frank lautenberg's -- i will say to my friend from new mexico, i think now that frank lautenberg 's legacy has been fulfilled. mr. udall: chairman inhofe, i couldn't agree with you more. i -- i know that you knew of senator -- that you knew senator lautenberg very well. you worked with him on the committee and off the committee on a variety of issues. he was really committed to his grandchildren. as you know, many times we would see him in committee when he would talk, and he would talk specifically about the bills before us, and he would say, you know, is this going to help my children and their children? and one of the things he talked about on this bill was this would save more lives and help his grandchildren's generation more than any bill he ever worked on. and so he was very proud of this bill and we were very sorry to lose him. but the thing that i want to say about chairman inhofe as a dedicated and determined legislator is you saw the opportunity that we had worked on this, senator vitter and i had worked on this. we came to you at the beginning of the congress and said we have a

and i also want to thank bonnie lautenberg. senator lautenberg fought hard for tsca reform. i was proud to take up that fight, and i'm grateful to bonnie, who has helped us every step of the way. she's been an incredible advocate in terms of interacting with senators and their staff to push the crucial message forward on tsca reform, and it was the message that her husband, frank lautenberg, would repeat every day when i saw him in committee. he said, are we doing the right thing for our children and our grandchildren? and he really believed tsca reform would save more lives understand that anything -- than anything he ever done in his life. i'd also like to recognize the great advocates for reform. a lot of this was grass-roots people standing up and saying, we haven't done what we need to do for the american people, for our families, for our children on chemical safety. and some of these -- there are too many to mention all of them, but the bipartisan policy center stood up and helped out, the environmental defense fund, fred krup their lead played a crucial role, the nati

the lautenberg bill passed the senate in a nail-biter, tie breaking vote by al gore is how it passed.year, 1999, it went on to die in the house. since then, that loophole has remained. it's survived lots of attempts to close it. right after the sandy hook shootings in newtown, connecticut, in 2012, there was momentum from democrats to revisit the issue once again, this time from help with a handful of republicans, but still it wasn't enough. even now, immediately after the san bernadino attacks, with even some republicans coming out once again to say they would support background checks for all gun sales, the senate once again this week failed to close that loophole. but could there be another way? "the new york times" is now reporting that white house officials are looking to ways to try to close at least most of the gun show loophole without congress. they think they may have a way to do it by prem alone. an official telling "the new york times," the work is very much under way. asked at a press briefing whether the president would wait until the investigation into san bernadino is

julia rogiski an adviser to frank lautenberg and fox news contributor and doug holtz aiken, the president of the american action forum. good to have you with us this morning. thank you for being here. what is your take on these new polls? you said this last week, ted cruz would be number one. >> cruz has the strongest organization, he's a very consistent conservative message, both trump and carson, people aren't sure where they are. it is interesting, carson talked about he'll lead the republican party, just joined the republican party a year ago. nice to have. but at the end of the day, it is not like he's been around the game for a long time. people know cruz. and the interesting thing in the fox poll is he's leading among conservatives, he's leading among evangelicals, leading among tea parties. so that's what you need, plus the -- i think he'll win iowa and i think he'll win iowa going away. >> and then what? >> get momentum out of that, may not help you in new hampshire, but it will in the southern starts come march 1st. >> as the news flow continues to highlight terrorism and this n

it was frank lautenberg who first introduced legislation to say even sales at gun shows should require a background check. it passed the senate in a nail-biter tie breaking vote by al gore is how it passed. but in that year, 1999, it went on to die in the house. since then, that loophole has remained. it's survived lots of attempts to close it. right after the sandy hook shootings in new town, connecticut, in 2012, there was momentum from democrats to revisit the issue once again, this time from help with a handful of republicans, but still it wasn't enough. even now, immediately after the san bernadino attacks, with even some republicans coming out once again to say they would support background checks for all gun sales, the senate once again this week failed to close that loophole. but could there be another way? "the new york times" is now reporting that white house officials are looking to ways to try to close at least most of the gun show loophole without congress. they think may may have a way to do it by president obama alone. an official telling "the new york times," the work i

