2020 Democrats go after Trump for 'reckless' airstrike

close

Video

2020 Democrats go after Trump for 'reckless' airstrike

Trump gets backlash for strike that killed Iranian commander; reaction and analysis from 'The Five.'

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," January 3, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Dana Perino: Hi there. This is The Five. President Trump speaking about the killing of Iran's top general at an event in Florida. Let's listen back in.

Donald Trump: Thank you, James. Got to know each other well. A friend of mine who was on television before I knew him and he kept saying, you know, he might not know the Bible as well as I do, or frankly, as well as a lot of people. But he's a leader, and he loves God. And he's a great Christian. And he said, “I love him, and I want him to do a terrific job,” and I think hopefully I've more than exceeded expectations. Robert Jeffress. Right? Thank you, Rob. And I hope I have. Cissie Graham Ledge, when you talk about a great family, that's a great family, the granddaughter of Billy Graham and the daughter of Franklin. And I appreciate everything that Franklin has done over the last two weeks. Right? He fought very hard for us. And it's a special woman and it's a special family. Thank you very much. Michael Tate. Everybody knows Michael Tate. Thank you, Michael. Great job. Jensen Franklin. Thank you, Jensen. Great. Alveda King. Jack Graham. Jack Graham. Thank you. Thank you, Jack. And Miami Zone, a man that everybody knows. I think they might know him better than they know me. Is that possible? Yes. Alberto Delgado. Alberto. I especially like to thank Paso Maldonado, Paso Maldonado. What a great guy. What a great guy, what crowds.

[applause]

I think I'm going to come to a Sunday service one of these days, is that all right?

[applause]

We have a lot of fun,. But I want to thank you very much for welcoming us here to El Rey Jesus church, the largest Hispanic congregation in the United States of America.

[applause]

And as you all know from those unemployment numbers, the best in the history of our country. The best. We'll go over that very soon, we're delighted to be with more than 5,000 Christians, including so many extraordinary Hispanic and African American faith leaders who are lifting our nation to incredible new heights. Things are happening like they've never happened before. There is no better place to begin the new year than right here with so many friends and families, pastors and patriots who believe in the power of prayer, the majesty of creation, and the love and grace of Jesus Christ. Thank you.

[applause]

In 2016, Evangelicals, Christians helped us, and they went out. Evangelical Christians went out and they worked so hard and they produced numbers like they've never produced before. And based on what Paul told me, Cissie told me and everybody told me, we're going to blow those numbers away in 2020.

[applause]

Going to blow 'em away. Hi Charlie. Charlie Kirk. Hi, Charlie. He could be a pastor and be a very good pastor.  Every day since I've been fighting for you and we really have -- we've achieved results that nobody thought was possible because things were looking very bleak for a long period of time. Things were looking very bleak. Even a thing like Merry Christmas remains to go around in the summer. I'd say, we're going to say Christmas again. We're going to say Christmas again. And now they're all saying Merry Christmas again. Right? They're all saying, you go to these big department stores, three years ago, four years ago. And that have the snow and that and the red and the white. They'd have everything. But they wouldn't say Christmas. I said, "Where's Merry Christmas?" And they said, "We can't say it." They're all saying it again. They're saying it proudly.

[applause]

Evangelical --

[end video clip]

Dana Perino: You've been listening to President Trump. He's in Miami giving a speech there to a crowd of Evangelical Christians there to listen to him. And he also talked about the news overnight, that the United States took an airstrike, took action against General Soleimani. He was basically the second-in-command there in Iran and he is no more. We're going to take it on the table here at The Five. Now get The Five going. Pete Hegseth is with us, Lawrence Jones, Marie Harf, and Emily Compagno. But, Pete, let me start with you. When you first heard this news, you must have been quite happy. 

Pete Hegseth: Yeah, elation. I mean, this is a name that most Americans probably don't know. You know, you know a name like Baghdadi, you know a name like Osama bin Laden. But Soleimani was a name that maybe flew under the radar because you're used to hearing about the Quds Force of the IRGC or the Iranian regime, and not necessarily an individual name. But those who follow the nefarious nature of Iran understand how evil this man is and how are our nation's war fighters have been targeted by him and his forces, not just in Iraq, but around the globe. Hundreds killed and maimed because of him. But it's not just the particular personal nature of the guys in our hospitals here in this country who are recovering from the wounds specifically from him. But it's a strategic way in which he's tried to advance the evil motives of the regime in Tehran. I mean, ultimately the Quds Force, the name of the Quds Force, is the Jerusalem Force. I mean, the Iran -- that's what it stands for in English. Their goal is the capture of Israel and Jerusalem. So, when you look at Iran needs Iraq to get to Syria, to get to Lebanon, to get to Israel. Iraq has always been important to Iran. The ability to meddle there and try to put a Shia Iranian regime in charge has been central to their goals. They propped up Bashar al-Assad. Now, they were putting their top general there to try to connect those dots even further. And President Trump said, if you're going to try to take our embassies, if you're going to try to threaten our people, we've already declared you a terrorist organization, which we did, intentionally, in April of 2019, which no other mission [unintelligible] had done. You pop your head up one more time and your days are limited. And that's precisely what happened. God bless the courage of our president to do it and the war fighters who had the skill to make it happen.

