>>> WELCOME BACK.
>>> WELCOME BACK. REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUND THEMSELF
REPUBLICANS HAVE FOUND THEMSELF IN A POLITICALLY AWKWARD
IN A POLITICALLY AWKWARD POSITION ON THE SUBJECT OF
POSITION ON THE SUBJECT OF ELECTION INTERFERENCE.
ELECTION INTERFERENCE. YOU MAY THINK STOPPING FOREIGNER
YOU MAY THINK STOPPING FOREIGNER
FOREIGNERS FROM INTERFERING
WOULD BE AN EASY VOTE. BUT MITCH McCONNELL BLOCKED A
BUT MITCH McCONNELL BLOCKED A VOTE.
VOTE.
KEVIN McCARTHY TOOK PAINS TO AVOID CRITICIZING PRESIDENTO
AVOID CRITICIZING PRESIDENT TRUMPS I WOULD TAKE IT
TRUMPS I WOULD TAKE IT COMMENTS.
COMMENTS.
JOINING US IS STEVE SCALISE
WHOSE BOOK IS NOW OUT IN
PAPERBACK.
CONGRESSMAN SCALISE, WELCOME BACK TO "MEET THE PRESS."OME
BACK TO "MEET THE PRESS."
NICE TO SEE YOU.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHUCK. GOOD TO BE BACK WITH YOU.
GOOD TO BE BACK WITH YOU. >> LET ME START WITH THIS
>> LET ME START WITH THIS
ELECTION INTERFERENCE BILL. I KNOW YOU VOTED AGAINST WHAT
I KNOW YOU VOTED AGAINST WHAT THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS BILLED AS
THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS BILLED AS HR-1, THIS LARGE VOTING RIGHTS
HR-1, THIS LARGE VOTING RIGHTS BILL THAT THEY PUT TOGETHER.
BILL THAT THEY PUT TOGETHER.
IF THEY CARVED OUT THE PARTS JUST ON ELECTION SECURITY --
JUST ON ELECTION SECURITY -- THERE WAS AN ELECTION SECURITY
THERE WAS AN ELECTION SECURITY
PORTION REQUIRING PAPER BALLOTS, ESTABLISHING BETTERAPER BALLOTS,
ESTABLISHING BETTER CYBERSECURITY STANDARDS, ALSO
CYBERSECURITY STANDARDS, ALSO WOULD INCLUDE I THINK WHAT MARK
WOULD INCLUDE I THINK WHAT MARK
WARNER WANTS TO SEE, IMMEDIATE
REPORTING TO THE FBI, COULD YOU
VOTE FOR THAT BILL?
>> WELL, I HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH HR-1, NOT THE LEAST OFCERNS
WITH HR-1, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH WERE THE FIRST AMENDMENT
WHICH WERE THE FIRST AMENDMENT
VIOLATIONS.
YOU HAD EVERYBODY FROM THE ACLU
ALL THE WAY TO NATIONAL RIGHT TO
LIFE COME TOGETHER AGAINST THAT BILL BECAUSE OF WHAT IT DID TOT
BILL BECAUSE OF WHAT IT DID TO LIMIT THE FREE SPEECH RIGHTS AND
LIMIT THE FREE SPEECH RIGHTS AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RIGHTS OF
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RIGHTS OF
MILLIONS OF AMERICANS.
THAT BILL IS RIDDLED WITH
PROBLEMS.
IT PUTS TENS OF BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER MONEY INTO
POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS, SOMETHING I
DONT THINK MOST AMERICANS WANT
TO SEE THEIR TAX DOLLARS USED
FOR.
THAT BILL HAD MASSIVE PROBLEMS.
INTERESTING THAT IT WAS THE VERY
FIRST BILL NANCY PELOSI CHOSE TO MOVE THROUGH THE HOUSE WAS AE TO
MOVE THROUGH THE HOUSE WAS A BILL THAT FAR LEFT.
BILL THAT FAR LEFT.
ITS BEEN AN EXAMPLE HOW SHES RUN THE HOUSE.AMPLE HOW SHES
RUN THE HOUSE. NOT ADDRESSING REAL PROBLEMS.
