Rep. Tulsi Gabbard says all-out conflict with Iran would make wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic

close

Video

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard says all-out conflict with Iran would make wars in Iraq and Afghanistan look like a picnic

Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard joins Martha MacCallum on 'The Story' to discuss escalating tensions between Washington and Tehran following the U.S. strike on Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," January 6, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, HOST: So tonight Iranian President Rouhani who openly wept at Soleimani's funeral is now pushing back at President Trump's warning about 52 Iranian sites that could be targets.

Rouhani tweeting this. Those who refer to the number 52 should also remember the number 290. Never threaten the Iranian nation. So there Rouhani is referring to the 290 Irani civilians who were killed when their plane was accidentally shot down by a U.S. missile back in 1988.

So 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard says all of this is jeopardizing our national security interests. She says no war with Iran. 
She joins me exclusively in moments. Senator Tom cotton firmly planted on the other side of this debate. He is also here. He will respond to Tulsi Gabbard tonight.

Also this evening, the battle over the impeachment trial is heating up. 
John Bolton now says that he is willing to talk. He would testify if subpoenaed. Judge Andrew Napolitano joins me with his thoughts on that. 
Also Katie McFarland is here tonight with the President's actions in Iran.

But "The Story" begins with Fox news correspondent Benjamin Hall who is live tonight in Amman, Jordan. Good evening Benjamin.

BENJAMIN HALL, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Good evening Martha and ever since we have heard and learned of the death of Qasem Soleimani, we have been hearing from Iran. There are threats of retaliation, there are threats of revenge, there are threats to shed American blood.

We've heard it from their political leaders, we've heard it from their military leaders, we heard it again today during the funeral of Qasem Soleimani in Tehran. Over a million people, they say turned out to mourn him and they say they are going to attack the U.S. homeland.

They've said they're going to attack the White House, Saudi Arabia, ships in the Persian Gulf, U.S. embassies as well as numerous other facilities. 
They also said they are going to attack and target President Trump himself and they put an $80 million bounty on his head and they then had to ask the crowd if they would donate $1 - a dollar each to finance that.

We also hired from Soleimani's successor. His name is Esmail Ghaani. He's been in command of the Quds force since 1997. He was in charge of their Afghanistan operations and critically, he said he was going to continue Soleimani's legacy of harnessing proxies around the region, using them to wield Iran's power and today he spoke to the leader of Hamas, a worrying sign that the two might be planning something together.

The other big announcement out of Iran today that they would no longer abide by limits set by the 2015 nuclear agreement, that they would start enriching uranium, they would start breaking the centrifuge levels so they would start collecting material to build an atomic weapon.

They have always wanted that bomb. They now seem on a path to try and get it. 7 to 11 months is what experts estimate it might take them to break out. And in the middle of all these tensions the U.S. is now scaled back its operations in Iraq to boost its defensive measures.

They've also dispatched another 3000 troops on top of the 750 who have already gone to Kuwait as a precaution. From a U.S. perspective though, an official has said that will be no more U.S. strikes unless Iran does something that warrants it.

And on Sunday night, there was that vote, that vote by the Iraqi parliament that said, all U.S. troops must leave Iraq. It's a non-binding vote. There a few more stages for its pass through but it is a worrying sign of how conflicted Iraq is and certainly how tense the whole region is. Martha.

MACCALLUM: Thank you Ben. Here now exclusively Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii. A 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate, combat veteran and Major in the Army National Guard. She is campaigning tonight in New Hampshire. Thank you very much Congresswoman Gabbard. Good to have you here tonight.

REP. TULSI GABBARD, D-HAWAII, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Thank you Martha. I appreciate the opportunity.

MACCALLUM: So obviously you think this is heading in a very bad direction. 
What do you think happens next?

GABBARD: Well, we've got to be clear-eyed about the situation that we are in, that inching closer actually more than inching, speeding towards an all-out war with Iran would make the wars that we've seen in Iraq and in Afghanistan look like a picnic.

It will be far more costly in lives, American lives and American taxpayer dollars and all towards accomplishing what goal? What objective? I think that's really at the crux of this decision that President Trump made to take out Soleimani.

We've got to make sure that our Commander-in-Chief is making decisions that are based on the best interest of the safety and security of the American people and our own national security and that's not what's happened here.

MACCALLUM: All right so put yourself for a moment in the White House in the Oval office. You have a situation where tankers are being hit. You have a situation where an American contractor is killed and then you have the embassy that we built, it is sovereign United States territory under attack. What would you do?

