we will have a better idea of what the repercussions are going to be. i think it will be a huge risk for the iranian regime to start a war. they cannot win it. >> neil: i pressed this by the way with colorado senator michael bennet on the weather if he were president he would have taken out soleimani given the chance. this is from this week. if i came up to you and said mr. president, we can take him out. are you telling me that president bennett would not try to take them out? >> i'm telling you that it depend entirely on whether keep americans more safe. >> neil: intelligence officials that is going to kill more people. what a president bennett say no? >> i didn't say i wouldn't care. i said the question is -- >> neil: which you take them out? >> it would depend, neil,

what is vice president he was against the bin laden raid. ms.n his own words. >> devout, four weeks, possibility where button lot and was been we had to make a decision. president coming winter on the table to all of the senior people. including the chiefs of staff credit and i said i have to make a decision. what is your opinion. mr. president, my suggestion is logo grade to do to hers things critics select joining me now could, former white house and the founder of turning.usa, try current, i don't know, i guess joe has the most foreign-policy experience of all of these people running but it is a very good experience. in sanders. >> absolutely not, robert gacy said the it in the obama ministration, said the joe biden is been off on nearly every single foreign-policy decision great news from of the soviet union and an rn. in wrong about prices. it was wrong about solomonic current he was wrong about the assassination up in london. i don't of the joe what biden has gotten anything) i didn't know anyone would want and taking over as commander-in-

it was bin laden himself and he paid the price. >> now of course another major architects paid the prices well. your initial thoughts. >> i think this was a strike which led indications to our nation, middle east and potentially the world. when you look at what iran has been doing in the past decade, they've been upping the ante. this individual alone probably has more blood on his hands than any single individual. over 600 plus americans killed because of his or his proxy forces that he was orchestrating throughout the middle east and what we did here was we disrupted future planning the iran was going to come after us in our interest throughout the region. a large-scale operation. we disrupted it. >> the state department as a defensive action, people who read the media would think it's an offense of action, they said they weighed everything the administration said the risk of him staying alive were far greater than the risk of him being bad. >> i would agree. after 9/11, the nation asked how did this happen? why didn't we do anything? what we saw last night, that was a preventive measu

i'll tell you, even in the raid to go after bin laden, we -- i personally went up to capitol hill and briefed all of the gang of eight, the key players, so that they were aware of the fact that we had -- we thought we had found bin laden and would be conducting an operation. it was the right thing to do. nothing leaked as a result of that. but what it did do was it established a partnership that is extremely important to our form of government when it comes to military action. >> was that an assassination -- i don't think the right word. i think assassination referred to government officials. generals, people like yamamoto, in that case was that the purpose to kill him or bring him back dead or alive or what? what was the mission? >> the mission was to go after bin laden and clearly under our rules of combat, if he -- if it looked like he would surrender they were to take him as a prisoner of war. so that was the direction. when he fought back, obviously the team there shot him and killed bin laden but we were abiding by the rules of war and that's the way we should operate as a count

perhaps the most stark comparison when barack obama directed the killing of osama bin laden. where were the people who nowma claim his death is an abuse of power quick settle recall anybody them calling osama bin laden and assassination. they were on cable tv criticizing we were all celebrating. some of our democratic friends simply will never pass on an opportunity to criticize the president no matter how unfair they goodness there are democrats like former secretary johnson and former us senator lieberman who said president trump's order to take out qassem soleimani was morally, constitutionally and c strategically correct. it deserves more bipartisan support than the reactions it has received thus far from my fellow democrats. that is senator lieberman. i am also grateful for the informed comments by luminaries like former centcom commander former cia director betray us as well as ambassador crocker who both said that this action was authorized and necessary. is unquestionable the death qassem soleimani was a blow to the iranian regime and a message of deterrence to all st

go back to bill clinton, the book by robert patterson, he was offered osama bin laden over 10 times. he refused to capture or eliminate him. the question is when 9/11 happened, had to bill clinton done his job, what would happen if president trump did not do his job? what would happen if president obama remove soleimani when they had the opportunity? would we have our servicemen and women killed? the question about was this the right thing or not. leadership is tough. harry truman says if you can't stand the smoke, get out of the kitchen. president trump did what he had to do and this country is safe. i think the world a safer -- the world is safer and they're going to look at americans and say, thank you for your leadership. i yield back. >> thank you. mr. keating. rep. keating: the people that i represent have one question, are we less safe now than we were before? and i think this is an important hearing because i think to answer to that question is much more fundamental than dealing in the killing of soleimani. are we safer with a maximum pressure campaign we have? that campaign

