ronald reagan did the right thing after he went after muammar qaddafi. he restored it deterrence, he killed americans, he restored to terrence, he didn't maintain it, didn't do the things necessary to make it clear to qaddafi after the attack that he couldn't push right america america, and later was the pam am 103 bombing. absolutely correctly, trump has restored d terrence, but he not enough to deter them but what the iranians want, the iranians want us out of iraq, they want us out of syria, they want us out of the middle east. president trump needs to understand he can give the iranians what they want. he needs to maintain t the >> martha: we talk about iranians, there's the leadership of iran and the leadership of iran. what are they thinking tonight as president trump took out the number two leader there, and promised them the potential or the promise of a new life, and you don perhaps in iran? iranians colonizing and fox news host lauralogan. (whistling) (whistling) and i recently had a heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after m

when qaddafi was assassinated it was during obama's call. there were prices to pay, maybe we are still waiting for the shoe to drop on that. what about if we analyze what would happen if this general lived. he had a lot of plans and promises to hurt people and he had done enough in his history that we needed to be violent. what are we supposed to do? send in another hundred $50 billion and let them keep the forklifts? it's getting ridiculous. you can't fix broken. we need to get out, it's not about a regime change, which is what obama did. we sent a strong message, and he needs to either play well with others or he will not be able to play. think the caller puts his finger on the pulse of the trump administration and part of their views about the situation in the middle east, trump does not appear to like what had been the status quo, did not like the cost to the u.s., did not like how it was playing out. that was what was on the ground. i think the question is what happens when you upset the status quo, things can get worse. that's what dem

. >> well, bin laden was not a state actor. >> qaddafi was. >> the question is whether or not there was an imminent attack may be up for debate. bret, for me, and i'm just talking for doug jones right now. the most important thing for me is looking forward in what's going to be our strategy. we've got serious issues we've got to deal with. we've got more troops in the middle east now that we've had at the beginning of the summer, some 15,000. i want to hear better strategy what i'm hearing about the set of his talking strictly about whether or not there was going to be an imminent attack, which by the way, did not come out in a classified briefing about anything involving embassies. that just did not happen i in te senate intelligence briefing. >> bret: senator doug jones, we'll be following your rates very closely. it's a close one down there in alabama and we appreciate you coming audrey will have you ba back. >> thanks, bret. appreciate it. >> bret: when we come back the latest on arad. iran. is ending soon! get a 4-course meal starting at $15.99. treat yourself to the perfect gift t

regrets of his presidency and his answer was clear he said it was not planning for what came after qaddafi in libya so it's clear that the u.s. has a lot of scars when it comes to their intervention in libya and i think you seeing that now in washington with the trumpet ministration really not knowing where to go with this but clearly washington very hesitant to get too involved in libya directly thanks very much with the conflicts in libya has many regional powers vying for influence to help the u.n. recognize government in tripoli fights off the warlords after those advances his stronghold is in the eastern city of brooke over the past few months russia has deployed fights is to help after his soldiers the united arab emirates egypt saudi arabia and from several lined up behind half so the u.s. publicly supports the government of national accord tripoli but president trump has praised the past cats are also backs the tripoli government. up is director of the turkey project at the center for strategic and international studies in washington he joins us from the and. this is supposed to be

let's get kid of qaddafi. how is that working out. right? let's get rid of qaddafi.hen you had benghazi. you see, benghazi. they didn't respond. they didn't respond. [lock her up! ] [. >> then we had walk. they went into iraq. the geniuses go into iraq. iraq didn't knock down the world trade center. this guy was not a sweetheart. but he did kill terrorists, right? and it became harvard university for terrorists, right? but they did go after him. but he didn't knock down the world trade center. so they got a lot of bad thinking. we are doing a good job. we did something in syria. we were guarding their border. we had thousands of people between the syrian border between turkey and syria. they have been fighting for many many years under different names. i said i am getting our soldiers out of there. i did, i took them out. you know what i did with the soldiers? they don't tell you the true story because they are a bunch of corrupt people back there. i told turkey, you have got to defend your own border. we are not going to defend your border. we get along with turkey.