NOT ADDRESSING REAL PROBLEMS. >> LETS GO TO ELECTION
>> LETS GO TO ELECTION
SECURITY. LETS TALK -- IM ASKING ABOUT
LETS TALK -- IM ASKING ABOUT JUST THE ELECTION SECURITY.
JUST THE ELECTION SECURITY.
THIS WAS NOT A SMALL EVENT.
THIS SEEMS TO BE NOT
UNREASONABLE IDEAS HERE WHEN IT COMES TO THE CYBERSECURITYEN IT
COMES TO THE CYBERSECURITY PORTION OF THE BILL, WHAT MARK
PORTION OF THE BILL, WHAT MARK WARNER IS CALLING FOR.
WARNER IS CALLING FOR. COULD YOU SUPPORT THAT?
COULD YOU SUPPORT THAT? >> THERES A LOT ON
>> THERES A LOT ON
CYBERSECURITY I THINK WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON. CAN
COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DETAILS ON
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DETAILS ON
HOW SHE WOULD WORK WITH US ON SOME OF THE THINGS WE TRIED TO
SOME OF THE THINGS WE TRIED TO GET THROUGH CONGRESS THAT ARE
GET THROUGH CONGRESS THAT ARE BIPARTISAN DEALING WITH
BIPARTISAN DEALING WITH
CYBERSECURITY, BECAUSE THERE ARE
CONCERNS NOT ONLY FOR ELECTION SECURITY BUT THE CORPORATE SIDE.
SECURITY BUT THE CORPORATE SIDE. YOU HAVE SEEN PERSONAL DATA,
YOU HAVE SEEN PERSONAL DATA,
PRIVATE DATA STOLEN THROUGH
ATTACKS PRIMARILY FROM FOREIGN
STATE OPERATORS, WHETHER ITS
RUSSIA, CHINA, NORTH KOREA OR SO MANY OTHERS.A, NORTH KOREA OR SO
MANY OTHERS. >> I WANT -- THERES A NEW STORY
>> I WANT -- THERES A NEW STORY IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TODAY
IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TODAY THAT HIGHLIGHTS A MORE
THAT HIGHLIGHTS A MORE AGGRESSIVE TACT THAT THE U.S.
AGGRESSIVE TACT THAT THE U.S.
GOVERNMENT IS DOING NOW AGAINST
RUSSIA IN PLANNING POTENTIAL
ESSENTIALLY FORMS OF MALWARE
INTO THE RUSSIAN POWER GRID,
TAKING A MORE OFFENSIVE APPROACH, RATHER THAN JUST DOING
APPROACH, RATHER THAN JUST DOING THIS ON DEFENSE.
THIS ON DEFENSE.
DO YOU SUPPORT THAT NEW POLICY?
>> LOOK, YOU HAVE TO TAKE EVERY STEP POSSIBLE FIRST OF ALL TORY
STEP POSSIBLE FIRST OF ALL TO MAKE SURE WHAT HAPPENED IN 2016
MAKE SURE WHAT HAPPENED IN 2016 WITH THE
WITH THE WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT DOESNT
WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT DOESNT HAPPEN AGAIN IN 2020 OR ANY
HAPPEN AGAIN IN 2020 OR ANY
OTHER ELECTION.
IM GLAD THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN TAKING AGGRESSIVEATION
HAS BEEN TAKING AGGRESSIVE ACTION, INCLUDING IF YOU SAW IN
ACTION, INCLUDING IF YOU SAW IN
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER THE
PRESIDENT ISSUED A FEW -- OVER A YEAR AGO, ALLOWING DOD TO BEER A
YEAR AGO, ALLOWING DOD TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE AT MAKING SURE
MORE AGGRESSIVE AT MAKING SURE THEY CAN PROTECT NOT ONLY OUR
THEY CAN PROTECT NOT ONLY OUR
GRID BUT GO AFTER ANYBODY WHO IS GOING TO TRY TO MESS WITH OUR IS
GOING TO TRY TO MESS WITH OUR
ELECTION SECURITY.
>> IT WAS INTERESTING -- I WANT
TO POINT OUT ONE NUGGET IN THAT
STORY.
APPARENTLY, THE PRESIDENT WAS
NOT FULLY BRIEFED ON THIS
OPERATION.