Dana Perino: It was quite skillful. And also, it seems like, Emily, that there was an imminent threat apparent. We don't have the details on this yet, but we hear from the Pentagon that they had some sort of intelligence that there was going to be an attack directed by Soleimani against hundreds of Americans.

Emily Compagno: Right, which is why the Secretary of State has continued to maintain all day that it was a decisive defensive strike, especially with his statements that he has been connecting with world leaders who he says agree with us in that measure. And I agree with everything that you said wholeheartedly. I think for 40 years we've seen U.S. presidents struggle with essentially the question of whether Iran is a country or a cause. And this answers the question of how we're going to proceed. And with those that are saying, "Well, this is a whole new war." It's not. It's a new chapter in an ongoing war. And up until now, we have fought it in the realm of economic sanctions and precision strikes with proxies. Now we have erased that line between the proxies and of the country. And I think we've not only delivered a blow to that terrorist regime, but also to the fact that up until now, they've been trying to bully the world into treating them like a country. They're not. And so, therefore, from here on out, as you said, we've -- we will treat them as such.

Dana Perino: They've tried -- you were talking about the strategic way that they were trying to have instability, but it also included India. Anything that the New Delhi attack and I don't know, if in the control room if we still have since we started off here with breaking news, the soundbite from the Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo. I would like to play that because, of course, we have Marie Harf, who works at the State Department here. Let's play that now.

[begin video clip]

Mike Pompeo: President Trump made the decision, a serious decision, which was necessary. There was an imminent attack. The orchestrator of the primary motivator for the attack was Qasem Soleimani. He's got hundreds of American lives, blood on his hands. A military commander who was actively engaged in plotting to kill Americans in the region. The Iranian leadership understands that President Trump will take action. We made very clear that these responses would be swift and decisive. We've now demonstrated that. We don't seek war with Iran, but at the same time, we're not going to stand by and watch the Iranians escalate and continue to put American lives at risk.

[end video clip]

Dana Perino: And Mary, in the last few weeks, we've seen these protests happening in Lebanon and also in Iraq, by citizens who are frustrated. And they were really protesting Iran's influence because they want to be able to govern themselves.

Marie Harf: My question I have today when we're looking at this news is, why now? And we've heard that there was an imminent threat on the horizon. We need to see more information about that, because the Bush administration and the Obama administration both debated taking out Soleimani and they calculated that the risk of doing so and the consequences that would come from that, whether it was basically having us kicked out of Iraq, which the U.S. likely will be now. That's certainly where it's trending. Whether it was a wider regional instability, a wider conflict with Iran, that there's always a calculation that goes into these decisions. Is this strike worth the risks? And to --

[cross talk]

Dana Perino: You talk about the Obama administration, though, wouldn't they have not wanted to strike Soleimani because they were trying to make a deal, a diplomatic deal --

[cross talk]

Marie Harf: There are reasons, there are -- but look, there are reasons the Bush administration also didn't target Soleimani.

Dana Perino: I know but the Bush administration was not trying to make a deal with the Iranians.

Marie Harf: But there are two administrations that had very different policy goals, both of whom separately concluded that to do so would cause wider instability. So, I agree that he was an evil person. There are a lot of evil people in the world. We need to know what the Trump administration's plan is for what comes next. What is -- how are they going to get back to the negotiating table? How are they going to handle possible retribution, which could come in ways we see, and could come in ways we don't, from cyber-attack. It's not funny, Pete. I have friends too over there. 

Pete Hegseth: No. Iran is now limping back to the negotiating table because they've realized --

Marie Harf: I will take that bet with you today, Pete. They will not. 

Pete Hegseth: So, you know what I can't stand, is the argument today, "Oh, Iran's going to do something. Oh, no."

Marie Harf: They are. 

Pete Hegseth: "They mount a counterattack. Oh, no." You know who needs to look at their back? Iran does. You know who needs to look over their shoulder? The number two general. They need to be the ones worried because it's America who leads. 

Marie Harf: Pete. 

Pete Hegseth: No, it is honestly they don't have --

Marie Harf: Don't discount the threat to our people in the region. If something happens --

[cross talk]

Pete Hegseth: I understand. If anybody understands the threat to the people in our region, it's me. 

Marie Harf: As do I. 

Pete Hegseth: We both do. 

Marie Harf: We both do. 

Pete Hegseth: Why do we play into their narrative by pretending like they're this all powerful --

Marie Harf: We're not playing into their narrative, but ignoring threat is not going to make it go, Pete. 

[cross talk]

Dana Perino: But showing that you are tougher, can that be a deterrence? 

Lawrence Jones: Yeah, I think it is, and I think anybody that knows me knows that I hate war. I'm not advocating for war. 

Dana Perino: Nobody loves war. 