let's get rid of qaddafi. that's a hillary deal. than you then you have benghazi.here's a story with the democrats. if i didn't kill him, and let's say we lost three, four, five embassies or bases or thousands of people or hundreds of people oratorical people were killed. they would have said trump should have taken him out. anything we do, they go the opposite, so we kill him, and that was precision. some people thought it was much too fast. went too fast. so we kill him, and they say what a horrible -- we t didn't kill him, they say what a horrible thing. a wall, we are building a wall. you do know that, right? [applause] and by the way, they think they caught me. they never catch us. because, you know, mexico is paying for the wall. alyou know that. you will see that. it's all worked out. mexico -- it's driving them crazy. now they say, okay, he's building the wall, but mexico didn't pay. mexico will pay. >> tucker: that's it for us tonight, unfortunately. we will get back, though, every weeknight, the show there is now and always the sworn enemy of my income po

. >> chris: george bush started new wars without getting a new aumf, barack obama took out qaddafi inzation. >> congress had already approved of those measures. >> chris: they didn't approve taking out qaddafi in libya. >> we can get into libya, congress had already authorized that. we need of new resolution. and if iraq decides to expel u.s. forces that at the time isis is think it was still a hue bigger question which donna raised which is does this administration have a strategy for dealing with iran and you heard my conversation with the national security advisor, maximum pressure, more sanctions, bring them to the table but although treasury secretary announced another round of sanctions on friday, we are about sanctioned out and iran is not getting less aggressive, not being more pliable, they are being more aggressive. they have gone after tankers in the persian gulf, they went after the saudi oil facility, nuclear deal. is there strategy that's going to work? >> first of all, there was what precipitated the last ten days of this crisis, i think it bears a reminder was and iran

chris: they had not approved taken out qaddafi in libya. >> congress had already authorize that.ed a new resolution, chris. and with this, when iraq decides to expel u.s. forces at a time isis is still active, this would all be for not. i just think it was still a huge mistake. chris: m gillian, here's the bigger question which donna did raise, as does this administration have a strategy for dealing with ironic? and you, heard my conversation with the national security adviser, maximum pressure, and more sanctions bring them to the table. although secretary-treasurer mentioned another round on friday, we are about sanctioned outs, and ironic is not getting less aggressive. they are not being more pliable, they are being more aggressive. they have gone after tankers in the port persian gulf, they went after the saudi oil facility, they're pulling out of the nuclear deal, is there a strategy that's going to work? >> first of all what precipitated the last ten days of this crisis, everybody bears a reminder was and iran's sponsored attack on the u.s. embassy in baghdad. it wasn't th

starting with the invasion of the killing of qaddafi, and now this assassination, are we dealing with something that is broken, or something that can be fixed? >> let me say you are right to take it back, which is one reason i went back to preventative war. yes, i think the responsibility to protect, which i supported, but was then used as a way of overturning qaddafi. i am supposed to be writing a expansion of the liberal international order, and my conclusion is more or less the only way to strengthen it and spread it is to work as much with governors and mayors nonstate actors as with state actors, because i do not see the will among state actors for even the minimal enforcement of these rules. we have never had maximal enforcement, but we had something you could call in order. if this president and president putin and others, though not president xi -- he does not want any rules, he wants back to the 19th century where anybody who is biggest makes bilateral deals with anybody else. hein once that as well, wants no rules. if we have a president who says andave to build -- rebuild b