GABBARD: Well, actually work to de-escalate the situation. We've got to recognize that these things doesn't just happen overnight. These things began with Trump's withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement, choosing to move away from diplomacy, further escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran, escalating crippling sanctions, a modern-day siege against Iran.

Sending more and more troops to the region, further escalating tensions and designating Iran's military as a terrorist organization, further escalating this conflict with Iran. Something that's never been done by any country anywhere in the world before.

MACCALLUM: All right but--

GABBARD: And this where he has not - he has not put the national security interests of our country first. I just want to finish this because there's two main points here of how he's undermined our national security. Number one, every day that goes on that Iran is not in the nuclear agreement and just I think yesterday announced that they're no longer abiding by any restrictions that are part of that agreement.

That means they're closer to developing a nuclear weapon capability, putting us and the world at risk and number two, because our forces in Iraq for example are no longer going to be focusing on defeating and ensuring that Al-Qaeda and ISIS are not allowed a resurgence, the Commander - our commander there yesterday just said, we're not doing that anymore because now our troops have to focus on Iran allowing ISIS and Al-Qaeda to create and mount a resurgence that further puts our national security at risk.

MACCALLUM: I think there are plenty of people who agree with you and then there are people on the other side of the equation who say when you are presented with intelligence and members of Congress are going to hear what that intelligence was, I imagine on Wednesday or at least a little bit more information on these imminent threats and you don't take the target of opportunity to take this person out who is behind those threats to American citizens and American military, you take a risk of having people then turn back to and say how could you have allowed our people, our military to be made vulnerable by this attack when you knew you had the opportunity to take this guy out.

And I want you listen for just a second to Sargent Bartlett who has been a frequent guest on this program when he talked to us the other night about the IED that was Iranian made that blew him up and changed his life and took away his friends. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SGT. ROBERT BARTLETT, RETD AMRY STAFF: It's retribution for guys like this. Sgt. Brian Mancini who died at the hands of Iranians passed his injuries. 
Sgt. William J. Brooks, Corp of Bishop. Robert Sydenham. All these guys are there - you know have died at the hands of the Iranians in this current regime and some to the Quds force and Soleimani at his hands so for us it's
- it's retribution.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: So given the opportunity to take him out and prevent further attacks against men and women like that, how do you not take it?

GABBARD: Now look Martha, I'm the only candidate running for President who's actually served in uniform in Iraq during the height of the war. I understand very clearly, both what happened and the situation, the challenges that we are dealing with their now.

But here's the key that as Commander-in-Chief, the Commander-in-Chief should not be making decisions based on who is a bad guy or even who has blood on their hands. The Commander-in-Chief needs to make a decision about what is in the best national security interests of our country and I just gave you the two biggest examples of how Trump's decision has undermined our national security and made the American people less safe.

That is at the crux of what is wrong with the decision that Donald Trump made and why it's so critical that we have a Commander-in-Chief who has experience and understanding in both foreign policy and our national security to make - and with the foresight to see what the consequences of those decisions will be.

This is why I'm running for President to bring the experience that I have to fulfil that responsibility and to serve as Commander-in-Chief.

MACCALLUM: Everybody respects your service and your ability to discuss it from your own perspective from your experiences there as well. I just want to play this. This is sound bite from the Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, threatening Americans and warning U.S. forces.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NASRALLAH, LEADER, HEZBOLLAH (through translator): When the American soldiers and officers coffins start moving to the United States as they came vertically, they will go back horizontally. Then Trump and his administration will recognize that they really lost the region and they will lose the election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Interpret that threat for us you know in practical terms, what do you expect to happen now?

GABBARD: Look, it's hard to say with specifics but I think that this statement is further affirmation of how this step that Trump took is a serious - a serious escalation of this war that further puts the American people and our troops in the region at risk.

This is why I am calling for our troops to get out of Iraq and Syria now because the longer that they stay there, the more likely it is that we will find ourselves entrenched into another endless quagmire of a war with no one able to define what does winning look like. What does victory look like?

What are we actually trying to accomplish and how does it actually serves the best interests of our people and of our safety and security.

MACCALLUM: Congresswoman Gabbard, thank you very much. Good to speak with you tonight. Thanks for being here.

GABBARD: Thank you Martha.