Lawrence Jones: And the president, and I'm not a war hawk, but the president said something. I want to quote him. He said, "We took action to stop a war, not to start a war, and that we weren't advocating for regime change or anything. But the threat was imminent." And Democrats have told us for months that the president needs to listen to our intelligence agencies. Right? The president listened to our intelligence agencies. And we don't know exactly what was in that briefing. But it was enough that the president felt the need to act. This is a bad guy. 

Dana Perino: But I also think that it's kind of hard to compare previous administrations because circumstances are certainly different. As ISIS emerged after the Bush administration, during the Obama administration, now ISIS has declined. And of course, all of us would like to be able to have everyone come home, but only if we can prevent ISIS from resurging.

Pete Hegseth: I think you mentioned risk threshold. There is a different risk threshold here. Because ISIS was allowed to emerge, we ended up partnering with Iran and Soleimani under the Obama administration to try to push them back, which only empowered the Iranian militias more, so they were able to take over Baghdad. Now, they're landing their top general in Baghdad to attack our embassy. Hello. The alarm bells are going off saying our risk threshold has been passed. They're going to attack Americans.

Marie Harf: Soleimani has been doing this for years, Pete. He's been operating in Iraq since the Bush administration. I want to see --

[cross talk]

Marie Harf: -- whatever intelligence. I want to see the intelligence because there's a lot of claims in the administration, and we've seen claims in the past about intelligence. We all need to see --

Dana Perino: Well, there's going to be at full briefings, full briefings, apparently for the congressional members who will be back in town. Well, not in New York. They'll be in D.C. All right. Coming up, more reaction from President Trump on the airstrike taking out Iran's most powerful general. We're going to show that to you next. 

[commercial break]

[begin video clip]

Donald Trump: He was plotting attacks against Americans, but now we've ensured that his atrocities have been stopped for good. They are stopped for good. I don't know if you know what was happening, but he was planning a very major attack and we got him.

[end video clip]

Lawrence Jones: That was President Trump moments ago explaining why he took action to kill Iran's top general. He says he did it to prevent a war, but his critics are piling on.

[begin video clip]

Male Speaker: We appear to be without -- by the way, I'd say without congressional authorization -- entering into another Middle East war.

Male Speaker: I would anticipate the Persian Gulf war will begin anew.

Female Speaker: This one-off action can have unbelievably horrific consequences.

Male Speaker: Number one, there will be dead Americans, dead civilian Americans, as a result of this.

Female Speaker: And it's not just service members. All American citizens are now walking prime targets for walking prime targets for Iranian retaliation.

[end video clip]

Lawrence Jones: And some Democrats even accusing Trump of using the airstrike to distract from impeachment. "Squad" member Ilhan Omar tweeting, "So, what if Trump wants war? Knows this leads to war and needs the distraction?" Oh, my god.

Dana Perino: Good distraction.

Lawrence Jones: Pete, typically when there is something like this the country comes together. You put politics aside. Of course, they can have the debate if the president should declare war. But accusing the president of using this for a block for impeachment?

Pete Hegseth: Oh, but Trump; I mean, the whole idea of him being the commander in chief. There was a commentator today that said, "Right action, wrong commander in chief." It ultimately doesn't matter the decision that he made.

Emily Compagno: [laughs]

Pete Hegseth: No, that was literally --

Emily Compagno: Oh, my gosh --

Pete Hegseth: -- Jonathan Alter on another network said that, said -- correct? The implication is "I'd rather have the correct commander in chief," meaning Hillary Clinton, "and the wrong actions." And it sums up precisely how everyone who isn't a supporter of this -- the haters of the president view him. It doesn't matter what he does, we're going to dislike him. The reality is, though, the commentary there is true. He made the right call. He made a call based on advisors around him who believe this is an imminent threat, and specifically because he saw a policy action taken under the Obama administration where sovereign American soil where there's a consulate or an embassy was threatened and not taken seriously, dismissed by an Internet video by the national security advisor later on. Ultimately, he said, "If you're going to try that," -- and we know what Iran does. Iran, 40 years ago, used the American Embassy in Tehran as the launching-off point for their Islamic Republic. Embassies are meaningful to them. It's sovereign American soil. He said, "This will not happen again. And as a result, I'm going -- I see the signs in front of me and I'm going to compensate. I'm going to send the Marines. I'm going to send the 82nd Airborne," which he did, by the way, knowing they had intelligence on Soleimani -- that looked like a bit of a bigger reaction than people thought as a result. But they knew what was coming next. So, this was something that as intentional because he didn't -- imagine if he hadn't acted, the amount of negligence he'd be charged with --

Emily Compagno: Exactly.

Marie Harf: No, if he hadn't --

Dana Perino: Yeah.

Pete Hegseth: -- for knowing about the gathering threat and not stepping up.

[crosstalk]

Marie Harf: -- if there really was a different imminent threat. I mean, there have been imminent threats from Soleimani for decades, for over a decade. We know that. That's why I keep harping on actually wanting to hear more about this because I think the American people deserve the knowledge about why this time was different with all of the potential downsides that will come from this strike. Look, I mean -- 

Pete Hegseth: Like Ghaddafi in 2011, like there are lots of downsides that came from that, too. 