no he was very intense like if you compare this what reagan did with gadhafi the if taking out of qaddafi change the behavior because they saw how dramatic it was a look. there's no guarantee at all with this remember iran needs the united states as a bogeyman so that they can stay a dictatorship america's the problem not us and they say that throughout they put out these all these pictures of victory and everything else so that the middle east thinks america's the bad guys and in this attack play right into that narrative that they have in iran. well. in the face of escalation of 11 straight attack eleven's hacks into months sometimes you have to do something like reagan did with gadhafi yes in the short term it gives them telling their people that we did the right thing but in the long term, the curbs there it curbs their ability along with his sanctions. >>our producer's yelling at us or ear. we haven't even talked about the whole nuclear thing that is going to have to get left for another day where you all right how easy to say to hear from you. >>check out your wednesday night foreca

is concerned it was accused by some of the libyan suddenly door position of qaddafi that they were supposed to put the field of it in safe haven and so on and so forth algeria had its own problems over the last few years and its diplomacy has not been doing what it should be what it's been the with let's not forget that julia was one of the most important to the world in the seventy's and the was an influential country in united nations but but all has died more or less over the last 2 decades with the new president in office with the new minister of foreign affairs which is basically a seasoned diplomats in the united nations also for algeria wants to come back to delusional issue that's not forget that algeria something almost a 1000 kilometers we did libya in the instability in libya would spill over to algeria. oil plant was attacked in algeria and. have a larger in 2015 the so-called terrorists that came from libya the downfall of gadhafi for instance left libya one of the most armed countries but population in the world so it is in the interests of libya is a stable obviously they tal

let's get rid of qaddafi, there was a hillary deal. then you had been gauzy. -- benghazi.outing] should be.: [chanting] lock her up! pres. trump: then they went into iraq, the geniuses go into iraq, iraq did not knock down the world trade center in case anybody had any question. this guy did kill -- he was not this guy did kill -- he was not a sweetheart, he was a bad guy in every way, but he did kill terrorists, right? and it became harvard university for terrorists. but they did go after him that he did not knock down the world trade center. so we've got a lot of bad thinking. we are doing a good job, we are getting out, and you don't -- we did something in syria, we were guarding the syrian border between turkey and syria, it has been there for a thousand years, they have been fighting for many years under different names. i said i am getting our soldiers out of there, i did, i took them out, and you know what i did with the soldiers? they don't tell you the true story because they are a bunch of corrupt people back there. [cheering] [booing] i told turkey, you got to d

what's the difference between what president trump did , and what president obama did, taking out qaddafi? i feel like there's a total lack of grace, and i think the polarization -- i just don't fairif there could be any -- when it comes to stripping the president of his power to act unilaterally without congressional authority. question,t's a great because it's complicated. lawyers,s, lawmakers, and white house lawyers have disagreed about what are comparable cases. even in the cases where there was bombing of libya under nato , those wereospices contentious as well and there is a question as to whether those should come under the auspices of the war powers resolution. there is no easy answer. but it there -- but there is a case that supporters want to do their best to insulate presidents and say that the war powers resolution does not apply in particular circumstances. , whichts to the legalese luckily i'm not trained to go into. these are point out, political questions for the rest ,f us and they are tough ones because they can be interpreted in all sorts of different ways. holland, mi

supporting the request from the arab world from libyans themselves for support for the overthrow of qaddafi now the 2 reasons why the post revolutionary victory stabilisation didn't work was 1st that the countries that had been involved in the armed campaign had no position on the ground to assist with the necessary civilian reconstruction of institutions that was necessary to achieve stability but the underlying reason for that was that the libyans themselves were very reluctant to accept foreign assistance on the ground that is disputed by it was abraham good to have his spokesperson who in fact this program to the 1st interview since the overthrow of get every with him he said the whole objective of u.k. bombing was to destabilize libya that africa's richest recover the country was evaded african currency this is a completely different to the arguments given by there with cameron by the british government and in fact after relies on the so-called green resistance who so was abrams. they are aligned with safeguard afy he said they if anything a been signed in berlin that would have been i