MACCALLUM: Coming up Sen. Tom cotton who has served also in the military in Baghdad, in Iraq and Afghanistan. He's also an informal adviser to the President on Iran. He says America is safer because of the actions taken by President Trump. He's up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GABBARD: It's an all-out war with Iran would make the wars that we've seen in Iraq and in Afghanistan look like a picnic. It will be far more costly in lives, American lives and American taxpayer dollars and all towards accomplishing what goal?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard moments ago on why she opposes war with Iran. My next guest has served as an informal adviser to President Trump on Iran and while he wasn't made aware of the details of the strike against Soleimani before it happened, he fully backs President Trump's decision after long pushing for a more forceful approach in dealing with the Iranian regime.

Here now Republican Senator Tom Cotton, a member of the House, of the Armed Services Committee, I should say and an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran. Senator, thank you for being here this evening.

SEN. TOM COTTON, R-ARK.: Good evening Martha. Happy New Year.

MACCALLUM: I guess her question is definitely one that is on the minds of Americans. What's - what's the end goal here? How do you - how do you describe success with this current tension escalation with Iran?

COTTON: Martha, the President put it well on Friday when he said he did not act to start a war, he acted to stop a war. For months now Iran has been escalating its aggression against the United States and our partners, bombing ships that are in the Persian Gulf, attacking unmanned aircraft of ours back in June, striking Saudi Arabian oil fields and increasing the pace and the scale of their attacks against our troops in Iraq.

Couple of Fridays ago an American was killed. President made it clear from the very beginning that if Iran killed an American, they would pay severe consequences. That's exactly what happened last week when he ordered the death of Qasem Soleimani. Let's remember who he was as well.

He's been the terror mastermind of Iran for decades. He has the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands. So we didn't just get vengeance and justice for all those Americans who died at his hands and for their families but we also made America safer in the future as well.

MACCALLUM: Understood and we have talked about that quite a bit but I think that it is a question that is on people's minds because President Trump was going to end the endless wars. He's been in the middle of pulling our troops out of these areas so if they do retaliate, what comes next? Then what happens? What do we do after that?

COTTON: I would suggest to Ayatollah that they should think very carefully before they take any more action against Americans and the Middle East or anywhere else. Donald Trump showed just last week what happens when you kill a single American.

He would order the killing of your terror mastermind. Let's remember Qasem Soleimani was flying from Lebanon where he had been visiting with Hezbollah, his terrorist proxy there into Iraq. He was killed at the Baghdad International Airport, not with an Uber driver but with the head of Hezbollah in Iraq as well.

They were plotting to kill more Americans in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. That's the lesson that Ayatollah needs to take away from this. The President nor I nor many other Americans want to start another war but we aren't going to let Iran wage a proxy war against us without fighting back.

MACCALLUM: All right. I want to play a sound bite from Michael Bennett who is a Democrat running for President. Here's what he had to say about the President's action.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MICHAEL BENNET, D-COLO., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You know, I hate to say this but I think it's President Trump raising his middle finger at the Congress. For us to now be sending 3500 troops to the Middle East without taking account of what we've been doing for the last 20 years on the basis of the President's impetuous, uninformed and weak decision, I think creates a lot of peril.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: What do you say to Sen. Bennet on that?

COTTON: Well, the thing that is important to remember that these troops are part of our global response force. They are on a 2-hour recall. When I was in the army we prepared every day to be on that to our recall to be deployed anywhere within 24 hours to hot spot around the world.

They're not going to the Middle East to be an advance force, to invade Iran or to occupy Iran as we saw in Afghanistan or Iraq in the last 20 years. They're going simply to augment our defenses, to be prepared for any strike and hopefully this to deter such strikes.

You wouldn't expect the President to make those decisions in long consultation with Congress. That's why we have a single Commander-in-Chief to make decisions that have to be made quickly and decisively.

MACCALLUM: So you know, in terms of him saying that the President's giving the middle finger to Congress, what do you think?

COTTON: Well, Michael's running for President and I understand the Democratic Party activists sometimes like that kind of rhetoric. The President's been consulting with Congress. He's going to send the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State and the CIA director in just a couple of days to brief everyone once they're finally back in Washington.

I was in the office today. I reviewed all the classified briefings they had sent over and had all my questions answered. The President acted decisively for a target of opportunity, last week. His administration's going to be briefing Congress fully this week.

MACCALLUM: We look forward to hearing some of that. Senator Tom Cotton, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight.

COTTON: Thanks Martha.

MACCALLUM: So John Bolton didn't see eye to eye with the President on Ukraine and now the former National Security Adviser is prepared to testify if subpoenaed in the Senate impeachment trial. What that could mean for President Trump when "the Story" continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: Former National Security Adviser John Bolton dropping a bit of a bombshell today. He said he would testify in a Senate impeachment trial if he is subpoenaed and now Democrats who have long held that Bolton's testimony could be key to proving wrongdoing by the President are imploring their Republican colleagues to get on board, arguing that those who don't are co-participating in a cover-up.