Marie Harf: But we're not talking about 2011 Pete we're talking about today and President Trump. 

Pete Hegseth: Why can't you to step back and say this is a dead bad guy who's dead and that's a good thing. 

Marie Harf: Because I think the consequences that come from it could have far reaching strategic negative impacts in the United States that outweighed the benefit from it. I mean, this is the most consequential decision that an American administration has taken in the Middle East since the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 and I just haven't seen the kind of strategic planning from the Trump administration that it makes me think they know what comes next.

Lawrence Jones: It's one that it's one thing to say, you know, you need more information, but you have Obama, former administration officials like Ben Rhodes saying that they questioned the president's strategy and competence to lead. 

Marie Harf: And do to. 

Dana Perino: And so that's just that's going to happen, and presidents can't worry about it. Right. They have to be able to make decisions based on the information that they have, the responsibility that they have and the timing and then history will figure that out. Right. That's not for them to worry about right now. The other thing is, if he if there had been an attack based on something that the president knew about and he didn't act in doing it, then what do you think of all the 2020 Democrats would have said instead. That would have been a much different conversation because they would've said how much tougher they would be. So, it's kind of difficult when these things are happening in the middle of a presidential election to the point that Ilhan Omar, the congressman from Michigan, said Minnesota, excuse me that said that maybe President Trump was just trying to create a distraction. I think it could arguably say that from September to now the biggest distraction in America has been impeachment. That was actually a distraction and I also think that there is more strategy behind this because of something you pointed out, Pete, that in April of 2019 the Trump administration designates Soleimani and his group as a terrorist organization. So they've now I think that that probably you will look back and find is the history is written about this time that there was a lot more strategy to it than we thought but it can't you can't plan everything out and so, yes, we need to know anything right now. 

Emily Compagno: And I think that the point I'd like to make is the fact that when people say that this is the escalation, what if the Iranians have been doing they have been steadily escalating and become more bolder with their aggressive actions against us right. Starting with oil tankers and then the oil processing facilities and then U.S. positions and then an all-out attack in Kirkuk that killed a U.S. contractor and then an attack on the U.S. embassy. So, I also don't understand why all of a sudden out of the blue, we question the U.S. intelligence community when apparently, especially in domestic matters, they are to be absolutely believed at all points. It's only because of Trump's involvement that all of a sudden, we're not to believe them, we're not to trust them when they have the intelligence community has come out. They strongly indicated that a major attack necessitated preemption with this risk. So why now all of a sudden do we need more information? If-- 

Female Speaker: Well, we have --

Emily Compagno: --coupled with if coupled with Iranian behavior and decisions in these last year or so has escalated. Why wouldn't we believe that?

Lawrence Jones: We've got to we've got to go. Coming up, 2020 Democrats lashing out at President Trump for killing Iran's top commander. The Trump administration is hitting back. We'll discuss next on The Five.   [commercial break]

Pete Hegseth: Welcome back. Well, 2020 Democrats are blasting President Trump's decision to take out Iran's top general. Candidates claim Trump should have asked Congress for permission first. Yea I'm sure they would have held onto that tidy little secret, and though the airstrike prevented an imminent attack. Take a look. 

[begin clip]

Bernie Sanders: Tragically, his actions now put us on the path to another war. 

Joe Biden: The risks are greater today because of the actions Donald Trump has taken. 

Tulsi Gabbard: This was very clearly an act of war by this president. 

Cory Booker: We have a president who has had really a failure in his Iranian policy. 

Male Speaker: I can only hope that the president has carefully thought out the national security implications of this attack. 

Pete Buttigieg: The next president who will be picking up the pieces after the Trump administration. 

[end clip]

Pete Hegseth: There we go and Secretary Mike Pompeo responding with this blistering rebuke. 

[begin clip] 

Mike Pompeo: We took a very different approach. We didn't send pallets of cash to the Iranians. We didn't pay for hostages. We didn't create a deal which would have given them a clear pathway to a nuclear weapon. We've taken a very different approach. We believe it's the one that will ultimately lead to success and stability in the Middle East. 

[end clip]

Pete Hegseth: You know, Dana, is this kind of criticism something you're familiar with is this what political opponents will do when there's a disputed foreign policy or is this even more frothy because of the Trump environment? 

Dana Perino: I was trying to I was trying to think back to some other examples of that and I think that the initial obviously the initial response after 9/11 was widely seen, had a lot of bipartisan support. The Iraq war had bipartisan support and then that fell apart pretty quickly after that and then if you think about President Obama's red line then there was criticism about that, although when there were calls for Congress to have a debate. 

Pete Hegseth: Yep. 

Dana Perino: You see and reauthorize, the Republicans said, we don't want to do that because we think that you're going to head down a path that would tie this president's hands or the future hands of future presidents. I was kind of surprised at Joe Biden today and I think that he could have taken a different tact and separate himself out because the Elizabeth Warren issues like two statements right. 

Pete Hegseth: Yea. 