now multiple forces have been vying for power in libya since the ousting of longtime leader moammar qaddafi in 2011 the un backed government of national accord controls the capital of tripoli you can see that appear light blue with some coastal areas in the west of the country it's rival represented in by the self-styled libyan national army under general holds large swaths of the country in eastern and central libya a 3rd region is actually controlled by local tribes and militias you can see that marked down here in green the u.n. backed government formally requested military aid from turkey last month in the face of an onslaught by half the us forces meanwhile libya's neighbors have voiced major reservations over troops deployment plans with egypt calling on the international community to respond we have been hearing analysis from turkey and beyond on close move and it's possible it's. we see a very soft announcement by the arab league we can see that they're unified only by name we're seeing turkey become more and more now the major player in not only libya in the north africa and the ea

political capital in libya because it didn't take part in the regime change in 2011 right that toppled qaddafi so for that reason this is a real chance for germany to try to exercise its influence and i think we've seen that all sides really do see it here as a trustworthy broker very briefly iran can we apply anything we saw here with these libyan talks to the talks to save the iran nuclear deal well certainly germany has been partnering with the u.k. and france to do exactly that to stay with the diplomatic process now it says it's going to invoke the dispute resolution mechanism of the iran nuclear ago. 3 meant that could eventually lead to sanctions but actually the 3 are doing this because they want to save the agreement and by invoking that process again they get iran to the table theoretically the u.s. could even come back to the table on that on that point i think the thing that we're seeing here is that it's not germany alone germany can only be effective internationally if it's acting within the context of the e.u. with its partners and or the united nations and that is i think what

qaddafi as a huge of state after the putsch and the year after. lootera troops are present in libya as well so it's acquired the historical link but they're both country and now we have 20 years put in the power in russia last year in december so hughes is doing step by step reconstruction of the russian influence not to the soviet level of course but i'm quite agree with you that the russian trying to use this not limit not putri source of its half but limited resources but very very smart very very small indeed i just wonder. at the beginning of the show we have this quote from you holy spaces never empty was not all of it it's about if you leave some space it's not about geopolitics it's a general life. rise from the altar iceman's saying if you leave a space which is very attractive for many parts many many participants someone will jump on that so if america leaves a place or europe least someone didn't jump jump in and try to them in the space and it's not only for me though it's just don't you know there's a certain fascination for russia e

libya has been torn apart by fighting and instability as colonel qaddafi was killed in 2011. —— gaddafii't step in the same room. jenny hill reports. volatile, complex. libya's at war with itself. two factions backed by foreign powers, as they wrestle full control of this oil—rich land. today, world leaders arrived in berlin to seek a solution. many of the countries represented at the table have sent troops, weapons, money to both sides, despite a un weapons embargo. today, they agreed to stop. translation: i am under no illusion that we have a difficult road ahead of us. and in libya at the moment, emotions are running high. but we agreed that in light of all the suffering that is happening and in light of the terrible situation, that it is worth it. outside the meeting, supporters of both libya's internationally recognised prime minister and his warlord rival. no truce today, but delegates hope an end to foreign interference might be a first step. they're fuelled by fear. that they can no longer rely on libyan oil supplies, that the instability will inflame islamist terror in the regio

figure in libya the rebels who took arms in 2011 against gaddafi consider him to be a replica of qaddafi they say we didn't fight and our lives for the sake of a vibrant democracy in libya and finally to see someone like that if i have to be there and this explains this divide that you see russia france in particular say that we need someone like khalifa haftar turkey for example says there's a general government isn't. government of national accord that has been recognized by the international community and therefore that's the authority vested be considered legitimate of the country and what will this talk about turkey this is a bit of a gamble for them is it not because. i have to seems to be gaining territories easy to get immense in and he has powerful backers turkey's got quite specific strategic interests in libya itself it that there's a chance that that government could fall it is a massive gum ball for turkey it's an uncharted territory for them given the experience in syria but this time it is an involvement that could potentially change the political landscape in libya and th

