Return to Transcripts main page

Piers Morgan Live

Government Still Shut Down; Interview with Benjamin Netanyahu

Aired October 04, 2013 - 21:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

PIERS MORGAN, CNN HOST: This is Piers Morgan Live. Welcome to our viewers in United States and around the world. Did she have to die? New details and questions in the police chase on Capitol Hill that ended in a hail of bullets. Now the family of the driver, Miriam Carey, speaks up.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just know that my sister did experience postpartum depression with psychosis. They labeled it, which came along with treatment of medication and counseling, which she did, and she had her challenges with that.

MORGAN: The latest on the shooting, her state of mind and the investigation. Plus day 4 of the shutdown showdown.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I said I am happy to have negotiations with the Republicans and Speaker Boehner on a whole range of issues. But we can't do it with the gun held to the head of the American people.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R) OHIO: This isn't some damn game. The American people don't want our government shut down, and neither do I.

(END OF VIDEP CLIP)

MORGAN: What will it take to put America first? I'll talk to Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Marsha Blackburn, plus you'll meet more real people paying the price of politics as usual, and our newsmaking interview with Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister's surprising comments on President Obama and Iran.

To begin with the death of Miriam Carey, shot, following a dramatic and terrifying chase through the capital yesterday. Well, the questions tonight about her mental health and the police response. CNN's Deborah Feyerick is here with the very latest. Deborah, good to see you in person.

First of all, we spoke last time. I raised a question of just on my mind. It wasn't really getting of (inaudible) at the time, but it just struck me, was there a question of overreaction here? The more we've learned now about this incident, the more I'm asking that question, because you got a woman with a baby in back. She's already have postpartum depression and so on, history of mental illness, did the police have to take lethal action in the way they did? DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, if you speak to police, the answer is yes, yes they do. Because they didn't exactly know what the threat was, they didn't know that this was somebody who potentially is suffering from a mental illness, postpartum depression.

They were treating it as a serious threat and the moment she failed to listen to their directions to stop to get out of the car, the entire thing escalated. There really was panic, there was pandemonium, there's that visual of the police car just running into a barricade shuttering, people were really on it just specially with the navy yard shooting but they say that when you go to these areas where there are people, where there is possibility of politicians better there, all of the sudden every knows use of deadly forced is authorized in those particular situations.

If it's somebody with the suicide vest strapped to them and they had taken this person out, then people would have said, those people were heroes.

MORGAN: I know it's very easy to criticize after the event. They're going to work and (inaudible) it could be anything as you say, couldn't bomb, it could be -- what struck me looking at the video close is (ph) you see five or six armed policemen all around the car. So, he must have identified either (ph) a woman driving and he got a baby in the back, what else in the back? At that stage is there an option to shoot the tires trying to stabilize the car, what do they say about that?

FEYERICK: That's what a lot of people wondering why they didn't shoot the tires? Now, I discovered (ph), you know, a couple of FBI agents, they say, look, it's almost impossible. It works great in the movies, it doesn't work in real life, you can just sort of (inaudible) the car. But what they do say is that, you know, they were looking to stop this because they didn't know where she was going. She had (ph) gone to the White House, she tried to get pass the security guards there then as she was pulling out, she clipped one of the security officers, went over the Capitol, it was so irrational and erratic the way she was behaving that in fact she -- they just didn't know. Her sisters did talk about the possibility that they could have use something much less lethal, take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CAREY-JONES: We have a lot of questions. I'm sure it's (ph) a lot of viewers when you read the information, you see what the media is reporting it just doesn't add up and personally I feel that, you know, as professionals there has to be another way instead of shooting and killing an individual. I do feel that it could have been something else that could have been done. So I will go and figure out what happened.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

FEYERICK: And one of the things they're also looking at, Pierce is that she left in her apartment with an (ph) envelope. Initially, we thought there was a letter inside the envelope. It was just an envelope, it was addressed by hand to her boyfriend and inside there was a sugary substance that it should -- appeared mix together, it was removed by (inaudible) undergoing in testing right now but there was just a number of things that simply didn't make any sense and that's how police are responding.

MORGAN: Deborah, stay with me. We're going to (inaudible) two friends of the Carey family, both happen to be law enforcement officers, that's a county police officer Darrin Green, a retired Nassau County police officer. Thank you both for joining me tonight. You're his (ph) friends of the family not as law enforcement officers so much. But what is your take on what has happened here? Do you believe that it was all completely justified or do you think it was another way perhaps of resolving this without your friend being killed?