Dana Perino: And they were pushing for a more leftward leaning one and I think Joe Biden and in his national position, his position as head of the national polls could have said something like, good, glad that this is taken care of I support the president, United States and we'll take your questions. Right because I think that he could have set himself apart, and I don't think it would have hurt him as much. The extreme positions of somebody like Bernie Sanders or Tulsi Gabbard or frankly, kind of the kind of the weasely one of Mayor Pete. 

Pete Hegseth: Yeah.   Dana Perino: Does not inspire confidence. 

Pete Hegseth: Marie, though, putting on a political hat a little bit, setting aside the policy because we could disagree about that all day, is that a position Joe Biden could have taken? Can a Democrat nominee really step back and just support Donald Trump in an action he takes overseas? Or is that automatically something you have to hate if you're a Democrat?

Marie Harf: I don't think that Joe Biden supports this action, so I think it would be disingenuous and not genuine for him to say --

Dana Perino: That would be bad.

Marie Harf: -- what Dana wants him to say. And so, I don't think that would be a good thing. I think that Joe Biden is not afraid to use military force. He voted for the war in Iraq, which is not causing the same problems it caused Hillary Clinton in 2008, which is interesting, although Mayor Pete's trying to get that in there.

Pete Hegseth: He's trying?

Marie Harf: He's trying, really -- yeah. But on this. I think that Joe Biden was trying to sort of do a version of that, but say, "Obviously this is a good thing. Qasem Soleimani was evil. He had American blood on his hands." But when you're president, you have to think about the second and third and fourth order outcomes. And I don't think that President Trump has. So, he actually was trying to be the moderate here and not, you know, Tulsi Gabbard saying, "This is an act of war." I mean, Tulsi's way out there on issues related to Iran. Anyways but, you know, I think that what Democratic voters want to see is a strong statement. And so a statement like Mayor Pete's, which I do think didn't say a whole lot, wasn't -- I think Pete actually having served in Afghanistan could have made a much stronger statement for why he believes this is putting us on the course to conflict. And he missed an opportunity here, I think.

Lawrence Jones: I don't think Joe Biden is the one that we want to go to for these type of decisions. I mean, this is a guy that Robert Gates said has been wrong on every foreign policy decision in the last 30 years. He opposed the Osama bin Laden raid. And so, this is not a guy who would have the guts to do something like this. I'm not sure I would put that mistake in his opinion on this, but I do believe that the other candidates could have struck another tone. But again, the progressive side of the Democratic Party is not going to be for them. They look at this just as war, period. Even though this guy was a bad guy, they see it as war. And someone who is a libertarian like me has even taken a step back saying, "I want more information." But this is a counterterrorism strike, and I believe the president did the right thing.

Pete Hegseth: Yeah. I mean, Emily, it shouldn't it be okay to be on Team America for just, like, an hour a day or for a statement?

Emily Compagno: Right. And I think we saw that, interestingly, with Elizabeth Warren today, just like we saw with her with Medicare For All. So, she first of all, said, you know, "I support this. He was a murderer. I support increased DOD spending for this." And then basically when the left started freaking out of her party, then she came back and said, "Oh, just kidding. It was an assassination." Criticizing Trump's policy. And she suffered for it after she did the same with Medicare For All, support for her deflated. And I think if people see through this. Already, we're seeing a waning for her. But you can't be, as a candidate, all things to all wings of the party, especially that party. And we're seeing it here, for that reason that you can't stand up for one moment and just really tell the truth for one moment.

Dana Perino: I do think that the Bernie Sanders position, though, could be attractive to a lot of people. So, President Trump, for example, when he was campaigning, he was like, we're out, we're done, we're not doing that. And then when you become president, everything looks a little bit different because you have the responsibility and you have more information. But Bernie Sanders today, he was like, I will prevent war with everyone.

Pete Hegseth: Well, we might actually get a chance to talk a little bit more about that, because, of course, President Trump also ran on that. Hey, pull us out of foreign entanglements. That's what Bernie Sanders is talking about it. Maybe we'll talk a little bit about that. Up next, more reaction to the U.S. airstrike that killed Iran's top general on the other side.

[commercial break]

Dana Perino: President Trump declaring his reign of terror is over after ordering an airstrike to take out Iran's top general. Here's the president just a couple of hours ago explaining why he took action.

[begin video clip]

Donald Trump: Soleimani was plotting imminent and sinister attacks on American diplomats and military personnel. But we caught him in the act and terminated him. Under my leadership, America's policy is unambiguous to terrorists who harbor or intend to harm any American. We will find you. We will eliminate you. We will always protect our diplomats, service members, all Americans, and our allies.

[end video clip]

Dana Perino: Speaking of our allies, though, today Secretary Pompeo made specific references to many different countries and allies of ours that he said supported this reaction by asking and acknowledging that it was Iran's escalation that required necessitated our defensive action. What comes next for our allies and us?