the 2001 aumf specifically authorized our going after osama bin laden.e is the example of congress getting involved. that was the authorization to get osama bin laden in pakistan or any place else. and that's what we're trying to assure here. that things aren't just happening, that there is actual authority. osama bin laden is the wrong example because we gave the authority to go after him. i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. frankel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. frankel: thank you, mr. speaker. as the mother of a united states marine war veteran, i came to congress with the promise of never sending someone else's child to a war that could be avoided. this war powers resolution says no war with iran without congressional approval. while still ensure defense if there's an imminent threat. while we do not mourn the death of iran's commander of terror, americans and our allies worry about the ramifications will make us less safe. the fight against isis has been diverted. regional protests against the irania

what does a man who killed bin laden about the media lionizing soliemani. my angle comes on a little later on tonight. it's a good one. going to connect the dots, all of these player, prince harry, meghan, all of the latest exploits of those with the clintons and the bidens. and a friend of the show, dr. drew pins kee is so fed up with adam schiff that he's considering seriously now a congressional run against schiff in california. he's here exclusively to tell us what he's going to do next. but first, to the breaking news tonight, top iranian military officials are saying that the recent ballistic missile strikes on u.s. troops were just, quote, the start of big operations that will continue in the entire region. but with no sign of deescalation, the democrat-controlled house passed a war powers resolution in an attempt to limit the president's ability to defend the country against any further iranian aggression. the president addressed all of this at a rally just a short time ago. >> here's the guy who slaughtered and butchered civilians all over and mili

he was not in hiding like baghdadi or like osama bin laden was. he traveled freely throughout syria and iraq and iran and recently years he posted a lot on social media. it does not seem like he felt rather confident in his status and he was untouchable. i don't think he or the iranian government or many people like myself thought that we would take him out. i would just say that we could have done this, and the israeli called have done this the past ten years and if we decided not to about ten years ago when they had an opportunity and that's telling, the timing of why we did this now is very questionable to me. i think there is significance reasons to doubt the administration. >> let's talk about the threat, steve. the administration has posed a reason for doing this that there was an imminent threat. what reason do we have to believe? the threat is eliminated with the death of soleimani. was he that important of taking the man out and changes the situation on the ground. >> i don't think so at all. certainly soleimani was very important to the

the guy's name is osama bin laden. >> didn't you tell president obama not to go after bin laden thatay? >> i didn't. >> and while that is inconsistent with previous comments he has made, biden has called out more offense for a different part of his record. his vote in favor of the iraq war and the person that is talking about that the most, bernie sanders that is now using last night's strike to call out president trump for what he warned is a broken campaign promise. >> unfortunately trump ignored the advice of his own security officials, ignored the advice of his own security officials and listened to right-wing extremists, some of whom were exactly the same people who got us in to the war in iraq in the first place. >> so while candidates are focusing on foreign policy today, they're looking at healthcare and the economy because they're running out of time for iowans to back them. caucus day is a month from day. >> trace: thanks, peter. australian's navy rescuing hundreds of people as deadly wild fires continue to rage. and forecasters warning conditions there could get much worse

>> usama bin laden was discussed during the bush administration. neil: there related.l: on capitol hill would you have gone ahead, republicans or democrats? >> it was agreed after 9/11 we were going to go after al qaeda. we went to afghanistan. neil: targeting bin laden and not getting conversation with congress versus targeting this guy. >> there was no mistake this had to be done. neil: two other administrations had a chance to go after this guy. >> this guy helped with outside and send a lot of information on al qaeda. neil: do we have a double standard here? >> the wall street journal editorial knows that this week, chris murphy, a democrat, tweeted that trump has rendered america impotent in the middle east. that was earlier this week. now all of a sudden this is terrible and in that tweet he says no one fears us. democrats are complaining that trump didn't want to do anything and now they are complaining he didn't go to congress or get permission. legally we are allowed to do what we did because we can fight terrorism. neil: the boys waited, the danger of respond

