Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

Why Didn't Israel See Attack Coming?; House GOP Picks Jim Jordan As Speaker Nominee; Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) Is Interviewed About Israel, House Speaker; Can the Hostages in Gaza Be Rescued? War in Israel Reignites Debate on Campus Free Speech. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired October 14, 2023 - 09:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:38]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: The ground war seems imminent, but how it's described is already a subject of debate. I'm Michael Smerconish in Philadelphia.

We're one week removed now from the unprovoked brutal attack by Hamas on Israel. And now Israel's military has warned 1.1 million people living in northern Gaza to evacuate their homes. Gaza's humanitarian crisis is deepening. America's top national security officials are putting up a united front in their visits to the Middle East. But behind the scenes, a difficult diplomatic challenge is brewing about public messaging on the Israel war.

A source tells CNN that the State Department sent an e-mail to a small group of officials who work on that messaging, instructing them not to use phrases like de-escalation, ceasefire and restoring calm. Joining me now with more is CNN Jennifer Hansler in Washington, D.C.

JENNIFER HANSLER, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT REPORTER: Well, good morning, Michael. Yes, we are seeing the administration toe this really difficult line when it comes to their public messaging around the war in Israel. Normally, in situations like this, we would see the administration coming out to urge calm, to urge the parties, to de- escalate, we have not seen any of that in the past week. We have seen full throated support for Israel to respond to those Hamas attacks from last weekend.

Secretary Blinken has been traveling in the region, and every one of his public events he has spoken about Israel's right to respond. Yesterday, he said these were not retaliatory operations that have been carried out. These would not be retaliatory if Israel chose -- was to launch a ground incursion. In fact, he said these would be defensive in order to ensure that something like this does not happen again. And he said that if something happened like this in America, America would respond in the same way.

And so behind the scenes, we have also seen this reflected in that e- mail that you reference that went out to this small group of officials who work on the public messaging, urging them to reflect the messaging we have heard from Secretary Blinken from President Biden to not use those phrases like de-escalation, like ceasefire, like urgent, calm, they want this to be a united front on all fronts when it comes to how the administration is talking about this war in Israel. I should note that this was a small group, I'm told, this was not a diplomatic cable that went out to a lot of embassies or anything like that. But it is notable that they are trying to put up such a unified front as this incursion seems imminent. Michael?

SMERCONISH: Well, the takeaway seems to be that they don't want any perception that they're putting limitation of any kind on Israel, Netanyahu and the IDF. It also brings to my mind a tweet that was deleted by Secretary Blinken. I'm going to put it up on the screen in the more immediate aftermath of the attack, "Turkish Foreign Minister Fidan and I spoke further on Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, I encouraged Turkey's advocacy for a ceasefire." But he didn't want that lingering, and so that was deleted by the State Department. Your thought?

HANSLER: Yes, actually, the State Department spokesperson was asked about that earlier this week. And he said it did not convey the message that they wanted to have conveyed to the public, so they deleted it. And of course, that does underline what you were saying they don't want there to be any impression that they are not supporting Israel in any of its operations to respond to what happened last weekend. And of course, I should note that they have started to speak more about the need to protect civilians. This is something we had not really heard in the forefront of their messaging in the immediate aftermath of those attacks.

We are now hearing Blinken, and others speak more about the need to protect those civilians in Gaza. Michael.

SMERCONISH: Jennifer, thank you for the report. We appreciate it.

I want to know what you think. Go to my website at smerconish.com. This is today's poll question, Should the Biden administration encourage de-escalation in Gaza? We're following the breaking news unfolding in Israel. It's a race against time for more than a million Gazans as Israel upsets, warning to evacuate their homes immediately and head south away from what will likely be targeted with a massive assault.

Joining me now is CNN International Anchor Becky Anderson, who's on the ground in Tel Aviv.

Becky, how long before the Israelis launched this assault? And what can be accomplished during this pause?