Pete Hegseth: No, that's a good thing. I think what comes next, most importantly, where the president will stay focused on is America's interests. That's why one of my favorite things about this was Trump's American flag tweet right afterwards. I mean, it's a reminder that this is an action taken in advance of American interests. We can't rely on Iraqi guards standing outside our embassy. Guess what? We've been training them for 16 years and they still let the Iranians through to trash our embassy. We can't rely on allies who've never been full partners, as much as we'd like them to be, in the war against radical Islamic terrorism. If we're going to defend ourselves, it's going to be us. As it pertains to Iraq and the future. I mean, we killed an Iranian general in Iraq trying to destabilize the country. We've spent that much time, blood, and treasure investing it. I say -- I mean, listen, if the Iraqi parliament votes to say we don't want the Americans there anymore, as far as I'm concerned, fine, fine. And I say hand them all guns and let 'em shoot each other. And I know that sounds sort of, like, barbaric and backwards. But I think there are a lot of people out there in America that say if you're not satisfied yet, if you won't follow through and defend yourself yet, then at what point do we decide it's not in our interest. We can do some from further away and work with allies that are still there, like the Kurds, but pouring money and pouring weapons and pouring investment into places where people don't want it or they're not capable of keeping it, is something this president ran against. So, this action should not pull us closer to war, but instead its weakness invites challenge. This is strength, which I think sends a signal. The right signals we want to run to read right.

Emily Compagno: And all day, also that we -- our messaging has been a commitment to de-escalation there, that if they stop, we'll stop. So, how does, also, all that messaging --

Dana Perino: Well, I think there have been. There's, and there's been frustration along the way, right? There's all of these little points of escalation. The drone that the Iranians shot down. 

Pete Hegseth: Shot down, yes. Yeah.

Dana Perino: And talk about the Iranian actions, right? And we have actually kind of, like, kind of let it slide. But you attack the embassy, and then that's different. But also, I think -- and we'll get more information on it -- like, what was the intelligence that led to the strike? And I also think that if the Iraqis decide that they don't want us to be there anymore, the one thing about the American interest piece is that can we be assured that the Iranians won't then use that area to plot and plan against our interests other places?

Pete Hegseth: That's fair.

Dana Perino: And so, we have to be prudent. And I think people should give the president and the administration the space that they need and the time they need to figure that out. But don't forget that Iran is supported by Russia and China. Russia and China just did some joint military drills last week. I mean, keep an eye on this, it's a, it is a bigger play. But I don't think that this was without strategy, I really don't. I think that we will find out that there was something leading up to this for a while.

Marie Harf: If we end up having to leave Iraq because of this, I think there will be many questions about what we actually accomplished during the time we were there. And all of that blood, and sweat, and American men, Pete, that you talked about who sacrifice there, if we end up with no foothold in the country, a government in Baghdad that is closer to Tehran because of us, and a country in Iran where the hardliners feel emboldened and where they now have an external enemy -- because don't forget at home, Iran right now is facing incredible protests domestically, probably bigger than the 2009 protests.

Pete Hegseth: Because of the stand the Trump administration has put on.

Marie Harf: Not entirely, no. There's a bunch of different reasons the protestors are out there in the streets. But one thing we know for certain is that the Iranian regime will use this as a rallying cry back home to solidify their power and it will embolden the hardliners. So, I think it is a strategic question. We know what the positives of taking him out are.

Pete Hegseth: The finger, the finger for that is not pointed at the Trump administration.

Marie Harf: We don't yet know --

Pete Hegseth: The reason why we've --

Marie Harf: -- how the negatives --

Pete Hegseth: -- lost a foothold is not --

Marie Harf: -- how the negatives will play.

Lawrence Jones: Yeah.

Marie Harf: And losing a foothold in Iraq after so many years and so much American money, and blood, and treasure --

Lawrence Jones: I think --

Marie Harf: -- would be a really --

Lawrence Jones: -- I think the main thing --

Marie Harf: -- big problem.

Lawrence Jones: -- I think the main thing to take away now is where do we go from here. And that intelligence is very crucial that they had. And are there still threats that -- we took out the main guy, but there's a number two already that has taken his spot. And so, what are we going to do now? And I do believe that the administration has a strategy and the president has been hesitant to reveal that strategy, I understand for national security reasons as well. But I do believe that America, the country, needs to understand why the president decided to act. And I'm not telling him to divulge all the sensitive information.

Emily Compagno: All right. Okay. We have to go. We are going to switch gears because there's a huge fight brewing in the Democratic Party, and it could have a major impact about who could become the nominee. We'll tell you about it next.

[music playing]

[commercial break]

Marie Harf: Top Democrats trading blows with the Iowa caucuses just one month away. Bernie Sanders going after Joe Biden saying, "It's just a lot of baggage that Joe takes into a campaign which isn't going to create energy and excitement. He brings into this campaign a record which is so weak that it just cannot create the kind of excitement and energy that is going to be needed to defeat Donald Trump." And Biden is responding with this jab, "Good luck, Bernie. Lots of luck in your senior year, Bernie. That's what they used to say in the yearbooks." In the yearbooks.

[laughter]

Dana, so, a month away from Iowa.

Dana Perino: Yeah.

Marie Harf: I cannot believe we are already there and there is a fight at the top of the polls between a handful of candidates, Bernie and Biden among them.