It would take four Republicans to move the needle here. Joining me now Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst. So you know, it's interesting because we're in the middle of all of this Iran news, right?

And then all of a sudden John Bolton comes out and raises his head and his hand and says well, if I'm subpoenaed by the Senate, I actually would talk. 
I would come in and testify and tell my story and just to remind everybody, this is the National Security Adviser who said that he believed that you know, Rudy was a hand grenade that was going to blow them all up and that he didn't want to have anything to do with the Ukrainian drug deal, he called it.

JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FOX NEWS SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: Right, very harsh words, not untypical for him. Now in full disclosure, we all know John, he used to work here. He's a straight shooter. He's honest to a fault so to speak. He'll say exactly what he thinks.

I think this is a game-changer because of it's hard to believe that if the Democrats subpoena him, let's say Mrs. Pelosi passes the articles of impeachment over in Senate.

MACCALLUM: Well, let's say--

NAPOLITANO: That's a big if.

MACCALLUM: That's a big if.

MACCALLUM: And sends over a team of prosecutors. You know, last time around one of those prosecutors was a young Congressman Lindsey Graham. This time he's one of the jurors. Sends over a team of prosecutors and they say Chief Justice Roberts, we subpoena John Bolton.

It will be hard to believe that Republicans would overrule the Chief Justice on something and someone as key as this.

MACCALLUM: But they could.

NAPOLITANO: They could. What--

MACCALLUM: And today Mitch McConnell said, you know, let's get the you know, the articles of impeachment and then we'll - we'll talk later about
what--

NAPOLITANO: But here's the thing. If he does testify, he opens up the floodgates to a real trial meaning as Senator Schumer's been saying as recently as a few hours ago, live testimony and documents, not summaries of what people told the House Judiciary or House Intelligence Committee as they did in the - in the Clinton investigation.

That's what's good news for the Democrats and bad news for the President. There's another side to this and that is we don't know what John Bolton will say.

MACCALLUM: Exactly.

NAPOLITANO: And he might not give an interview. Now it would be crazy for a prosecutor to call a witness to testify without knowing ahead of time what the witness is going to say. In the real world and impeachment is not quite the real world, that would be malpractice, whatever - whatever the outcome.

MACCALLUM: Well you know, here's what we know about the situation, right? 
John Bolton left the White House. The President basically you know, said he was fired. He said, I wasn't fired so obviously there's that feeling, right?

He's also a very staunch conservative who will - I would imagine you know, stick up for the principles of the President's rights. He also could say, he can go in there and say, yep, I said it was a Ukrainian drug deal. I didn't want anything to do with it. I also said that I thought that Rudy essentially shouldn't be involved in what he was involved in Ukraine.

Those things being true, I don't think what the President did was impeachable.

NAPOLITANO: He could very well say that.

MACCALLUM: I mean, I don't--

NAPOLITANO: He could - he could - he could blame somebody else and not the President or he could say I was there when the President said fill in the blank. I'm not giving this guy his money until he goes after Joe Biden, I mean if something like that comes out of his mouth, that would be very hard for the President.

MACCALLUM: Absolutely.

NAPOLITANO: And it might - it might force the President to take the stand in his own defense.

MACCALLUM: So you've got - you've got Susan Collins, you've got Mitt Romney, Diane Feinstein, all reacting to this and you know, obviously they would need four Republicans. Does that look like a possibility?

NAPOLITANO: I think it is a probability.

MACCALLUM: You do?

NAPOLITANO: Yes, that Republicans will want to hear from John Bolton because they do not want to face the backlash of silencing.

MACCALLUM: And would it be behind closed doors? Or will that--

NAPOLITANO: Oh no, this testimony--

MACCALLUM: It would have to be open.

NAPOLITANO: It would be on the floor of the Senate, in front of the Chief Justice with hundreds of millions of people watching. Can you wait?

MACCALLUM: No, I think it will be fascinating and he has a book coming out too, right?

NAPOLITANO: Yes, this is not the book either way.

MACCALLUM: Well, but very interesting either way because he clearly was a fact witness in this situation and was right there in the White House but I think the jury is open in terms of whether or not he would - you know sort of indict the President, so to speak with his comments but we don't know.

NAPOLITANO: Right.

MACCALLUM: Judge, thank you.

NAPOLITANO: Oh pleasure.