I WANT TO SHOW YOU ONE PART OF THIS "NEW YORK TIMES" STORY OF
THIS "NEW YORK TIMES" STORY
ABOUT THAT.
IT SAYS, PENTAGON AND
INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS DESCRIBE
BROAD HESITATION TO GO INTO
DETAIL WITH MR. TRUMP ABOUT
OPERATIONS AGAINST RUSSIA FOR
CONCERN OVER HIS REACTION AND THE POSSIBILITY HE MIGHTN AND
THE POSSIBILITY HE MIGHT COUNTERMAND IT OR DISCUSS IT
COUNTERMAND IT OR DISCUSS IT WITH FOREIGN OFFICIALS AS HE DID
WITH FOREIGN OFFICIALS AS HE DID
IN 2017 WHEN HE MENTIONED AN OPERATION TO THE RUSSIAN FOREIGN
OPERATION TO THE RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTER.
MINISTER.
THE PRESIDENT WAS UPSET ABOUT THE STORY, EVEN GETTING IN THE
THE STORY, EVEN GETTING IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN AS HE TWEETED
PUBLIC DOMAIN AS HE TWEETED
ABOUT IT LAST NIGHT. DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THESE
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THESE OFFICIALS MADE A MISTAKE NOT
OFFICIALS MADE A MISTAKE NOT
BRIEFING THE PRESIDENT ABOUT THIS OPERATION?ESIDENT ABOUT
THIS OPERATION? >> CHUCK, THE PRESIDENT AND THE
>> CHUCK, THE PRESIDENT AND THE
WHITE HOUSE HAVE PUSHED BACK
AGAINST A NUMBER OF ELEMENTS OF
THE STORY.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE PRESIDENT IS TAKING AGGRESSIVE ACTIONIDENT
IS TAKING AGGRESSIVE ACTION AGAINST RUSSIA.
AGAINST RUSSIA.
I WISH THAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED
IN 2016 WHEN THEY WERE TRYING TO MEDDLE WITH OUR ELECTIONS.ING TO
MEDDLE WITH OUR ELECTIONS. I THINK THE MESSAGE IS BEING
I THINK THE MESSAGE IS BEING SENT NOW.
SENT NOW.
IF THE RUSSIANS TRY TO TAKE SOME ACTION AGAINST OUR ELECTIONS ORE
ACTION AGAINST OUR ELECTIONS OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY, WE ARE
ANY OTHER COUNTRY, WE ARE
ALREADY READY TO GO AFTER THEM.
IT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN 2016.
IM GLAD THE PRESIDENT IS BEING AGGRESSIVE AGAINST ANY FOREIGN
AGGRESSIVE AGAINST ANY FOREIGN COUNTRY WHO IS GOING TO TRY TO
COUNTRY WHO IS GOING TO TRY TO MEDDLE WITH OUR ELECTION.
MEDDLE WITH OUR ELECTION.
>> DO YOU THINK THE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN ARM OF THE HOUSE OUGHT
CAMPAIGN ARM OF THE HOUSE OUGHT TO PLEDGE NOT TO USE ANY STOLEN
TO PLEDGE NOT TO USE ANY STOLEN MATERIAL, HACKED TELL?
MATERIAL, HACKED TELL?
I KNOW THERES BEEN ATTEMPTS TO GET ALL -- BOTH POLITICALTS TO
GET ALL -- BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES TO SIGN PLEDGES.
PARTIES TO SIGN PLEDGES.
THERES BEEN HESITATION ON THE HOUSE SIDE. HESITATION ON THE
HOUSE SIDE. >> IM SURE THEY WILL LOOK AT
>> IM SURE THEY WILL LOOK AT THAT.
THAT.
I THINK ITS INTERESTING THAT
THE ENTIRE BASIS OF THE MUELLER
REPORT WAS INFORMATION THAT THE
DEMOCRAT PARTY GOT FROM RUSSIA. THEY SOLICITED USING FOREIGNIA.