north korea saw what happened to saddam hussein and qaddafi.they think those guys had nuclear weapons was the americans and nato never would have attacked. they believe with nuclear weapons you have regime security and with nuclear weapons you are able to threaten your enemies so why give them up? in the end like all states, for example in the killing fields in cambodia, there are 1.5, even more cambodians killed by khmer rouge, they thought it would last forever but it didn't. in north korea today what is happening is ironically you have a number of they facto marketing economies. in the 1990s you have 2 million north koreans died so it basically melted away. all north koreans have to fend for themselves so this generation, the millennials of north korea are going to change north korea from the bottom up. although they have been indoctrinated they don't give a darn about the regime were the leader. ngo in south korea hit a number of videos including younger north koreans and she said when i first heard of kim jong un who will become our next l

let's get rid of qaddafi. how is that working out? that was the hillary deal.ghazi. they didn't respond. now, here's the story with the democrats. if i didn't kill him, and let's say we lost three, four, five emphases or bases or thousands of people or hundreds of people, or two people were killed, they would have said, "trump should have taken him out." anything we do, they go the opposite. so we kill him and that was precision. some people thought it went too fast. so we kill him and they say, "what a horrible --" we are building the wall, you know that now. [cheers and applause] and by the way, they think they caught me. mexico is paying for the wall. you know that. you'll see that. mexico is paying. it's driving them crazy. now he says, okay, he's building the wall. but mexico will pay. >> tucker: that's it for us tonight. we will be back, though, every weeknight at 8:00 p.m. now, the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, plu, and groupt. sean hannity, with breaking news. >> sean: i have news for you. go to in-n-out burger. get onions, a double-double. the

when qaddafi was assassinated it was during obama's call. there were prices to pay, maybe we are still waiting for the shoe to drop on that. what about if we analyze what would happen if this general lived. he had a lot of plans and promises to hurt people and he had done enough in his history that we needed to be violent. what are we supposed to do? send in another hundred $50 billion and let them keep the forklifts? it's getting ridiculous. you can't fix broken. we need to get out, it's not about a regime change, which is what obama did. we sent a strong message, and he needs to either play well with others or he will not be able to play. think the caller puts his finger on the pulse of the trump administration and part of their views about the situation in the middle east, trump does not appear to like what had been the status quo, did not like the cost to the u.s., did not like how it was playing out. that was what was on the ground. i think the question is what happens when you upset the status quo, things can get worse. that's what dem

didn't cackle like hillary clinton, we came, we saw, qaddafi died. do not understand the l hysteria, targeted assassinations are fine we can joke about them, the logan act exists here and there. if there ever was a logan act,t, john kerry was violating it. >> laura: shuttle diplomacy when he's no longer secretary of state. lee and victor, fascinating. thank you so much, both of you. when we were told that the democrat 2020 candidates were a veritable field of dreams, how many times have we heard that old trope?da what happened? my angle explains that next and dinesh d'souza responds. it's going to be a doozy. stay right there. xplains that ne ♪ >> laura: the field of shattered dreams. that's the focus of tonight's angle. it began with such promise right now. the democrat party produced more than 20 candidates from political rookies to season the runs. came from texas, new jersey, california, and places in between. all claiming whatever it took to dispatching the ultimate political nemesis, donald trump. well, in the democrats' case, if you built it w

didn't cackle like hillary clinton, we came, we saw qaddafi died. i do not understand the hysteria, targeted assassinations are fine we can joke about them, the logan act exists here and there. if there ever was a logan act, john kerry was violating it. >> laura: shuttle diplomacy when he's no longer secretary of state. lee and victor, fascinating. thank you so much, both of you. when we were told that the democrat 2020 candidates were a veritable field of dreams, how many times have we heard that old truck? what happened? my angle explains that next and dinesh this is a response. it's going to be a doozy. stay right there. >> man: what's my safelite story? i spend a lot of time in my truck. it's my livelihood. ♪ rock music >> man: so i'm not taking any chances when something happens to it. so when my windshield cracked... my friend recommended safelite autoglass. >> tech: hi, i'm adrian. >> man: thanks for coming. >> tech: oh, no problem. >> tech: check it out. >> man: yeah. they came right to me, with expert service where i needed it. that's servi