i don't remember anyone calling the killing of osama bin laden's and assassination. when he was killed, they were not on cable tv criticizing, we were all celebrating. some of our democratic friends will simply never pass on an opportunity to criticized the president, no matter how unfair. thank goodness are democrats like former department of homeland security jay johnson informers senatoran lieberman said president trump's order to take out qassem soleimani was morally, constitutionally, and strategically correct. it should have more bipartisan support than has been received thus far from my fellow democrats. that was senator joe lieberman. i am also grateful for the informed comments by luminaries like former centcom commander and former cia director contrasts and ambassador ryan crocker who both rightly said that this action was authorized and necessary. it is unquestionable that the death of soleimani was a major blow to the regime and a strong message of deterrence to all stateed sponsors of terrorism. the blood of hundreds of american soldiers and countless ci

i don't recall anyone calling the killing of osama bin laden an assassination. when he was killed, they weren't on cable tv criticizing the move. we were all celebrating. some of our democratic friends will simply never pass on an opportunity to criticize the president no matter how unfair. thank goodness there are democrats like former department of homeland security secretary jeh johnson and former u.s. senator joe lieberman who said president trump's order to take out qasem soleimani was morley, constitutionally, and strategically correct. it deserves more bipartisan support than the degrudging or negative reactions it has received thus far from my fellow democrats. that's senator joe lieberman. and i'm also grateful for the informed comments by luminaries like former centcom commander and former general petraeus as well as ambassador ryan crocker who both rightly said that this action was authorized and necessary. it's unquestionable that the death of soleimani was a major blow to the iranian regime and a strong message of deterrence to all state sponsors of

that's what makes this different than the actions against bin laden or al baghdadi.nd there is a division in congress over whether or not this is even legal. you have republicans saying they're behind this action 100%. but there have been democrats overnight who have noted, wait a second here. where's the authorization for this type of action? hey, wait a second. is the united states now involved with the assassination of government officials? so there is that political divide. >> yeah, and those are going to be the questions. why wasn't there congressional authorization for something like this because you're hearing from several members of congress they were not notified about this beforehand. expect the white house response to that to be that the president has pretty broad powers here. that's what we've heard from him in the past. they argue he has a lot of leeway in making a decision like this. that's where this is going to become a focal point. this intelligence that they say they had that essentially he was master minding these future potential attacks. the ques

rob o'neill, the former navy seal who killed usama bin laden and author of the book, "the operator." are they tried to stay safe here that they are ultimate goal to drive the u.s. out of the region. >> it's a threat that something else. if iran is under two pressures, huge pressures, when coming from the base of the hard-core people and they want the regime to strike and strike again they don't care except about ideology. there's a season group among them who understood what's happening in the president and the demonstration on the forces are series that have seen examples of what happened and they are advising to calm down and do whatever needs to be done for the iranian public to calm down strategically and wait for nine months. of >> laura: congress top military officials and runop toy said they believe this was going to last between three days and potentially two weekss. and that they had thousands of missiles ready to fly. he gave it this long winding presss conference but they seem -- who knows what he seems, they seem like they were a little bit surprised that it was that shor

al qaeda terrorism did not end with the sidelining of osama bin laden.sis has not ended with the killing of al baghdadi. so if you're trying to end whatever is happening, this is a major escalation, and we need to see what the plan is. >> also another note, obviously, soleimani, for better or worse, he was a government official which differentiates him from bin laden. you were killing a government official with this. that has different implications. the u.s. relationship with iraq, the iraqi prime minister condemned this. it's a violation of the u.s. agreement to station troops in iraq. what will this do to the u.s. presence there? >> overnight the u.s. missile attacks on the al kataib base changed the u.s./iraq relationship. iraq suddenly went from, you know, demonstrating against iranian presence and others to demonstrating against the united stat states. did the united states expect its embassy in iraq to be breached by pro-iranian militias in baghdad? did the united states expect that when it retaliated for the killing of that american contractor? an

. >> neil: what about the usama bin laden comparison.uy is a bad guy is a bad guy. >> bin laden was authorized by congress. i know because i was there as general counsel department of defense at the time in 2011. that strike was part of the conflict against al qaeda. bin laden was the leader. >> neil: former homeland security secretary, a lot of people were breathing a sigh of relief, not to up the ante here. that was it, we don't have anything to worry about. >> i would urge americans to read some of the statements that my old apartment at dhs homeland security has been putting out over the last couple of days. they are very straightforward and candid. they are worried about the threatening environment that we are in now. it's not just physical safety. we have to make sure that we are vigilant when it comes to our cybersecurity. >> neil: do you think that is the next shoe to drop? >> we have to consider cyber warfare, cybersecurity to meet part and parcel of armed conflict these days. and what dhs is telling us and telling critical infr