MACCALLUM: Good to see you. Happy New Year.

NAPOLITANO: Yes and to you.

MACCALLUM: Welcome back.

NAPOLITANO: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So President Trump today blasting the Obama administration, saying that it could have taken tough action against Iran but chose not to. 
Marc Thiessen and former Obama officials Y. J. Fischer who helped implement the Iran deal take on that debate next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSH LIMBAUGH, HOST, THE RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOW: What was the purpose of American policy with Iran prior to your presidency?

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP: I don't think they had a purpose. I don't think they knew what was happening.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP:  He is a terrorist. He was designated a terrorist by President Obama and Obama did nothing about it except but give them $150 billion and even more incredibly, 1.8 billion in cash. You hear me talking about that all the time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM:  President Trump blasting his predecessor today amid reports that the president is fixated on the previous administration. The Washington Post quotes former aides as saying Trump has "burned with the desire to raise Obama's foreign policy legacy and proved himself a superior commander in chief."

Meanwhile, former Obama officials are firing back saying that the president has undone their work. Former deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes writing this. "To keep his promise to kill an achievement of Obama's Trump has been willing to break his promise to get us out of wars in the Middle East."

Here now, Marc Thiessen, host of the American Enterprise Institute's What the Hell is Going on podcast and Fox News contributor, and Y.J. Fischer, a former Obama State Department diplomat who helped implement the Iran deal.

Marc, let me start with you.

MARC THIESSEN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Yes.

MACCALLUM:  Do you think that's the president's goal here?

THIESSEN:  No, I don't think that's the president's goal to undermine Obama's legacy. He's trying to fix the mess that he inherited from Obama in the Middle East.

And look, for Ben Rhodes to say that the president is fixated on erasing Obama's legacy, you know, that's rich coming from the administration where, I just interviewed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on the podcast and he told me that there are Obama administration officials are actively talking to the Iranians and tell them to just hang on, and wait out the Trump -- the Trump administration until Donald Trump loses.

That talk about undermining somebody's foreign policy, this is a former administration that's doing this to the current commander in chief while he's dealing with the terrorist regime.

MACCALLUM:  Well, there was a suggestion, I mean, reporting awhile back to John Kerry was suggesting that to them as well. Y.J., is that true, are members of the Obama administration sort of signaling to Iran to just of wait this out and that they can return to the Iran deal and everything that went with it if a Democrat wins?

Y.J. FISCHER, FORMER OBAMA STATE DEPARTMENT DIPLOMAT:  Martha, absolutely not. When President Trump came into office, he inherited the Obama legacy which was a successful campaign against counter ISIS, which was a contained Iran nuclear program and which was not an additional war in the Middle East.

And now, all three are more likely. And President Trump would do well to take his own advice. On the campaign trail he said multiple times that we should avoid further entanglement in the region. He fired John Bolton over it and here we are careening towards another war of choice in the Middle East.

MACCALLUM:  Well, we'll see about that. I want to play Jeh Johnson who was homeland security secretary in the Obama administration. Here is what he said about the move to take out Soleimani.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEH JOHNSON, FORMER UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY:  If you believe everything that our government is saying about General Soleimani, he was a lawful military objective. And the president under his constitutional authority as commander in chief had ample domestic legal authority to take him out without an additional congressional authorization.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM:  Y.J., let me go back to you for a second. Do you agree with Jeh Johnson?

FISCHER:  A bit. I mean, I would say that I think we should ask whether this move actually makes Americans safer. Right? I think President Trump has taken his eye off the real prize which is the real terrorist threats, ISIS.

So, yes, I do think that Jeh Johnson is right but I also think we should be asking what makes America --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  Just take Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi before this guy.

THIESSEN:  Yes.

MACCALLUM:  So, Marc Thiessen, do you think that America is less safe because of this move?

THIESSEN:  I think it's much safer. And look, it's a little bit rich for someone from the Obama administration to be questioning the wisdom of taking out Soleimani. It was the Obama administration that literally directly funded Soleimani's terror campaign across the Middle East by giving him $150 billion in cash sent on secret plane loads and pallets of cash.

When Donald Trump came into the Oval Office what he inherited from the Obama administration was an Iran that was on the march across the Middle East, in Syria, in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Yemen. And what he has done is he has fought back the economic benefit; he's posts huge crippling sanctions on the regime.

And the Washington Post reported earlier, late last year that as a result of the sanction, this is a quote, that "Iran's ability to finance allies such as Hezbollah has been curtailed."