we toppled muammar qaddafi in libya. we fought isis in syria and stuck around. we are still there. we are special forces have been fighting in yemen, pakistan, who knows where else. in every single place, each of these conflicts has turned out to be longer and bloodier and more expensive than we were promised in the first place. often the benefits have been none existed. a lot of lectures about how the people we are killing deserve to die. i hope that makes you feel better. we do the american people think about all of this? just five months ago, after months of supposedly iranian provocation, americans didn't seem to view iran as a major concern. not even close. in a gallop poll taken last august, just 18% of americans say they backed military force to shut down iran's nuclear program. 70% they prefer diplomacy and economic sanctions alone. so in a democracy you would think this would matter. a body, as is so often the case, the preferences of actual americans don't enter the equation at all. they are immaterial. in 2016 donald trump ran on a promise of fewer foreign adventures. he

. >> reporter: the root of this crisis and the overthrow of dictator muammar qaddafi.ng uprising. after disagreement, the u.n. backed nato to intervened. he stopped georgia dqaddafi's a. jets pounded his army, but not u.s. forces. president obama contributed only what the europeans could not, surveillance and mid-air refueling. his message, libya was europe's problem. and when gaddafi was killed, again, no consensus for what next. europe took its eye off the ball. tribal divisions opened up. islamist militias took control of the cities. ♪ ♪ u.s. ambassador chris stephens and a colleague were killed in benghazi. diplomats began to draw down. isis and al qaeda found a foothold. the u.n. helped create a government of national accord, but it had little local buy-in. international air-strikes, the only real point of western consensus, routed isis. but meaningful help rebuilding the country was in retreat. waves of migrants began using libya as a launch pad to reach europe. oil floes fluctuated. libya was a failing state. fertile ground for regional and global power plays, a

neither was saddam hussein, neither was qaddafi.he question is, first constitutional, the united states doesn't go and start wars without congressional authorization -- and i did not happen here. is,second, the question what is an appropriate response in terms of keeping us safe and not allowing terrorism to spread? what we have seen is the war on terrorism over the last 20 years has been a failure. terrorism has spread. it is 5000% up and spread around the world since this war on terror has started. we spent trillions of dollars in these wars that could have gone into other initiatives to make our country stronger. is, just because someone may be a bad actor does not mean the united states can go to war without congressional authorization. amy: this is secretary of state mike pompeo speaking on cnn just before we went to broadcast stock looks watched protest over the last week. they were not burning american flags, they were demanding the iraqi political leadership stop their kleptocracy, stop their political shenanigans and suleim

she bragged about overthrowing muammar qaddafi in libya. how does that work?re now selling in downtown tripoli. watch. >> that is a land of unconfirmed -- >> we came, we saw, he died. >> did it have anything to do with your visit? >> tucker: we killed him! killing people is hilarious! especially when their countries fall apart and markets open. if anything, hillary clinton's intentions towards iran or even more bloodthirsty. in 2008, a long time ago, the first time she was running for w president, she was morning that iran would better be ready because she was going to crush them. >> if iran were to launch a nuclear attack on israel, what what our response be? and i want the iranians to know that if on the president, we will attack iran. whatever stage of development they might be in their nuclear weapons program in the next ten years during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them. >> tucker: yeah. so just in case you didn't remember that hillary clinton was the neocon because she was and i