DENNIS JONES, LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE: Well, there's always an opportunity to look things over and determine that there could possibly be another way that it could have been done. As law enforcement, you're trained for so many different outcomes. You don't necessarily every outcome has to end in a death of someone.

So, we are looking at that as the Law Enforcement Alliance to make sure that all parts of this is played out correctly and that all of the information in this investigation and his relay to all of the proper authorities, the family and all people responsible for this will, you know, be interviewed and determine exactly what part they played and hopefully we can get some answers, because right now, there's so many question.

MORGAN: Right, I mean -- and Darrin Green. We know that Miriam suffered a lot of mental issues. She obviously -- according to his sister had a former postpartum depression and so on. And, does any of that in the end come into play though, if you're guarding the white house or the capitol itself because it could be (ph) you could be on such ready alert any kind of attack and really have time to think is this person, you know, a harmless woman who is suffering some form of depression or is she a terrorist?

DARRIN GREEN, LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE: Well, I think clearly what has to happened is we rely on the (inaudible) training, and let this clarified for the record if I could, Pierce, is I'm with National Country Sheriffs Department, not the police department.

MORGAN: Right.

GREEN: I just want to point that, a slight correction, but I think that -- when you think about mental illness and again the training that the officers undergo, we call it muscle memory. When you train hard and you train properly you become something that you do instantaneously. And again, Monday morning quarterback in situation now is a little late, but clearly the methods that were used at that point in time are clearly questionable as to, is there a lesson to be on the (ph) force when you're dealing with somebody, that's dealing with a mental illness and hard for them to diagnosis at that particular point and scene but clearly there has to be something that which just said (inaudible) the other guest is that, that word panic.

If the officers panicked, and under the extreme stress (ph), you know, panic, panic does not allow you for rational thinking because you're (inaudible) a stress level. And that's where the training becomes a very vital factor, is that vital factor allows your muscle memory to kick in and do the things you're probably trained to do. Panic cannot be an option but that can be a reason or excuse as to why you did not perform properly

MORGAN: Right. Very good (ph) for you both for joining in, my sincere condolences on the loss of somebody (inaudible) and your friends and family, thank you both very much indeed for joining me.

GREEN: Thank you.

JONES: Thank you.

MORGAN: Well, the police and many others are defending the shooting, some say this is a clear case of excessive force (inaudible) open fire (ph) the driver, I want to bring in now, Marc Lamont Hill, Professor at Columbia University and host of HuttPost Live (inaudible) legal analyst and defense attorney, Danny Cevallos, and Ben Ferguson, CNN political commentator and host of Ben Ferguson show.

Ben Ferguson, let me go to you. I kind know where (ph) come from here, but is anything you heard so far in the show giving you any cause to post about your absolute certainty that the police did everything completely correctly here?

BEN FERGUSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, you can always look at the tape afterwards and say there're things we can learn from this. But, you're dealing with the woman that was at the White House clipped an officer and then goes off. We don't know if this is a destruction for terrorist attack. We don't know she has a bomb in her car. We don't know if she's trying to distract from another attack and we know that this is in the most sensitive area around government with a lot of tourist and a lot of people walking around and if she would have been someone to have a bomb in her car then people would then (ph) said, they didn't take her out soon enough, they gave her an opportunity give up in front of the Capitol by that fountain.

She decided to then continue to run and used her car as weapon. I don't think they had any other choice because you got to assume by the White House, by the Capitol in this situation that this could be a much, much, much bigger threat then end up being.

MORGAN: OK. Let me play a clip from Mark O'Mara. He was of course in the (inaudible) of Martin Case, is one of the attorneys. So, let's hear what he want to say about this thing. Quite interesting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARK O'MARA, DEFENSE LAWYER: How the police officer shot at her as they did when she first left the White House area and shot and killed her would have been a justified shooting. And if it happened during the chase, I think it also would have been a justified shooting. When that car stopped and the woman got out. At that precise moment, if the police did not see an imminent threat to themselves and she did not turn on them, look like she was going for a gun, something to it at that point say, the threat is ongoing and it is immediate, and imminent, then maybe the police should have taking a breath.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

MORGAN: You see, Danny Cevallos, very interesting breakdown there by Mark O'Mara. He's a very smart guy. I'm always been impressed by him. And there he takes us through the various places where he believes as a lawyer it would have been justified to shoot her. He doesn't conclude that in the end they made the right decision, at the end. Do you go along with that?

CEVALLOS: Well, it does give you something to think about. Mark is an expert on legal forces, we all know from the Zimmerman case but he brings up a good point. The Supreme Court has said that deadly force is not a per se grant anytime a potential felon. Please, there has to be some reasonable belief of actual physical harm, probable cause in fact.