MACCALLUM:  Yes. You know, Y.J. --

(CROSSTALK)

THIESSEN:  So, they were literally being fueled by the cash provided by the Obama administration.

MACCALLUM:  When you look at the situation now, I mean, you know, you wonder what their next move could possibly be. Their economy is in very rough shape. They have protesters in the streets of Tehran. It's possible. 
And the crackdown killed 1,500 of them according to some of the reports in Iran.

This is a religious leadership dictatorship that is really on the brink in a way that they haven't been for a long time. And in fact, the last time they were on that brink was 2009, when a lot of people feel there was an ability for the Obama administration to have pushed a nudged a little bit to have given these people a chance of freedom and didn't take advantage of it. So, here we are again.

FISCHER:  I think that it's an open question about what happens in Iran next but I want to zoom out for a second. And I just want to say that the two lessons from the Trump administration seem to be that America doesn't keep its word and that you are much better off with nuclear weapons.

MACCALLUM:  Wasn't the -- hold on, hold on, hold on. Because last time I checked, the word is if you hurt an American --

THIESSEN:  Yes.

MACCALLUM:  -- you're going to have hell to pay and that's exactly what he did.

THIESSEN:  He is the difference between Donald Trump and Barack Obama. 
Barack Obama drew a red line in Syria and didn't enforce it. Donald Trump drew a red line to the Iranians. He said if you kill a single American you will pay a price, and he enforced it.

MACCALLUM:  Yes.

THIESSEN:  Barack Obama diminished ISIS as the J.V. team, Donald Trump took away their caliphate. Donald -- Barack Obama gave the Iranians $150 billion to spread terror across the Middle East, Donald Trump squeeze them and taken away their ability to do that and he took out Soleimani. The world is safer today because he has rolled back the disaster to Iran nuclear deal.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  I'm going to give Y.J. the last word here because I gave Marc the first. Go ahead, Y.J., and then we got to go.

FISCHER:  I'm just going to say that countries are going to look at the attack on Soleimani and they are going to think this never would have happened if Iran had nuclear weapons. And the contrast between how President Trump kowtows to the North Koreans versus how he is behaving in regard to Iran sends a clear signal to countries around the world that they are better off if they have nuclear weapons and I think it's something we should be very concerned about.

MACCALLUM:  Well, President Obama did say, gee, North Korea is the thing I'm the most worried about on the way out the door, so we'll see where all this goes. Y.J, thank you very much.

THIESSEN:  Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM:  Marc Thiessen, thank you as always as well. Thank you, guys.

So, former Trump deputy national security advisor K.T. McFarland says the president was right to take out the, quote, "world's king of terror." But she says if you read between the lines in what Iran is now saying there's actually something big in there. She's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM:  A top Iranian military advisor vowing to hit the United States military targets in response to the killing of General Soleimani, calling President Trump a gangster and accusing him of not knowing international law after President Trump warned Iranian cultural sites could be targeted.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOSSEIN DEHGHAN, MILITARY ADVISER TO SUPREME LEADER AYATOLLAH KHAMENEI (through translator):  The only thing that can end this period of war is for the Americans to receive a blow that is equal to the blow they have inflicted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM:  Former deputy national security adviser, K.T. McFarland joins me now. She is the author of the upcoming book "Revolution:  Trump Washington and We, the People." K.T., good to see you this evening.

K.T. MCFARLAND, FORMER DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER:  Good to see you.

MACCALLUM:  You sort of listened into a little bit more of what he had to say there. And you found something interesting in sort of what the military commander from Iran was saying. What did you see in there?

MCFARLAND:  He said that we are going to inflict an equal blow on you. And then, basically, that's it. Now normally the response would be, we're so angry, we're so mad, we're going to do this, we're going to do that. But he had very carefully chosen words and he spoke in a very sort of sober manner.

And he said we are going to do an equivalent a blow to what you did to us and that's the end of this.

MACCALLUM:  Then it's over.

MCFARLAND:  Now to me, I read into that and think, well, are they trying to send a signal here? I mean, maybe there's an opportunity, let's see what their reciprocal blow is but maybe there's an opportunity to say, OK, that chapter is closed, what's the next chapter.

MACCALLUM:  Well, as you say, the most important thing there is whether or not there is a blow --

MCFARLAND:  Reciprocal. Yes.

MACCALLUM:  -- response is something that we can let lie. And the president said he doesn't want this to turn into a war and I think the American people probably --

(CROSSTALK)

MCFARLAND:  No, of course.