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: So, this is the big question, isn't it? Because of course this hour as your show went to air is the close of what is the advertised window, it is now 04:00 p.m. in the afternoon Saturday here. And the Israelis advertise that they would extend this window of what they sort of consider a safe passage window until 04:00 p.m. on Saturday. It is not clear what happens next. [09:05:20]

We do know that the effort on the part of the Israelis was to encourage as many as 1.1 million Gazans to flee south, evacuate south into what is the Gaza valley down towards Egypt from Gaza City, which you have to assume therefore, is going to be the clear target of any escalation in this conflict on the part of the Israelis be that by ground or air, which is what many, many, many people here, of course, are anticipating, I have to say, you know, we've been on the ground here for more than a week or for a week now and all the sources that I've spoken to on the Israeli side, certainly not indicating what their plans might be. We do know that the Israelis have saturated that border with Gaza with 300,000 troops mobilized there. And they have been in the last 24 hours conducting what they describe as raids into Gaza to try and discover and collect evidence of hostages, so 100, 250 hostages we know, a number of them, Americans being held by Hamas, and also these raids to try and sort of denigrate or destroy any Hamas infrastructure.

So, the short answer to your question is we don't know when this wider conflict will start. We don't know when this wider military assault will begin. And we don't know what the scope of it will be. So what we do know is that the U.N. is telling us it is almost impossible to get everybody evacuated out of Northern Gaza. You know, hospitals, people are in hospital, disabled, elderly, you know, they're very, very short of fuel and water at this point. And electricity, of course, is a total siege at this point.

One thing we do know on the part of the --

SMERCONISH: Becky, quick --

ANDERSON: -- American administration, which has been working -- sorry, let me just say, has been working very closely with its allies, Israel and Egypt. They've been trying to get U.S. citizens out through that rough crossing which present in Egypt is closed. I've just seen some photographs indicating there are about 500 people down on the Gaza side of that border. So it may be that we are seeing the beginning of an evacuation of U.S. citizens at least from Gaza. Sorry.

SMERCONISH: Quick answer if you're able, if the Gazans get to where the Israelis would like them to go, what resources, if any, await them?

ANDERSON: Nothing. Nothing more than what is in southern Gaza at present. The U.N. agency which normally works in the north Anwar (ph), they have reportedly moved some of their operations down into the south, but nothing like the scale of what will be needed. They were already sheltering 330,000 people in their medical facilities, their education facilities, nothing like what they need.

And the Rafah boarding as the border is closed that present, what, you know, what is being discussed here is opening that up on the Egyptian side for the aid, medical supplies, fuel that is sitting on the Egyptian side of the border to bring into southern Gaza to, to your point, provide some sort of infrastructure and support for people who are fleeing south. That border at present, as we understand, it remains close. All of those supplies stay on the Egyptian side of the border at this point.

SMERCONISH: Becky Anderson, thank you for that report.

Now on the question of should Israel have seen it coming? CNN is reporting that in the weeks before last Saturday's attack by Hamas, the U.S. intelligence community produced multiple assessments, based in part on intelligence provided by Israel warning the Biden administration of an increased risk for Palestinian Israeli conflict. They're worried of Hamas escalating rocket attacks across the border and unusual activity by Hamas. All indications that an attack was imminent.

Richard Clarke joins me now. He is of course a former White House counterterrorism adviser who advised three consecutive U.S. presidents. It was during his tenure with George W. Bush that he famously wrote a January 2001 memo warning National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, about the threat posed by Al-Qaeda and reiterated his concerns on September 4 warning of hundreds of American deaths just a week before the World Trade Center, sadly, proved him correct. He also spent 10 years as chair of the Middle East Institute and he's written 10 books and recently wrote a piece for smerconish.com titled "The War 50 Years After the War," which warns that we don't want another war in the Middle East that turns out to be based on false Intel.

[09:10:04]

Richard, thank you for being here. I guess I could also have said that one of your books was titled warnings on exactly this subject. What's your impression of the Intel now coming to light and whether it could have been acted upon?

RICHARD CLARKE, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNTERTERRORISM ADVISER: Michael, there are two problems with the warnings issue. One, if your opponent knows how you collect intelligence, they can hide from you. And that's what's happened here. Hamas knows Israel well, they know how they collect with drones, with signals intercepts, and they worked around that.

The other problem with warnings is you have to have a warnings officer who has the courage to -- and the instinct to see indicators and break the glass and sound the alarm. What this looked like to the Israelis was more of the same, because a lot of things like the small border crossings occur all the time.