So, the thing that concerns me is obviously once flight is over is someone still fleeing felon and its deadly force still authorize. You know, you hear a lot of discussion about could have been a bomb, could have been a bomb. That's not the way we -- we cannot approach all of law enforcement with the idea that everybody could have a bomb.

MORGAN: OK.

CEVALLOS: Now, I will say this (inaudible) that they will not look at the -- they will not look and they will look at the facts available for the officers at the time of and they won't engage in Monday morning quarter backing and that's good thing.

MORGAN: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

FERGUSON: ... this is not some random place in America. This is the Washington D.C. area where the probably the most incredibly well- trained individuals are with threats towards the president, towards the Capitol Hill.

MORGAN: OK, let me say third point. Let me say that point. Now, you may made a point. Let me take that point to Marc Lamont Hill. Hey Mark is all we see (ph) very, very difficult here to be too critical to the police whichever where you view this? But when you see Mark O'Mara talking as through this -- I mean, that you're shaking your head there, do you feel (inaudible) was once I knew more about this woman was, OK, wow this maybe didn't need to happen, he didn't need to shoot him (ph) dead. What is your reaction now we know you so much more?

MARC LAMONT HILL, HUTTPOST LIVE HOST: Knowing so much more makes more complicated and it makes my heartstrings get togged a little bit but the police didn't have the benefit of knowing this woman's history, her background, they didn't even know whether or not she had a gun. So, I won't put that -- I won't put that burden on the police. What I will say though as Mark O'Mara said is that there are moments where the police reasonably could have thought their lives were in danger. If at the moment you no longer think your life is danger you don't get a chance to shoot.

So, what I say is we need to investigate this, we need to dig further. I'm not willing to give the police the benefit of the doubt without investigation but I'm also not willing to say the police did anything wrong just yet. And some of you were saying and I think didn't (ph) they have even said this, that yes, you know, many of us will be afraid, many of us in that moment may have made the same decision but we're not trained law enforcement.

MORGAN: Right. Let me just ...

LAMONT HILL: ... we are training to have a higher standard, a higher level of quality (ph).

MORGAN: Right. Let me just wrap this, please.

((Inaudible)

MORGAN: Wait a second. So, I'm going to show you a bit of footage. This is from an incident in Oregon that happened earlier in the summer. Video has just come up, the reason I want to show you, this is a guy is being pulled over speeding and he has his three kids there on the back of that car, he gets out, they tied (ph) him twice, we want to talk to you about the speeding. He then advances toward them and he has been shot.

Now, he's a military guy, he gets hit himself. His body is found dead in the car a little later and the reason I'm saying that is that, well, we can criticize the police for what happened yesterday and many people have come (ph) including me yesterday.

When you see that footage you can understand perhaps in a contrary swimming with guns that the police are going to be twitching in this situation and that's why I played that. So, thank you all for joining me. Deb, thank you for joining (inaudible) Mr. Morgan. Thank you very much.

Next, how lawmakers reacted to the D.C. chase and shooting. A lot of people talking Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Marsha Blackburn joined me with about that (ph) and of course the shutdown showdown.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. STENY HOYER, (D) MINORITY WHIP: I know that I joined the majority leader in expressing our gratitude to the Capitol police.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MORGAN: Lawmakers is in the house praising the police following us in the deadly chase and shooting, they gave the officers a standing ovation. Was that the right to do? And we all come on what is now day four of a shutdown showdown. Joining me now is Congressman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee and Tennessee Republican, Congressman Marsha Blackburn. Welcome to you both on this busy Friday night. And, Debbie let me start with you there. I mean, all we see -- again, with the benefit of (inaudible) great to see a standing ovation being given to police officers who have as we now know shot dead an unarmed woman suffering perhaps from postpartum depression. What do you think of this story? Obviously, it's very complicated and you don't want to be too critical of the police, what do you think?

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ, (D) FLORIDA: Well, first of all those Capitol police officers deserved our thanks and our appreciation in every bit of the standing ovation we gave them because they lay their lives on the line for us every single day and we worked in a building that is one of the most high value targets in the entire world. And as we've seen there is really a constant threat virtually all the time we've had Capitol police officers shot to death in the United States Capitol itself. Two weeks ago we had a mass murder on the Navy Yard just two week -- you know, two miles from the Capitol.

So, you know, its second guess the actions of those Capitol police officers would be totally you're wrong and inappropriate. And look, I mean, those officers knew that the woman ram the barricade at the White House, she not only after they surrounded her car with weapons drawn backed up and led some more, hurt two officers with her vehicle and, you know, anywhere in the world we've seen vehicles used as weapons particularly in the last number of years. So, I think the last thing we should do is second guess their actions.