MACCALLUM:  -- on board with that idea as well. You wrote an op-ed about all of this today. And in it, you said, once this round of tensions subsides either in a new relationship or with the current Iranian regime or its successor government, which is another interesting idea, because maybe there's a room for a shake-up there which I think a lot of the protesters would like to see happen -- it's time for us to turn our resources from the Middle East to Asia. What do you mean?

MCFARLAND:  One of the reasons I supported Trump from the very beginning was he was the only person who understood we have spent way too long in the Middle East, we have spent way too much blood and treasure in a part of the world that has fought for, you know, thousands of years and we are not going to change that sort of ethno-tribal psychodrama of warring tribes.

So, they've been killing each other at least at their throats for decades, and centuries, and millennia. So, we don't need their royal anymore. And the big game changer is because of our energy independence.

You know, two or three years ago we would have that conversation and we would have said what we have to say in the Middle East --

MACCALLUM:  Right.

MCFARLAND:  -- because we need their royal. We don't need their anymore. And then fact, if the Iranians respond, if their reciprocal blow is to try to shut down the Strait of Hormuz which 10 years ago would have put shutters into the world oil market. You know, it may not be that big a deal.

MACCALLUM:  Yes.

MCFARLAND:  It may hurt them more --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  Yes. It's bad for Europe, it's bad for China and other places but not so bad for us anymore.

MCFARLAND:  We could --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  So where would you like us to turn our resources to in Asia specifically?

MCFARLAND:  South China Sea. I think we need to -- we need to focus on what China is doing.

MACCALLUM:  Yes.

MCFARLAND:  And China is building up a blue water navy. They want an international string of ports. Now their commercial ports where they could easily be turned into military naval bases. They have decided to build this made in China 2025, they want to steal, beg, borrow, acquire the technology of the 10 leading technology --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  Would you put a greater military presence over there?

MCFARLAND:  We had a greater military presence there. Yes, I would, particularly a naval presence. But I would also really ramp up U.S. R&D spending and technology spending and the military but as well as in the civilian sector. Because the wars are the future aren't necessarily going to be aircraft carriers and land armies. There are going to be cyber wars, there are going to be economic wars.

MACCALLUM:  So, you've been saying that for years. Before I let you go, I want to ask you one quick question about John Bolton because a lot of folks out there seem to think that this news is seismic.

This is the political headline. Bolton curveball threatens to upend the impeachment trial. And here's a little bit of the reaction on TV. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, HOST, CNN:  John Bolton, a potential star witness now says he's prepared to testify if he is subpoenaed by the Senate.

ARI MELBER, HOST, MSNBC:  His testimony could be damaging.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  It's a major change of heart from a key witness.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Democrats here they have been demanding to hear from Bolton and tonight they feel that this offer strengthens their case for witnesses.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM:  So, you know all these players, John Bolton is going to throw President Trump under the bus?

MCFARLAND:  The problem with President Trump has, is when he fires people instead of letting them leave with grace and honor and dignity, he wants to humiliate them. He kicks them one more time on the way out the door and that's what he did to Bolton.

Now we know John Bolton, we worked with him, he's not going to win miss congeniality. And so, I worry that what he might say could embarrass the president. I don't think the president did anything illegal. I think the president talks a lot but I think if you look at his actual what he does, what are his deeds, I don't think he has done anything illegal. Maybe a little bit inappropriate but nothing that rises to the level of an impeachment.

And when I listen to these people, you know, Judge Mukasey said, what these people are, they're just sitting around inhaling their own exhaust fumes and getting high on them.

MACCALLUM:  It is never a good idea. K.T., always good to see you.

MCFARLAND:  Thank you.

MACCALLUM:  Thank you so much for being here. Happy New Year to you. K.T.'s op-ed is up now at Foxnews.com. It's excellent. I urge you to check it out.

And coming up next, some of President Trump's 2020 rivals accuse him of being politically motivated with the strike that killed Iran's top general.

Guy Benson and Juan Williams take that on coming up next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Are you trying to suggest the president may have done this for political gain?

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:  Look, the president and his whole administration have no credibility. Why right now as Donald Trump faces a potential impeachment trial in the United States Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM:  Some of President Trump's 2020 rivals now say that political gain may have motivated the strike that killed Qasem Soleimani in an effort to distract from impeachment.

Here's Senator Elizabeth Warren this weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WARREN:  Why does he pick now to take this highly inflammatory, highly dangerous action that moves us closer to war?

JAKE TAPPER, HOST, CNN:  Are you suggesting that President Trump pull the trigger and had Qasem Soleimani killed as a distraction from impeachment?