Dana Perino: Yeah. There's some consolidation, right? And you --

Marie Harf: There is.

Dana Perino: -- finally, you start to see them going after each other. I used to diagram sentences in the eighth grade. We would take the Far Side cartoons and we had to diagram this whole packet. And so, I diagramed a Bernie Sanders one --

[crosstalk]

-- and I don't think that it was very mild. I think if you read into it, he was saying "a lot baggage." That equals Hunter Biden and he is trying to, like, let him know that. He said that "your record is so weak." That means "You're not progressive enough and I'm actually the one that can deliver results." You know, complaints about the Obama administration not going far enough. And then he says, "You can't create the energy and excitement," which basically is saying, "You're too old and too slow for this, and I'm not." And I think that it was a little bit tougher jab than weak.

Marie Harf: "Even though I had a heart attack not that long ago," Bernie Sanders. But they -- look, we're going to start seeing more of these jabs at each other because we are down to the wire here in Iowa.

Lawrence Jones: Yeah. And I'm interested to see the Iowa debate on how that's going to go. But look, I think even though it was a petty fight, I think there was a lot of things that were true. Biden does have a lot of baggage. I mean, someone that has been in political office ever since he was 30 has a long track record, and he's flip-flopped on a lot of issues on the campaign to appease the progressive base. Look, I do believe that Bernie is sincere in his belief system; and so, there's a certain authenticity that comes across when he's talking about these issues. But the problem Biden's going to have, not only is that baggage, but that progressive base that probably won't show up in the general election because it seems like the party is -- and I believe Biden is going to be the nominee because there's nobody -- no matter all the hits that he's taken, he's still been the frontrunner.

Marie Harf: Yeah.

Lawrence Jones: A lot of people aren't going to show because they feel like he's been forced down their throat.

Marie Harf: As a supporter of President Trump, which of the Democrats are you most worried about being the nominee?

Pete Hegseth: I still think it's going to Bernie Sanders. I --

Lawrence Jones: And who ?

Marie Harf: Are you worried about him?

Pete Hegseth: -- I'm not worried about him at all. I'm not worried about any of them.

[crosstalk]

But I -- because I think if they think Joe Biden's the guy that's best to beat Trump, look. Look at this response. What does it even mean? This is like --

[laughter]

[crosstalk]

Dana Perino: Do you want me to diagram it?

Pete Hegseth: -- you know, this is really, really bad old people trash talk.

[laughter]

Lawrence Jones: It is.

Pete Hegseth: "Good luck, Bernie. Lots of luck in your senior year, Bernie. That's what they used to say in the yearbooks. You know, lots of luck in your," -- what does that even mean?

[laughter]

Honestly.

[crosstalk]

Dana Perino: That's a sick burn. You don't know that?

Pete Hegseth: What a burn.

[laughter]

This is what he came up on the moment and that just -- so, he's dealing with Bernie Sanders who's a lot of things but not really humorous.

Lawrence Jones: [laughs]

Pete Hegseth: And his attempt -- with Joe Biden -- is to talk about yearbooks? Just like when he talked about old movie reels. I mean, this guy is three steps behind the Democrat candidates. Imagine where Biden would be on a stage where he's having to debate President Trump. It's a joke. So, I --

Marie Harf: He's still polling ahead of President Trump --

Pete Hegseth: -- well, because he's --

Marie Harf: -- in many of the states --

Pete Hegseth: -- polling against --

Marie Harf: -- head to head.

Pete Hegseth: -- "Weekend at Bernie's," too. I mean, he's polling against a terrible --

Female Speaker: [laughs] "Weekend at Bernie's."

Pete Hegseth: -- terrible field. And that doesn't say much about his candidacy [spelled phonetically].

[crosstalk]

Marie Harf: Emily, a month out from Iowa. How do you make sense of this?          

Emily Compagno: Well, I think that in a different year, a different election, then what Bernie said would be absolutely true, but this, I agree with you, basically. Yes, he has baggage. Yes, he is weak. He's unable to galvanize the population. He has no spark. But this year, it's all about to the Democrats beating Trump, and so far, that has been able to carry Biden nationally for some reason. But as you said interestingly, maybe people are sick of that concept being rammed down their throats because we are seeing him falter in the realm of money and in these early states polling. And I think if he does outperform expectations in Iowa and New Hampshire, obviously he's already strong in South Carolina, that will be a domino effect that will resurrect his fundraising. But for now, if he doesn't, then he might be ultimately gonzo. 

Dana Perino: There we go. One month away. 

Emily Compagno: The countdown is on. 

Pete Hegseth: What seriously is senior year for, Bernie? 

Emily Compagno: I don't know. No one knows.

Dana Perino: I don't know what you're talking about, but we need a break. 

Emily Compagno: We are all under 85 at this table. 

Dana Perino: One more thing on the way.