me, noelle nikpour, republican fund raiders and jowlly roginsky, former advisor to senator frank lautenberging women's card, give me a break. a lot of people say that. she is incredibly wealthy, now privileged white woman. when she comes out to dot poor me thing, people don't like it. >> but people do respond to it, i will say. it is interesting for donald trump to be criticizing bill clinton or hillary clinton i should say for bill clinton's infidelities mildly. she was the number one victim of infill delts. hard to criticize a wronged wife sticking by her husband. nobody knows what goes on for anybody's marriage. it would be a mistake to judge him on any woman who stays in a bad marriage. that is between her and her husband. interesting he wasn't that much of a disaster. she was very happy to have hillary clinton and bill clinton at his own third wedding. for the fact he is criticizing bill clinton being disaster. he was good friends with him and food enough to invite to wedding a few years ago. melissa: noelle, we were talking about the subject a few years ago. a lot of people came on tw

we have hadley heath manning, julie roginsky, former political advisor to senator frank lautenberg ands contributor. steve moore, fox news contributor. steve, eight days before san bernardino the president saying no credible threat of terrorism in the u.s. why should americans or how can americans take him seriously about his assessment this time? >> david, i don't know if they do. i think that when you consider his whole approach to dealing with terrorism now for the last couple of years, it's been soft. i thought the speech was soft. the other thing he did, david, i thought was interesting. he set up all these straw men and tore them down. for example we shouldn't put 100,000 troops on the ground in middle east. nobody is talking about that hopefully. he made these other kinds of comments, oh, we shouldn't target all muslims. nobody is really talking about that. i thought the speech was more divisive than unifying. david: julie, he he does have a credibility problem on terrorism. he has been wrong bit. jv comment or no credible threat. how does he deal with that or how does he deal w

judy miller and julie roginsky, former advisor to senator frank lautenberg.l are fox news contributors. sabrina, what is different? >> i think it is interesting that chris christie come to the lead in new hampshire. he visited granite state 120 times since he announced. melissa: my goodness. >> this is his opportunity to shine. he put all his eggs in this basket. he has lot to demonstrate. he is in many way as establishment candidate. very strong on entitlements. very strong in terms of executive experience, public sector unions, hurricane sandy. he has the opportunity to present himself in new light. that could be very good for republicans. >> julie, we've seen a bunch of debates now. we kind of know how everybody will come out and what they will do and what their tricks are. what advice would you give to go into this one to stand out to differentiate yourself because everyone is known quantity? >> this is will be interesting. this is the first debate, where terrorism become overwhelming issue not just in the republican party, but nationally. outlyer, rand p

lautenberg became -- and the republican party went to court trying to use bush v.gore is the reason why they shouldn't allow that and the court just said that has nothing to do with this case. there has not been a single case since then it has been decided. you will find scholars. i'm sort of neutral on this point. some of my colleagues believed the court had to step in to avoid an even worse result and that would have been a republican legislature of florida deciding for bush. this would have been in terms of public perception. remember jeb is governor at that time. he had pulled strings so that the legislature would put his brother into the white house. it was true that dissent doesn't carry much weight but neither does the jordie opinion. was a one-off case and hopefully in our lifetimes we are not going to see another one. >> the american public such as the iraqi war. >> will you know you cannot tell gore would have been different. we don't know what gore would have done after 9/11. the second part, i'm not sure yet that the dissents in that case will not bear

david: joining me now, julie roginsky, former political advisor to senator frank lautenberg and fox newsnninger is back with us as well. dan, is he right? >> well, democrats are soft on crime because they want felons to vote for them and media is soft on democrats as well, i think he is probably right on that. but look, these republicans are out there at the moment, because of donald trump trying to prove who is the angriest conservative and ted cruz scored a lot of points in that cnbc debate going after the media. remember that? so i think he is going back to the media well again. there is some truth but trying to build up support out there. david: julie, i hold in my hands a article from none other than "mother jones" magazine. into the right-wing -- >> i'm happy you read "mother jones." david: particularly when it agrees with ted cruz. says the obama administration wants 6 billion americans to get back their right to vote, 6 million americans, could conceivably fall into this category that ted cruz is talking about, that would vote democratic if they were given right to vote. >> i don