senior legal advisor to the trump campaign jenna ellis and fox news contributor leslie marshall, qaddafi >> good to be here, shannon. >> shannon: jenna, she said i've got to pick the managers, the people who essentially argued the case comes hard to do with the rules are going to be in the senate and how this will work. why is that not a good reason to decide? >> it's unconstitutional. soul power to try impeachment is in the senate. we're not going to send prosecutors until we know essentially how the senate is going to manage this would be like a prosecutor telling a judge in a regular court, we are not going to actually bring any charges against the defendant until you can course a judge on holding the trial on our terms and managing the courtroom how we prefer. what is unconstitutional and ridiculous. the american public is seen through this because the democrats are trying to create a constitutional crisis in america because they are literally trying to overtly, just accumulate their own power outside the margins of their authority, because they hate president trump, they want to coe

self-preservation so that wants to communicate that if we ever tried to do something to him what happened with qaddafi and saddam and some of these others that he wants to communicate i have the ability that they didn't to take out millions of people, whether it's on our soil or in the region, whatever. he wants to make sure that's the case to prevent that very outcome but that's the intent. it's not to have this authentic capability that one day i will launch a missile that would be suicidal and if there's anything you can say about kim -- he is brutal, he is murderous, the general talked about what he did with his brother there. >> kim jong nam. >> kim jong-nam. his morality is, he doesn't care about this kind of stuff but he does want to live and he does want to continue to have power and maintain it and he doesn't want to commit suicide, and if anything you can see he's wanting to expand the economy. he's wanting to improve the quality of life for his country, all those things can work to our advantage because we can see this is not an irrational actor. he's very calculated, but he understands the

think the responsibility to protect, which i supported, but was then used as a way of overturning qaddafi -- i am supposed to be writing a piece on the expansion of the liberal international order, and my conclusion is more or less that the only way to strengthen it and spread it is to work as much with governors and mayors and nonstate actors as with state actors, because i do not see the will among state actors for even the minimal enforcement of these rules. we have never had maximal enforcement, but we had something you could call an order. if this president -- and i think president putin and others, xi -- hepresident wants back to the 19th century. anybody who is biggest makes bilateral deals with anybody else. putin wants that as well, he wants no rules. if we have a president who says we have to build -- rebuild and build a new international order, i think there are rules we could create. as a matter of prediction, it will take maybe this attack and a couple of other really horrific ones. i do not know how many, it will take a cyber attack at levels that creates massive casualties,

moammar qaddafi. i remember qaddafi was going on over there at that time. the bombing. i got married in c-span talk with secretary baker last week about his memories from that day and being in the oval office that day and what it was like too much of all of the berlin wall and this is secretary baker from the university down in houston texas talking about where he was when he heard about the news on november 9th 1989 >> i was hosting a lunch for the president of the philippines in the dining room at the top of the state department. i was hosting a lunch for her when an aide passed me a note saying the instrument government has just announced east german government has just announced they will permit traffic from east germany to west germany. i read the note to the assembled group of the table. proposed a toast and then excused myself to go to the white house to meet with the president. >> do you were member what you said in the toast? >> i don't remember the words of the toast except it probably spoke to the importance of the event, to the concept of freedom for which a

qaddafi with us today. a lot to get to. i'm bill hemmer life here in new york. how you doing? >> sandra: good morning, bill. are you? i'm sandra smith. the vote coming u up to the ministry should give the classified briefing to the whole house and senate on the decision to take out iran's top general. democrats still unconvinced. most republican seemingly satisfied, but the administration maintains its actions were justified. >> as long as i'm president of the united states, iran will never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. >> as i speak to you this morning from the white house, we continue to receive word that iran is standing down. >> the question is, should the united states be at war with iran? president trump, in a series of back-and-forth escalations in the last 18 months, has brought us to that place. >> i think it's unfortunate that so many democrats are making the question of the imminence of this attack a partisan measure. it was very clear, the intelligence suggested a major attack against our troops in iraq and the middle east. >> i came away from this briefing