[commercial break]

Dana Perino: It's time now for one more thing on The Five on this Friday. OK so we love cute animals here. Of course, you know, animals are great and there could be a good reason because it turns out they are actually good natural stress relievers. Michael Philips of The Wall Street Journal wrote a piece today that said a new study by the University of Tulsa is trying to prove that surfing the Internet for baby animal pictures actually makes you more productive at the office, not less. So you can tell your boss that everybody you know, you don't have to meditate and do puzzles. Some of you can just watch a slideshow of cute animals and you will feel better after that. Or you can go to my Instagram page at Dana Perino and see all the pictures of Jasper not a baby anymore, and Lawrence thinks he has the same face, same look on his face every single time. 

Lawrence Jones: He does. 

Dana Perino: Plus, you Greg Gutfeld you might have seen on Twitter you said he was a little under the weather, but he is feeling better. He's going to be back tomorrow night The Greg Gutfeld Show with Terry Shepherd, Jim Florentine Kat Timpf and Tyrus will be on tomorrow night, 10:00 p.m. eastern with Greg Gutfeld as your host. All right, Pete. 

Pete Hegseth: Tea shop might have a few things to say about-- 

Dana Perino: Maybe so, maybe so. 

Pete Hegseth: Yes. Well, if you know, I will be heading home right now to go home to go to sleep because a Fox and Friends weekend we're up from six to ten on Saturday and Sunday morning and for the last two years at the great privilege of hosting with Ed Henry. Now, Ed Henry went and got himself promoted. So, this weekend is his last weekend as the official co-host of Fox and Friends Weekend. He will be starting on January 20 as the co-anchor with Sandra Smith he'll do a fantastic job. You see that trophy there, Ed not only has become a very good friend, but also a nemesis and we've had many, many competitions I'd say we're about equal right now. 

Emily Compagno: Are you equal? Is there going to be a competition tomorrow? 

Pete Hegseth: I'm going to be generous to my good friend, I will say and Emily's going to be on with us.   Emily Compagno: Is there a competition tomorrow? 

Pete Hegseth: We'll make sure to have at least one competition of all competitions. 

Dana Perino: Okay we're going to tune in and check that out. 

Pete Hegseth: But congratulations to my good buddy, Ed Henry one more weekend. 

Dana Perino: Yes congratulations Ed. How about you, Lawrence? 

Lawrence Jones: All right. This was a close call, for sure. You got to see this footage and you got to follow the dot. Wild footage shows a beachgoer in Santa Cruz being swept off a coastal cliff by a gigantic wave. Look at that, the dramatic moment was shared on Facebook by the county of Santa Cruz. The footage shows a man tumbling down the rock into a choppy the choppy waters. Thankfully, he was rescued by the state park workers who warned beachgoers waves can sneak up on you. You should never turn your back never on a wave. 

Dana Perino: Oh, wow. 

Pete Hegseth: You die from that. 

Lawrence Jones: [crosstalk] He's OK though. 

Female Speaker: Good rescuer. 

Emily Compagno: Save that to the end. 

Dana Perino: All right Marie. 

Marie Harf: OK, so you may have heard of the new challenge called the 2020 tip challenge by now. This waitress from Michigan, Danielle Franzoni was given $2,020 tip while working at Thunder Bay River Restaurant on New Year's Eve. It was a 23$ meal, so that was an 8700 percent tip. She has finally spoken out, thanking the couple for their extreme generosity. Take a listen. 

[begin clip]

Danielle Franzoni: I'm going to build a future because of this my kids have a future, and I have a home. It's a big deal. It's a really big deal. 

[end clip]

Marie Harf: Wow as we end this first week of 2020. We should have more kind challenges like this, especially in the year that will be fraught with a lot of nasty politics. Yeah, more things like this. 

Dana Perino: So, you could keep it going all year. 

Marie Harf: Keep it going all year. 

Dana Perino: All right. Good idea. Emily. 

Emily Compagno: Okay, my one more thing is kind of a mix of Dana and Lawrence's in that it's a dramatic rescue of a puppy. So this 90 pound Pyrenees puppy named Ruby, she fell into a storm drain in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on Wednesday and she was trapped 50 feet down. So Tulsa firefighters showed up to dig. They find her trapped all the way down there and they it took them two hours to dig and dig and she finally got her out. She's healthy, she's back with her owner and we obviously extend our gratitude to these brave firefighters. I'm so grateful to them that they always save animals, too. It's not just people.

Dana Perino: It's interesting. Like when animals get freed like that, it's almost like they're like, OK, cool, we're fine. Then they make sure they shake it off so easily. And we're all like we're all like holding our breath, like, is he going to be OK? 

Emily Compagno: Although her Ruby's little expression when she was being put to the ambulance was. 

Dana Perino: Marie, are you ready to go back to D.C.? 

Marie Harf: I am ready to go home. 

Dana Perino: We've enjoyed having you on the show this week. We appreciate it. Anyone having a good new year how are your resolutions holding up? 

Pete Hegseth: So far, so good. 

Dana Perino: Yeah. What was yours? 

Pete Hegseth: I keep the bar, nice and low. 

Dana Perino: You hesitated there a little. 

Pete Hegseth: It's a work in progress. 

Dana Perino: All right. Well, it's great to spend our New Year's week with you, and but that is it for us. We're going to be back here on Monday. Have a great weekend, everybody.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.