THEY SOLICITED USING FOREIGN SPIES OF ALL PEOPLE AND USED
SPIES OF ALL PEOPLE AND USED THAT TO TURN IT OVER TO THE FBI
THAT TO TURN IT OVER TO THE FBI
AND UNFORTUNATELY, HAD YOU SOME PEOPLE IN THE FBI WITH AOU SOME
PEOPLE IN THE FBI WITH A POLITICAL AGENDA AGAINST
POLITICAL AGENDA AGAINST
PRESIDENT TRUMP WHO USED THAT AS THE BASIS FOR AN INVESTIGATIONAS
THE BASIS FOR AN INVESTIGATION TO SPY ON THEN CANDIDATE
TO SPY ON THEN CANDIDATE
PRESIDENT TRUMP.
THERE ARE A LOT OF CONCERNS I THINK IN THINGS THAT NEED TO BE
THINK IN THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ROOTED OUT WITHIN THE FBI TO
ROOTED OUT WITHIN THE FBI TO
MAKE SURE THAT DOESNT HAPPEN AGAIN EITHER.T DOESNT HAPPEN
AGAIN EITHER.
>> LET ME TURN TO IRAN HERE. AT WHAT POINT DO YOU THINK THE
AT WHAT POINT DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO GO TO
PRESIDENT NEEDS TO GO TO CONGRESS TO APPROVE ANY SORT OF
CONGRESS TO APPROVE ANY SORT OF ESCALATION WITH IRAN?
ESCALATION WITH IRAN? WHERE IS YOUR COMFORT LEVEL ON
WHERE IS YOUR COMFORT LEVEL ON
WHAT YOU BELIEVE HE HAS THE ABILITY TO DO NOW AND WHAT HE
ABILITY TO DO NOW AND WHAT HE NEEDS TO COME TO CONGRESS FOR?
NEEDS TO COME TO CONGRESS FOR?
>> THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN
BRIEFING CONGRESS ON WHATS
HAPPENING IN IRAN AND HOW THIS
HAS BEEN BUILDING UP.
OF COURSE, THIS DOES GO BACK TO
THE IRANIAN DEAL THAT WAS AGREED
TO IN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION.OUS
ADMINISTRATION.
DONALD TRUMP, WHEN HE WAS A
CANDIDATE, EXPRESSED HIS REAL
CONCERNS WITH THAT DEAL AS SO
MANY OF US IN CONGRESS OPPOSED
IT BACK THEN AND EVEN OUR ALLIES LIKE ISRAEL OPPOSED THE IRANLIES
LIKE ISRAEL OPPOSED THE IRAN DEAL WHEN IT WENT THROUGH
DEAL WHEN IT WENT THROUGH
CONGRESS.
YOU SAW PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU
GIVE A COMPELLING SPEECH AGAINST
IT.
WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS BEEN
DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WERE
GOING TO STAND UP TO RUSSIA --
OUR SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN VERY
EFFECTIVE.
THATS WHY YOU ARE SEEING IRAN TAKE ACTION.U ARE SEEING IRAN
TAKE ACTION.
THIS SHOWS YOU, CHUCK, DO YOU
REALLY WANT A NUCLEAR-ARMED IRAN?Y WANT A NUCLEAR-ARMED
IRAN?
THIS IS WHY THE WORLD, NOT JUST
AMERICA, BUT AUROUR ALLIES ARE
CONCERNED.
THIS IS WHAT THEY DID WITHOUT
ONE.
>> DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT
HAS THE AUTHORITY, DUE TO THE
AUMF, FROM IN 2002, DOES HE HAVE
THE AUTHORITY NOW TO CONDUCT A MILITARY OPERATION AGAINST IRAN?
MILITARY OPERATION AGAINST IRAN? >> WE DONT WANT TO SEE IT
>> WE DONT WANT TO SEE IT
ESCALATE TO WHERE IT IS A MILITARY OPERATION.T IS A
MILITARY OPERATION. YOU ARE SEEING THE PRESIDENT
YOU ARE SEEING THE PRESIDENT
TAKE ACTION AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PROTECTION AGAINSTTHAT
WE HAVE PROTECTION AGAINST AMERICAN INTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE
AMERICAN INTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST.
EAST.
INCLUDING IN THE STRAIT THERE WHERE YOU SAW THIS EXPLOSION,
WHERE YOU SAW THIS EXPLOSION, WHERE THE BOMB WAS DETONATED.
WHERE THE BOMB WAS DETONATED.
THE PRESIDENT IS MAKING SURE
THAT HE IS PROTECTING AMERICAN
INTERESTS.