MORGAN: OK. And now, I want to turn to you Marsha with this. I quite like this, this is a website called Congressstillgettingpaid.com which (inaudible) an update which is a constant. There were are. This is how much congress has being paid since the start of the shutdown, $985,610, 11, 12 and so it goes on dollars. A huge amount of money at the time when 800,000 people to be (ph) followed and many millions more are suffering from this and we'll hear from some of them later. And, what is this saying, all this? At the moment -- the general view seems to be -- look, the Republicans -- we've had your fund but now get real, let's get the shutdown over. Let's get over the sort of debt-ceiling, let's get serious and be grown up politicians.

REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN, (R) TENNESSEE: Well, I tell you that's the exactly what we are trying to do and have been trying to do. Republicans passed a budget in the house, we have worked toward a continuing resolution to address this issue. By the way we're doing that because of not completing the budget process. It takes both chambers and the administration to do that. And what we are doing is basically going through the appropriations process which is building the budget out and getting the budget open bet by ...

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: Come on, listen. It's me you're talking to.

BLACKBURN: Absolutely we are.

MORGAN: You're not talking to somebody and ...

BLACKBURN: That is exactly what we're doing ...

MORGAN: No, you're not.

BLACKBURN: It is the responsibility of the house ...

MORGAN: I have no chart (ph). I (inaudible) ...

BLACKBURN: The responsibility of the house ...

MORGAN: Let me finish.

BLACKBURN: To get the budget ...

MORGAN: Listen. Let me jump in.

BLACKBURN: To get the budget put together.

MORGAN: Let me jump in. I can't vote either way so I have a very nice take on this, which is it is a ridiculous situation. ObamaCare which is what this is all about is a law. It's not the mandate of the Supreme Court. It's on the (ph) mandate of an election for goodness sake. And to use that to shut down the government is just utterly outrageous and everybody knows it.

BLACKBURN: The issue is over spending. And the house ...

SCHULTZ: Come on.

BLACKBURN: The house passed -- No, Debbie listen. The house passed a continuing resolution that would fund all of the government except that one portion of ObamaCare then that was rejected. We came back and we said, "Well, let's just delay it." The president has a delayed 19 provisions of the law, gave 1,600 members ...

MORGAN: All right, let me bring in -- let me bring Debbie in. Debbie?

BLACKBURN: ... even this weekend has taken the website down for repairs.

MORGAN: OK, Debbie you're in the (inaudible) position of having me completely agree with everything you're probably about to say. And this clearly because I have listened to senior republicans like John McCain, saying how completely crack is this is. I also remember very vividly speaking of Boehner himself after the last election defeat by republican saying ObamaCare is law and we just have to swallow it, we lost the election. Now suddenly, apparently that is in his position but (ph) to me is selfish, childish politics. Debbie, over to you. SCHULTZ: Here is the bottom line and this is very simple, what we have to do tomorrow morning is go on the house floor, have the republicans put (ph) and be clean continuing spending resolution on the floor to reopen the government completely. Instead, what they're doing is they're holding our economy hostage and using ObamaCare as the ransom, that's basically what they did. And whether it's defunding or repelling o delaying, there's no way around that they are simply trying to extract and extort what they couldn't get when the bill was on the floor when it passed in to law, when the president signed it, when the Supreme Court upheld it and when we had an election over it and the President Obama was reelected.

MORGAN: OK.

SCHULTZ: And what they're doing is they're hitting (ph) with these bills ...

MORGAN: Let me ...

SCHULTZ: ... they're hitting (ph) veterans against ...

BLACKBURN: Not at all ...

(CROSSTALK)

SCHULTZ: Excuse me Marsha I didn't interrupt you. They're hitting (ph) veterans against kids and head start, against child cancer patients. Let's just open the entire government and stop this irrational non sense, it's irresponsible.

MORGAN: OK.

BLACKBURN: The appropriations process is not irrational nonsense.

SCHULTZ: I'm on appropriation.

BLACKBURN: And, I know that you are ...

SCHULTZ: I know the appropriation.

(CROSSTALK)

BLACKBURN: ... and what we need to do is make certain that we do our best and get this government back open and we do it in a fiscally responsible manner and ...

(CROSSTALK)

SCHULTZ: Pierce, can I say something else?

BLACKBURN: ... borrowing $ 2 billion a day is not a fiscally responsible ...

SCHULTZ: You know what Marsha, if you want ...