WARREN:  Look, I think people are reasonably asking about the timing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM:  Here now, Guy Benson, host of the Guy Benson show and a Fox News contributor, and Juan Williams, co-host of The Five of course and a Fox News political analyst. Gentlemen, thank you for being here.

GUY BENSON, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Hi, Martha.

MACCALLUM:  Guy, let me start with you. Is that a good place for these candidates to go?

BENSON:  No, it's embarrassing and it's reckless. There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this was done for political reasons. Elizabeth Warren, I understand put out a tweet early on calling Soleimani a murderer and that became a problem for her on the left and so she had to backtrack and basically walk it back and direct all of her rhetorical fire at President Trump which I think is not what a statesman or statesperson would do.

And it's actually I think pretty gross to see this entire line of argument. If Warren wants an answer to the question that she posted, why now, the answer is Iranian behavior and events. They provoked, they escalated, we drew a red line. And unlike other presidents, this president actually enforce this one and it's not a mystery. And this conspiracy theory I think with no evidence is irresponsible.

MACCALLUM:  What do you think, Juan, about drawing that connection?

JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS CO-HOST & POLITICAL ANALYST:  Well, I think she doesn't have any evidence. So, I mean, on that level, I think guy is right. Now there is precedent. Obviously, people point at President Clinton and some of his behavior in terms of going to war during the impeachment process back in '99.

But even in that regard, the question, the serious question to my mind is, Mr. President, speaking of President Trump, do you understand the consequences? What is -- where are we going? How do we say to the American people that this is in our best interest at this time and in fact, this is going to somehow de-escalate tensions? To the contrary, it's escalated tensions, we are sending troops now to the Middle East. This is a president
--

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM:  They killed an American --

WILLIAMS:  Right. Yes, but that's not the first time.

MACCALLUM:  -- and the president said, you know, if that happens. Yes, but in the context of all of this escalation, the president, you know, against the wishes of some other members of Congress and the Senate decided not to take kinetic action after the Saudi oil tankers were hit. And then he said, you know, this is about American lives. And if you cross that line you are going to have huge hell to pay.

WILLIAMS:  I just think we've -- he's crossed that line before and he's with hell, to restrain himself. In this case, and I think this is something that previous presidents across political lines have faced, Martha, and they have decided that unless you are ready to come to terms with the consequences of potential war, starting war not just between U.S. and Iran, but Saudi Arabia, Iraq, all the kind of demonstrations we've seen, that you don't do this kind of thing on an impetuous basis. You have to think about it.

MACCALLUM:  Guy?

BENSON:  I think there is definitely a thought through. There is a lot of reporting about how this was an option on the table for weeks that the president had declined to act on previously. And then with yet another provocation following the death of an American, wounding four others, eventually the president got to the end of his rope.

And I think that that's what's important here. We talk about risking war and that was part of Elizabeth Warren's answer there. You know, why are we getting closer to war? The Iranian regime has been waging war on Americans now for years.

Soleimani himself was responsible for the deaths at least 600 Americans over the course of years. And I think that there was a sense within the regime that they could continue to act with impunity and President Trump eventually disabuse them of that notion in a very shocking and bracing way.

And certainly, I hope they are paying attention because the president made it clear at some point he's not going to mess around anymore.

MACCALLUM:  Guy? I'm sorry. Juan?

WILLIAMS:  Well, I just think that, you know, right now when we are sending additional troops, when you have the Iranians pulling out of their deal to not produce nuclear weapons, a greater threat to Israel, you have to stop and think again. What are the consequences?

And I think lots of Americans given the administration's willingness to play with facts and tell lies, that people are questioning what's the credibility of the evidence because Soleimani has been a danger to Americans all along, but is he worth a war? I think President Trump said earlier no.

BENSON:  Well, there isn't -- Juan, we don't have a war. Do you think that we would be a safer country that Americans in Iraq and elsewhere would safer with Qasem Soleimani still alive plotting against Americans as he has for years?

WILLIAMS:  Well, I think we've now a lot of the asymmetrical type warfare from these terrorist groups ginned up because of his murder. We can see the people --

(CROSSTALK)

BENSON:  Yes. That's what Soleimani did.

MACCALLUM:  We got to leave it there. Gentlemen, thank you.

BENSON:  He is the architect of that.

MACCALLUM:  Thank you very much. Great to have you both with us tonight.

BENSON:  You bet.

MACCALLUM:  That is "The Story" of Monday, January 6, 2020. But as always, the story goes on. So we'll see you right back here tomorrow night at 7 o'clock.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.