it was frank lautenberg who first introduced legislation to say even sales at gun shows should require a background check. it passed the senate in a nail-biter tie breaking vote by al gore is how it passed. but in that year, 1999, it went on to die in the house. since then, that loophole has remained. it's survived lots of attempts to close it. right after the sandy hook shootings in new town, connecticut, in 2012, there was momentum from democrats to revisit the issue once again, this time from help with a handful of republicans, but still it wasn't enough. even now, immediately after the san bernadino attacks, with even some republicans coming out once again to say they would support background checks for all gun sales, the senate once again this week failed to close that loophole. but could there be another way? "the new york times" is now reporting that white house officials are looking to ways to try to close at least most of the gun show loophole without congress. they think may may have a way to do it by president obama alone. an official telling "the new york times," the work i

she also offered an amendment originally penned by the late senator lautenberg of new jersey relating to terrorists, but she also offered an amendment that related to background checks for those who wanted to purchase firearms. that amendment came to the floor under the sponsorship of senator manchin, democrat of west virginia and senator toomey, a republican of pennsylvania. what it said is very basic. if we are going to sell firearms in america, we are going to make every reasonable effort not to sell them to convicted felons nor people who are mentally unstable. that makes sense. in fact, it should be a standard we all accept. the vast majority of gun owners accept that standard. they don't want guns in the hands of people who would use them in crime nor people who are mentally unstable and can't manage a firearm. that amendment came to the floor again, defeated by the republicans in the united states senate. and it's unfortunate. in the state of il, in the city of chicago too many crime guns cross the border into the city of chicago, coming into that city when they're traced to gu

my predecessor trent lott along with the late frank lautenberg of new jersey were the authors of the passenger rail investment and improvement act, which was introduced in 2007 and much work on it was done before senator lott resigned at the end of 2007. it was actually passed in 2008. so i think it was quite appropriate that senator booker and i would be allowed to follow in their footsteps and participate in this legislation which deals with making our rail system safer in the united states and more efficient, that puts greater attention on planning and efficiency, and i know that senator booker shares my enthusiasm for the accomplishment that this congress has made in that regard. mr. booker: i say thank you, and i do share that enthusiasm. i appreciate the way you began your remarks. this is a tradition of bipartisanship that goes beyond the senator and i. but i want to say this about senator wicker because i am new to the senate here. i have been here about 25 months now. but this last full year that i have been working on this passenger rail bill as the ranking member -- with t

california offered this amendment, an amendment which had previously been offered by the late senator lautenberg of new jersey repeatedly. senator feinstein took up his cause and brought this amendment to the floor for a vote last week here in washington. i went back and looked at the "congressional record" to see what the objections were from the people who said they had to vote against the amendment which would say if you're on a terrorist fly list, you cannot purchase firearms or explosives in the united states. i read some of the statements that were made from the senior senator from texas. here was his argument against this. listen. "if you believe the federal government should be able to deprive an american citizen of one of their core constitutional rights without notice and an opportunity to be heard, then you should vote for this amendment. this is not the way," the senator from texas said, "this is not the way we're supposed to do things in this country. if you think the federal government never makes a mistake and that presumptively the decisions the federal government makes about put

amongst many other qualifications she has worked through several people including senator frank lautenbergnaudible] should also holds a phd focus on her research on the small and living in kenya. [inaudible] >> thank you for meeting with us today. i would like to say that for the simple reason that i am there for the simple description, the bad news, i have to say being given five minutes over five years is kind of an unfair task. so i will try to summarize and give you a snapshot of what we are seeing on the ground in syria and to start with the answer to the question that is frequently asked in the past four years of why are they fleeing in response to refugees around us. why are people from all walks of life are leaving their homes and leaving their country and the u.s. government to respond to this humanitarian disaster so i want to convey to you the importance of remembering that this regime continues to bombard the syrian people. she was stripped of the humanitarian access and of course many violent extremist groups including these areas continue to commit appalling abuses and violat