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: OK listen. I've got to bring this to hold (ph) but let me just say Marsha, for you to look at me with a straight face and use the phrase fiscal responsibility. I mean, come off (ph) it. What could be more fiscally irresponsible than shutting down the ...

(CROSSTALK)

SCHULTZ: ... billion dollars a week.

BLACKBURN: That borrowing $2 billion a day is not fiscally responsible and that's what we end up (ph) doing ...

MORGAN: Nor (ph) is shutting down the government Marsha.

(CROSSTALK)

BLACKBURN: The fact that we have had ...

MORGAN: ... establish law.

BLACKBURN: The fact that we have had ...

SCHULTZ: The democrats have already agreed to the republican's number which we opposed ...

MORGAN: Get back in there tomorrow ...

BLACKBURN: It's the law.

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: ... the law is ObamaCare. ObamaCare is the law.

BLACKBURN: We have to get our house, our fiscal house in order in this country. $17 trillion worth or debt borrowing.

SCHULTZ: Exactly.

BLACKBURN: $2 billion today.

SCHULTZ: So, let's (inaudible) stop wasting $10 billion a week.

BLACKBURN: A law ObamaCare that was to be $863 billion, and now it's $2.6 trillion ...

MORGAN: OK.

BLACKBURN: ... with all these delays that is not ...

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: OK, ladies, I have to say we'll bring this to a vote.

(CROSSTALK)

SCHULTZ: $181 a month in premiums for health insurance.

MORGAN: Yes I have to bring this to vote, listen.

BLACKBURN: Premiums are skyrocketing.

MORGAN: Ladies, I have this bring to a vote, thank you for the debate, I think my I made (inaudible) pretty clear. I think most people agree with it. So, get it back running.

Coming next, more of a shutdown, I know hurting most, real people taking (ph) the pinch and money for nothing. Look how much the member in the congress is making since the shutdown, even in the last few minutes. It's been racing ahead. We'll be back after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(INAUDIBLE)

MORGAN: I'm going to take a moment to highlight the real victims on the shutdown so just (inaudible) employees that area suffering. Some small businesses, many of them thought (ph) of feeling a pinch. Paul Carolan is a bartender at Maxwell here in New York. Let me talk to you Paul about (inaudible). It's a pretty empty looking bar that you're in, just in pure factual terms, how much business have you lost in the last three days to what you would normally have?

PAUL CAROLAN: Hey, how are you Piers? I'm guessing about 50 percent with the federal employees to, you know, (inaudible) all out. We usually have, you know, tables from 15 to 18 all in wards (ph) on that since the federal's shut down, we've got nothing at all. And it's, you know, really affecting business. I have a wife and a daughter to feed, you know, what I mean I still have to pay my tax dollars at the end of the month. And what's going on is just (inaudible) to me. And, if I could say something to Mr. Boehner, get your finger it mate (ph). This is a worker (ph) man's face here, you need to get on top of what's going on and just cut out that, you know, (inaudible) tactics. I mean, we've got a business to run. A lot of people have been affected by this.

MORGAN: Right.

CAROLAN: And it's not on.

MORGAN: It's not on.

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: And just to point out. You're next to the federal building down there in lower Manhattan and that's why it's so relevant. Paul, I've got to leave you to there. Thank you very much for joining. You've (inaudible) ahead there.

We're bringing now Matt Welch. He's editor in chief of Reason magazine and co-author of Declaration of Independents, How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong with America. Republican strategist, Kellyanne Conway, and also bring you back Marc Lamont Hill professor of (inaudible) university and half of his life obviously.

And Matt Welch, you know I hear all this stories every night now. Simple little stories, (inaudible) get his money back. One is his Furlough employees, you know, normally, you know the end of day, we'll get a check because now like it's losing business.

WELCH: I am as objectively pro bar as anybody sitting at this table. But I don't think the objects of the federal government and spending is based on making sure the bars in New York are open.

And I say this something that's against the government ...

MORGAN: But it's about keeping the economy flowing ...

WELCH: The economy doesn't flow based on ...

(CROSSTALK)

WELCH: Well, of course it does. The economy doesn't begin with the government being in business. That is not where the economy flows from. Again, I think the government should be open.

MORGAN: The sad role (ph), the economy flows when people spend money.

WELCH: True. But it, you know, it ...

MORGAN: No, no, spending money. You can't spend ...

WELCH: Washington D.C. were I moved year and half ago is absolutely flushed. I've never seen a place gentrified quicker than D.C. I'm not sure that's good for the health of the country. And you can say right now D.C is suffering, there's bars that are empty. Well, I'm not sure...