SMERCONISH: I'm curious as to whether you think Americans have the patience for what's about to unfold. One of your old bosses, former President George W. Bush said something interesting this week, I'm going to roll it for all of us to watch. Play.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, 43RD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Steadfast, but it's not going to take long for pay that has gone on too long. Surely there's a way to settle this to negotiations, both sides are guilty. My view is one side is guilty, and is not Israel. Don't be surprised if Israel takes whatever action is necessary to defend their self. And it's going to be ugly for a while.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: It's not going to be long before people say it's gone on too long said W. What do you say?

CLARKE: Well, I think he's right, at least about that. The American people are going to be very upset when they see what's about to happen in Gaza. And so is the world. And it may be that Israel is walking into a trap.

The Iranian foreign minister has been to Syria. He's been to meet with Hezbollah in Lebanon. It could well be that the Iranians are planning a massive Hezbollah response once the world is outraged by the images coming out of Gaza when the Israelis start their operation. The Israelis have to make these decisions coolly and calmly and in a calculating way. Right now they are like the Americans where after 9/11 they are traumatized than they are looking for vengeance.

SMERCONISH: You can also hear Colin Powell talking about the Pottery Barn relative to Gaza and Israel going into Gaza. What am I referring to? And what do you make of that?

CLARKE: Colin Powell said before we went into Iraq in 2003, remember the Pottery Barn rule. If you break it, you own it. The Israelis have two questions that they haven't answered at least publicly. One is who's going to run Gaza after they destroy Hamas? And two, what are they going to do about getting some of the hostages out?

And I think they have answers for both of those things. And they're not very good answers. But they're not saying publicly, they're not saying to the Knesset, this is a very small group of people at the top and Israel making these decisions without communicating what they are. And the answer is I think are they're going to run it, which is not a good outcome. And they're really not going to be able to get the hostages, which is a terrible outcome.

SMERCONISH: Wow. I was just going to ask to what extent the hostages pose an impediment to Israel doing what Israel wants to do vis-a-vis Gaza?

CLARKE: Well, normally the Israelis are very sensitive, very sensitive, perhaps too sensitive. They trade a 1000 Hamas prisoners for one of the Israeli soldier a few years ago, some of those prisoners that they traded were involved in the attack a week ago. I think the Israelis have gotten to a point where they think they have to eliminate Hamas. And if the hostages cannot be rescued in the process, they're willing to accept that as part of the horror that is about to happen.

SMERCONISH: There seems to be conflicting information in the public domain relative to the Iranian role. I'm curious to know what Richard Clarke makes of it. The Biden administration, at least, to my observation has been very reluctant to point a finger directly at Iran for being a catalyst for what unfolded a week ago today.

CLARKE: Well, the Biden administration is saying publicly, that there's no smoking gun. Well, of course, there's no smoking gun. There's just years of Iran training, arming, equipping Hamas and Hezbollah. I smell an Iranian hand here. I think this is exactly what Iran wants. They instigated it in my opinion to break up the deal that the United States was about to do involving Israel and Saudi Arabia which is now on ice.

[09:15:07]

And I think Iran is planning chapter two here, involving Hezbollah. If Hezbollah attacks Israel with 10s of 1000s of more sophisticated missiles, well, Israel is engaged in Gaza, the United States could come under pressure to get involved, and to help save Israel, by airstrikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon, that would bring the United States into a much wider Middle East war. We are on the precipice of that. And that's what Tony Blinken and others are now trying to prevent by their shuttle diplomacy around the Middle East.

SMERCONISH: OK. But less we -- it probably is not required to be said, but less we repeat the mistake of Iraq, we got to see the proof. It needs to be convincing, right? Relative to an Iranian role.

CLARKE: Absolutely. The American people, the American Congress, are not going to be happy with the United States saying that there was an Iranian role. Believe us, trust us, we can't show you the evidence. Not this time. Not this time.

SMERCONISH: Richard Clarke, thank you. Appreciate your expertise.

CLARKE: Thank you, Michael.

