Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Tonight on the docket the candidate most likely to lead us into an age of endless war.
The candidate -- was wondered public believe it's worth allowing terrorist attacks on US soil to keep us -- war.
Listen the presidential candidate Newt Gingrich and 2008.
Discussing how there has not been a successful attack on US soil up to that point since 9/11 this is.
By the way the great wanted one of the great tragedies of the Bush Administration.
-- more successful it down and intercepting and stopping bad guys.
The less proves there is there were in danger and it's almost like they should every wants a lot of -- contacting it's really just remind us.
-- -- to get through just to remind us in the debates mr.
Gingrich has made it clear what he intends to do with Iran take a -- I would say that to the government around today.
You have a very short time to solve this on your own.
And if you don't we will solve it for you and we frankly couldn't care less what the rest of the world things.
We believe on freedom watch that big government Democrats and big government Republicans like Newt Gingrich stay busy.
Lining up new enemies rest of fight Iran China Russia Syria.
North Korea because they want to distract Americans from the government's failures here at home.
-- -- a history of political failures in fighting the war for American prosperity the rule of law defending the constitution.
Are not in his big government DNA.
Speaker Gingrich already has a point man in mind.
For his war agenda here is yesterday at the Republican Jewish forum take a listen events.
If -- will except that I will last John Bolton to be secretary of state.
-- -- only appoint him if you'll agree.
That his first job is the complete and thorough transformation of the State Department.
And the replacement of the current foreign service culture -- -- -- entrepreneurial and aggressive culture dedicated to the proposition.
The defending freedom and defending America is the first of businesses State Department.
-- reaction let's bring in friend of freedom watch and sometimes friendly adversary.
Former ambassador to the United Nations former presidential candidate perhaps future secretary of state John Bolton.
ambassador to pleasure -- debater warned you we had those clips where you.
Did -- ask you first did you know this was coming.
No I didn't I was on a flight from Los Angeles to Miami when I landed on the tarmac and then turn my.
Cell phone back on the get messages it started coming in but it was it was news -- would you accept.
The appointment of secretary of state from a president elect -- -- -- president Gingrich.
Well I don't think it's appropriate for people in my position to be accepting or or rejecting anybody's thoughts on this because I think we shouldn't that number one it's presumptuous number two we shouldn't distract.
What the real priority has to be which is to -- a Republican candidate to defeat Barack Obama so I don't wanna muddy the waters candidates will say what they wanna say I don't think it's appropriate for me again until it I cannot help.
But note the round of applause the approval of the crowd.
The happiness of the throngs.
When your name was mentioned that you're -- lawyer.
You know that a political candidate cannot offer someone something of value for political support.
Is there any probable -- violation of federal law here was he said it was signal April.
Make sure you don't run for president get your people to support -- and you will be in charge and Friday.
Bottom now I don't think there's anything close -- that some.
Over caffeinated bloggers have been have been writing about it but there's no intent there there's no quid pro quo.
But this is an anti bribery statute and if it were really construed the way some people said a presidential candidate couldn't name -- vice presidential candidate either.
If you construe the statute that broadly is clearly violent of the first -- my.
Think -- -- and I do agree with you but he may be onto something here you and I were talking about this before the show that there may be some sort of the trend it.
For Republicans anyway the president already has a cabinet to indicate to the faithful who they are likely to support for various positions have you heard this right.
My understanding is yesterday or within this week governor Romney said he might that consider naming.
People he would he would like to see in his -- -- -- people like of those qualities he would like to see mentioned.
Former mayor Giuliani is an attorney general I'm told I think this is a good thing if politicians want to do and it's obviously political decision.
But it's a shorthand way for them to save these are the qualities I'm looking for this is the direction I'd like to go and voters can decide.
Let's say you do become the secretary of state and Newt Gingrich does become president Gingrich -- would you advise them to bomb the bomb.
What you believe is nuclear capability.
Well I've been saying for three years that were down to a choice between Iran getting nuclear weapons or somebody using military force to prevent that from happening.
And I have not changed my view now whether it's Israel or the United States I think there's room for discussion.
It's a very unattractive choice I don't make it likely.
But if you don't like the way Iran behaves now imagine what it will be like once gets nuclear weapons wouldn't you want to be absolutely certain that they had weapons of mass destruction so we don't make the same mistake twice we'll what looking for something in Iraq that didn't exist where you can never be certain.
And in fact if you look at the message Dwight Eisenhower drafted on.
It says I based my decision on the best available intelligence and that's all president or decision maker would've I think the intelligence here is unassailable -- you're going to kill people -- don't you have to be certain that there is this real target there and -- the target is a -- not human beings well I think that the effort should be to destroy the physical facilities.
Connected with the nuclear weapons program there may well be.
Casualties involved in and I'm not looking to maximize that but these people are making a nuclear weapon that can kill.
Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and prevent that from happening.
I'm prepared to recommend taking that risk do you.
Accept the notion that a country would have a nuclear weapon just to prevent others from attacking Obama gave -- this scenario -- mean.
I don't know what Moammar Qaddafi had he had some sort of nuclear.
Weaponry and may have been primitive -- -- Tony Blair and George Bush said get rid of at a Milwaukee with.
Welcome you into the community of nations he got -- -- that they welcome them into the community of nations.
Four years later some ragtag bunch of cave dwellers drove him out of office and killed him.
Might that might have happened had he still had strong and serious weapons it's it's possible that he could have stayed in power but I think a nuclear Gadhafi proves the point that it was right to get him to give up those weapons.
Lord knows we have tried to negotiate on and I wonder starlet but okay might -- the point of my question was not to suggest that Qaddafi wasn't dangerous although he did play both sides of of the fence.
The point of my question was to suggest do you blame Iran and who always enemies so -- don't it's for wanting to have a weapon that might deter those enemy.
I blame Iran for lying through its -- that is a party to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty voluntarily of its own free will it committed never get nuclear weapons it's violating the tree and that by the way undercuts its credibility on any -- -- might make.
That it's giving up that nuclear weapons program do you believe that war stimulates the economy and -- some time -- that -- I don't I don't favor war and ordered stimulate the economy war is the last resort but we live in a very dangerous world these nuclear weapons are not a military threat to the United States -- weapons of terror there aimed at killing American civilians.
And innocent civilians and friendly and allied countries and we need to stop that happening.
Should Americans trade in liberty for safety.
I don't think that's a trade you necessarily have to make I think you can have a free society that's also safe there are some very difficult choices at the margin.
And -- and if you were attorney general and sure we would debate how those choices might be made but the ultimate objective is the same protecting liberty ambassador moments of pleasure thanks for joining us thank you.
Filter by section