MORGAN: Yes, they're all working not drinking. (Inaudible) KellyAnne?

CONWAY: The idea that John Boehner, he doesn't working in space. He actually grew up above a bar, has one of 14 children and...

MORGAN: Right. Why doesn't he get into a bar with Barack Obama and do some business?

CONWAY: Because Barack Obama won't show up. When you look at your great interview with President Clinton, the real difference between now and 1995 I think is he was president frankly. You can't, Piers, you can't -- to John Harr (ph) say, in the span of the same paragraph and interview, I'm quote, "willing to negotiate with anybody on anything" and then say, "By the way, we're not going to negotiate until we get pass what I want them to do."

To lead to negotiate, as Peggy Noonan pointed out today but, you know, not always to negotiate is to lead. But I believe the president needs to be more engaged here. He runs the risk of looking disengagement in process and it's somehow becoming some big argument between the Tea Party and the Moderate Republicans. This is serious stuff.

MORGAN: Okay.

CONWAY: And you need all branches involved.

MORGAN: Marc Lamont Hill, (inaudible) you're shaking your head when KellyAnne Conway speaks.

LAMONT HILL: I agree with some (ph) of those points.

MORGAN: You know, (inaudible) I actually think the president is not great negotiator and he can be quite lofty and haughty about this kind of thing and say "Let them all suffer and we'll win in the end." But at the same time, you know, I think this is about split in the Republic Party, isn't it? Tea Party led by Ted Cruz has led all this from start to finish?

LAMONT HILL: There is no doubt. I've spoken to members of the House and Senate off the record. They've all essentially said the same thing that John Boehner is operating out of fear here. And that people like Ted Cruz are in his -- since (ph) high-jacking the party. There's definitely split between Moderates and Extremist in the party.

And I agree that President Obama should be taking more on low (ph) for the Democrats simply because he has the least to lose here. The more pressure that's put in the House of Senate the more vulnerable the Democrats are. And in 2014 elections, they can end up just as vulnerable as Republicans if they don't over play their heads.

MORGAN: Okay.

LAMONT HILL: But I disagree with that earlier point. And this the important point, President Obama should not be negotiating with John Boehner anywhere. The fact of the matter here is that Republicans are asking Barack Obama to unhinge his signature legislative accomplishments.

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: Wait, wait, wait, let me stop you there. I think that's a wrong approach.

I think he's got to sit down and negotiate. He can't just give in on ObamaCare, would be -- would I say, "Get in the room and make it something else." Let me asked the three of you.

(CROSSTALK)

MORGAN: I'm running out of time. Running out time. I want a prediction, pretty quickly. When is this going to end, very quickly?

WELCH: Six days.

CONWAY: October 17th or earlier.

MORGAN: Marc Lamont Hill?

LAMONT HILL: October 17th.

MORGAN: Okay. Two 17s. Thank you all very much indeed. Coming next, right here with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. What is this about President Obama and about Iran. (Inaudible).

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MORGAN: President Obama's recent arbiter to Iran is both groundbreaking and controversial and the consequences could have an extraordinary impact on Israel.

And my far reaching and revealing interview Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu constantly (ph) ground, his first meeting with then Senator Obama to surprising comments on Iran. And that's where we begin.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

If President Rouhani picked the telephone up and called you, would you take that call?

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: We're not averse (ph) calling. It's a question that I'll tell you what I'll tell him. "You want the sanctions lifted? Stop your nuclear program. Why you need underground bankers. Why you need ICBM." The sole purpose of ICBM, intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, is to carry nuclear payloads (ph). By the way, not to Israel, to Europe and to the Unites States. They already have a missile that (inaudible).

"Why do you need to enrich uranium? You said you want civilian nuclear energy? 17 countries, Canada, Mexico, Sweden, Spain, Switzerland, Indonesia with a quarter of billion people. They all have civilian nuclear energy program. They don't have enrichment, because enrichment -- uranium enrichment is how you make nuclear weapons."

MORGAN: How did you feel when you knew that the President of United States had spoken directly on the phone, a groundbreaking interview, first, for a very long time?

And were you satisfy of what President Obama told you about his intentions with that phone call.

NETANYAHU: He said that his goal is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He said that Iran's conciliatory words must be matched by transparent, verifiable, and meaningful actions. He didn't say to Hassan, "Well, give us 20 percent of your chemical weapons and we'll see about the rest." Complete shutdown. Complete dismantling. And then and only then you go to the next step. And I think that's what you need you to do here.

MORGAN: Were you happy that having set the red line as President Obama did about the use of chemical weapons, he didn't then take military action?