I DONT WANT TO SEE IT ESCALATE
JUST LIKE I DONT THINK ANYBODY ELSE DOES.I DONT THINK ANYBODY
ELSE DOES.
WE HAVE TO STAND UP TO IRAN.
THIS IS ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF WHY
WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT
THEIR ACTIONS.
>> BEFORE I LET YOU GO, ONE THING ABOUT YOUR BOOK., ONE
THING ABOUT YOUR BOOK. YOU WROTE ABOUT THE ISSUE OF
YOU WROTE ABOUT THE ISSUE OF
SOCIAL MEDIA, TALKING ABOUT THE
PERSON THAT SHOT YOU.
HIS POST DRIPPING WITH SCORN AND
HATE TOWARD THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
AND PRESIDENT TRUMP FUELLED HIM
MORE.
HE WAS LIVING A DOUBLE
ASSISTANCE.
HE WAS ANGRY AND CONFRONTATIONAL
ONLINE.
A COMBATANT WHEN PROVIDED THE
ANONYMITY OF AN ONLINE AVATAR.
THE SAME IDEA, SOCIAL MEDIA SORT
OF TAKING OVER THIS MANS LIFE. HOW DO YOU NOT VIOLATE THE FIRST
HOW DO YOU NOT VIOLATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND HAVE THE SOCIAL
AMENDMENT AND HAVE THE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES PURGE THE FOLKS
MEDIA COMPANIES PURGE THE FOLKS
BEFORE THEY COMMIT VIOLENCE?
>> CHUCK, WHAT I HAVE ALWAYS SAID IS WE CAN HAVE POLITICAL
SAID IS WE CAN HAVE POLITICAL DISAGREEMENT.
DISAGREEMENT.
WHEN YOU CROSS THE LINE AND
START INCITING VIOLENCE AGAINST
OTHER PEOPLE, THATS WHERE
THERES NO PLACE FOR THAT IN POLITICS. PLACE FOR THAT IN
POLITICS.
WE SAW IT IN THE CASE OF THE
SHOOTING IN MY CASE WITH THE
BASEBALL FIELD SHOOTING.
AS WITH OTHERS, YOU SAW SOMEBODY
TRYING TO NOT ONLY DISAGREE BUT
WHERE THEY TOOK ACTION AND TRIED
TO TAKE OUT PEOPLE BECAUSE OF POLITICAL BELIEF.E BECAUSE OF
POLITICAL BELIEF. FORTUNATELY, POLICE WERE THERE
FORTUNATELY, POLICE WERE THERE
ON THE SCENE. LAW ENFORCEMENT MADE SURE IT
LAW ENFORCEMENT MADE SURE IT DIDNT HAPPEN.
DIDNT HAPPEN.
THANK GOD THEY WERE THERE AND MANY OTHER HEROES AND MIRACLES I
MANY OTHER HEROES AND MIRACLES I TALKED ABOUT.
TALKED ABOUT.
>> SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES, CAN
THEY GET RID OF THESE PEOPLE
BEFORE THEY COMMIT VIOLENCE?
DO YOU THINK THATS A VIOLATION
OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS?
>> THATS UP TO EACH OF THEM.
YOU ARE SEEING SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES TAKE ACTION TO TRY TO
STOP PEOPLE FROM INCITING
VIOLENCE OR IN CASES EVEN LIKE
THE FLORIDA SHOOTING WHERE THEY SAW THE KID SAY, I WANT TO BE A
SAW THE KID SAY, I WANT TO BE A SCHOOL SHOOTER.
SCHOOL SHOOTER.
THAT GETS TURNED OVER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT.RNED OVER TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT.
THEY DROPPED THE BALL ON THAT
CASE.
THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
FOLLOW THROUGH MORE.
>> STEVE SCALISE, NUMBER TWO
REPUBLICAN ON THE HOUSE SIDE, THANKS FOR COMING ON AND SHARING
THANKS FOR COMING ON AND SHARING YOUR VIEWS.
YOUR VIEWS. YOU LOOK AT GOOD AS EVER TWO
YOU LOOK AT GOOD AS EVER TWO YEARS LATER.
YEARS LATER. NICE TO SEE YOU.