NETANYAHU: The military action is not a goal, it's a means. The goal is to dismantle Iran -- Syria in this case chemical weapon. Same thing with Iran, the goal is not take military action in Iran. The goal is to get rid of the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

If you can achieve that with diplomacy as in the case of Syria or in the case of Iran, fine. But if you can't then it has to be achieved because we can't let this regime. The Iranian regime that is the pre- eminent test (ph) regime of your time. As we speak, as (inaudible) is here, they're conducting terrorism all over the place helping Assad murder thousands, tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children, and so many other things, so burning every possible regime in the Middle East, you can't let such a regime have nuclear weapons.

That's what Iran has failed to offer so far. Rouhani has offered smiles whereas Ahmadinejad before him offered frown.

MORGAN: When he quote (ph) out Ahmadinejad the "wolf in wolf's clothing," you say Rouhani is the wolf in sheep's clothing.

NETANYAHU: Right.

MORGAN: You're not buying the new friendlier face of Iran's edition?

NETANYAHU: No, I want to see it back with action. I want to the see the Ayatolla Khamenei was the real boss, both of them Ahmadinejad and Rouhani are basically servants, faithful servants may I say with the regime.

MORGAN: When I interviewed Ahmadinejad last year, he resolutely refused to concede their have been a holocaust. Rouhani's taking a different position. He's conceded that that Nazis committed a great crime against the Jewish people.

NETANYAHU: No, thanks. That's great. I mean, what if the human, he actually acknowledged the 6 million Jews. He hasn't acknowledged that yet, and he said, "How many?" So, he did. What you do with it.

MORGAN: Does it mean anything that he at least had taken that step?

NETANYAHU: It would mean something if he would take, it would mean nothing if they continue their nuclear weapons program. It would mean a great deal if they stop it because Iran while acknowledging or not acknowledging the holocaust is planning another holocaust for another 6 million Jewish, that's the number of Jews who live in Israel.

MORGAN: You gave an interview unprecedented to be BBC Persia today where you can speak directly to the Iranian people. What were you thinking when you did that interview and was it a successful as you hoped it would be? NETANYAHU: It was great. Meaningful for me and very moving because I've never done that before. But of course it's not speaking directly to the Iranian people because the Iranian regime jams these things or some of it seeps through them. But I'm sure that some of them will hear it but it's like Rouhani's tweets, he tweets very fashionable. Tweets in New York, but he doesn't let them Tweet into Iran. The Iranian people are barred from tweeting.

In any case, what I said to the BBC Persian television and I hope it does get heard in Iran. I said, "Look, it's not really we in Israel who have a stake in preventing this regime that caused our annihilation from having nuclear weapons. It's not only the United States that has such an interest because, you know, for Khamenei we're the small sake, America is the great sake. We're just a small America under the road to global domination in their (inaudible). So it's not only Israel and America that I will stake and the Arabs just about all of them except Assad and the Europeans, it's also you, the Iranian people because if Khamenei and that Islam is dictatorship, if they get nuclear weapons, that journey will last forever. It's like North Korea, it will become immortal and you will always be slaves to that. If you want to have the future that I believe that great Persian people can have, this is a great civilization. They could be a great nation again."

Well they have to get rid of this medievalist, brutal tyranny. And that can only happen, that will not happen if these guys, if these people have nuclear weapons.

MORGAN: Do you have your own red line when it comes to Iran, and if so, what is it?

NETANYAHU: Well, simply put Piers, that Iran will have to get nuclear weapons.

MORGAN: If you get absolute concrete evidence...

NETANYAHU: Nuclear weapon's capability.

MORGAN: If you get the evidence to your satisfaction, in controvertibly that they have got that capability, is that your red line? Would you hesitate to take military action?

NETANYAHU: I wouldn't hesitate at all. And that is (inaudible) but I hope it doesn't come to that because we prefer a peaceful solution. We prefer diplomacy. Anybody in his right mind would, except you want a real solution. You don't want to be duped.

MORGAN: President Clinton told me that when he was doing business with Vladimir Putin, they should get in the room and take everybody out and just go man to man. I think we brutally set (ph) "bang, bang, bang" on both sides. And then they've reached points of agreement and he said that Putin never let him down, never went back on his word when it was just the two of them.

Can you envisage that kind of meeting with, say, Rouhani? NETANYAHU: Well, Rouhani openly says that he is deceiving. He's an honest deceiver. Here's what he said, he was Iran's nuclear negotiator between 2003 and 2005 publishers (inaudible). I brought you the book. Here's an open. Here's the book.

MORGAN: Thank you very much.

NETANYAHU: He ways while we were talking to the Europeans into Iran about nuclear disarming (ph), we were installing the equipment in Isfahan, that's a crucial facility for their production of nuclear weapons. By creating a calm environment, calm international environment, we were able to complete the work in Isfahan.

Did you know what he just said? He said, "Listen I fooled them." (inaudible) he brags about it. Well, you know, the saying, "Fool me once, fool me twice, who cares what the smiles are. Who care what the words are." We'll we do care because the words are often contradicted by facts. But it's not the style of (inaudible) it's a subsidence.

MORGAN: Next, one of my conversations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu including his fascinating story about meeting the future President Obama for the first time in airport. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MORGAN: I was told by a very good source that your very first meeting with President Obama was running as (ph) a senator and it was in Washington Airport and you literally went often to a little side room?

NETANYAHU: Right.

MORGAN: You were the leader of the opposition?

NETANYAHU: Right.

MORGAN: He was a rising senator he (inaudible) good me and almost the sole topic of discussion was sanctions in Iran back in 2006.

NETANYAHU: That's right. We met in Washington National Airport (inaudible) airport and when we first (ph) meet was in the superintended office. And I have my wife and a few of my staff with me. They came along and he said, "Well, what's the main issue on your mind?" I said Iran. And he said, "What is the main issue with Iran?" I said, "Well, you got to put thing sanctions on them because that might stop them. In mine (ph), it's not enough, you still need a credible military friend that crippling sanctions could be the way to stop him (ph) peacefully.

And two things happened when I left that meeting. The first is I said to my staff, we just met the next president of United States. And they said, "Well, you've lived in America but you don't know America, and we'll see." So that's the first thing that happened. The second thing that happened was that a week later, he had the Sanctions Bill. Senator Barack Obama had a Sanctions Bill. So, we've been pushing the sanctions effectively up to now. We've got them on the ropes. Their economy is about to collapse.

They've moved their program up. They're almost there at threshold level but they're almost about to collapse. And comes Rouhani and he says, "Take away the sanctions and I'll give you some cosmetic (inaudible)." No way.

You take away the whole thing then you take away the sanctions. That's really my message and don't leave them with a partial capability to reach nuclear weapons. That's bad for the world.

MORGAN: People though always try and draw a division between you and the President of United States. Barack Obama is been there quite a few years now. What is the reality of your relationship? I was fascinated by that first meeting you had. You clearly saw them the great potential in them. Has he realized his potential and what you do you think of him as a leader for the Israeli perspective?

NETANYAHU: Look, he's trying to do the best he can for the United States. I'm trying to do the best I can for Israel. I don't think our interests are contradictory or anemic (ph). I think they cohere.

America really doesn't have a better friend and we, as we'll, never forget that we don't have any better friends in the United States of America. It's a very solid alliance.

MORGAN: Isn't that of being so much turmoil in my lifetime in the Middle East. Was so many countries, unstable, and many more may go that way. Jordan for example, right on your door step may go that way too, Egypt, Syria, and so on. Do you feel more vulnerable as a result of over turmoil and how do you see it all playing out?

NETANYAHU: It's a big problem obviously because it's an unstable region, and we're stable because we're based on very solid foundations and we're people that been - that's been attached to this landfall since the time of Abraham. So, that's really 4,000 years. But in addition, we've espoused the modern traditions of a democratic state, a pluralism of open debate of a free press.

So, we have that stability. We've got one hell of an economy to boost. We've got technology and cyber and entrepreneurship. So, we're OK. And I make sure that some people call it the jungle doesn't penetrate. You know, sense a of poison, we've cut it off. Somebody tries to Hezbollah with the latest Iranian or Russian weapons. We've drawn the red line, we keep that line. The same as true of our other voice.

We're - we've maintain our security but we also know that that instability around us could be damaging to all of us. The anchors of our security have been at peace with Egypt that was threatened. I think it maybe back on track now.

Peace with Jordan, that is very much - it's very precious to us and we value it and we do everything we can to keep it and we want to achieve a real peace with the Palestinians that makes - enables us to defend our country in case the peace unravels but also, gives a chance for our children and their children to have a different future.

These are daunted tasks but I don't lose sight of it. And given what is happening in the region and in the world, well, Israel is not doing battling. My job is to make sure that peoples are doing well.

You caught (ph) me up in trouble these 4,000 years of history to - I have the likes of the Ayatollahs and our story. They won't - I won't let it out.

MORGAN: Prime Minister, very good to see you.

NETANYAHU: Thank you. Thank you, Piers. Thank you.

MORGAN: Anytime.