SMERCONISH: What are your thoughts? Hit me up on social media. I'll read some throughout the course of the program. Lot to get to today. So not as much time for social media as normal.

No good solutions to this situation without long term repercussions on both sides, says Scott Marcin. I think former President Bush had it right when he said that very soon, people will begin to say, well, it's gone on for too long. It's gone on only for a week and frankly, Israel has yet to do what it intends to do we think in Gaza. Public is fickle is what I'm trying to say. So, time is of the essence.

Up ahead. The war in Israel is just one of many crises foreign and domestic that America's Congress has been unable to address since the ouster of Kevin McCarthy. House Republicans have picked Jim Jordan as their next speaker nominee, but 55 of his own party still voted against him. I'll ask Congressman Matt Gaetz, who initiated the motion to vacate McCarthy if he thinks Jordan can get the 217 he needs to end the impasse.

Plus, Hamas reportedly took at least 150 hostages, including members of the Israeli military, regular citizens ranging from children to the elderly and Americans. Is there any hope of rescuing them in this situation? You just heard Richard Clarke address that. I'll talk to a former government official who was responsible for Americans held hostage abroad. And I remind you, go to smerconish.com, answer today's poll question, Should the Biden administration encourage de-escalation in Gaza?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:21:32]

SMERCONISH: Will the House finally get a speaker so that it can get back to work? Friday, Ohio GOP Congressman Jim Jordan was nominated to be speaker after garnering support from both deposed speaker Kevin McCarthy and from Fox anchor Sean Hannity. Without a leader the GOP has frozen the chamber during several looming crises from Israel's war against Hamas to a potential government shutdown now just 34 days away. It's unclear if Jordan can win enough support from the entire House to get the requisite 217 votes.

In a secret ballot on Friday, he still had 55 Republicans opposed. Joining me now is the person who started this whole chain of events by pushing for McCarthy's ouster Florida Representative Matt Gaetz.

Congressman, do you regret ousting Kevin McCarthy given that Israel is now at war with Hamas and we don't have a speaker?

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): Absolutely not. The United States stands with Israel, Israel has a right to defend itself. And there is no need expressed by Israel that the United States has not been able to meet. That's because we have an Israel essentially on auto pay.

As a consequence of legislation that was passed by Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, the administration is preauthorized to meet any need that Israel could possibly express in this particular phase of the crisis. My expectation is that we will elect speaker designate Jim Jordan as House Speaker next week, and will be prepared to move forward with resolutions of support. But those are non-binding expressions of our opinion when it comes to the movement of specific material and the coordination on intelligence. We are pre authorized because our relationship with Israel, is that unique.

SMERCONISH: How do you think that Jordan crosses the finish line with 217 if there were 55 votes against him? As being reported, you were there, 55 votes against him on that second ballot last night?

GAETZ: Well, I think it's important to understand how that math moved. Initially, there were 81 votes against Jim Jordan. And then about 30 minutes later, there were only 55 votes against Jim Jordan. So on that trajectory, he seems to be gaining a good amount of momentum.

Also, it's important to note that those 55 notes on Jordan, were on a secret anonymous ballot, like in the basement of the Longworth office building. It's quite a different thing to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and vote against the second most popular living Republican in America. I know how hard it is to stand on the floor and vote against the party's choice. I did it to extract concessions that I thought were meaningful that unfortunately, the former speaker did not live up to. But my expectation is that next week, we will elect Jim Jordan.

Frankly, Michael, I think we probably could have done it last night, and I would have preferred that path. But as Speaker Emeritus McCarthy said that he wanted Jim Jordan's family to be able to be there, his supporters to be able to be there. And I guess one thing that Kevin McCarthy and I agree on, Jim Jordan is going to be the next Speaker of the House.

SMERCONISH: You've heard the criticisms, right, from people, including in your own caucus, I think one member who said that it's a group of idiots who have led us down this path. Others say we look third world dish at a time when we need to be looking as a model for democracies around the globe. How do you respond to those who say that the whole perception of the United States and the dysfunction of Congress is what has arisen out of your ouster of Kevin McCarthy?

GAETZ: I find it a little ridiculous, right? Like, oh no, the world is ending because the House of Representatives isn't passing ceremonial resolutions this week. The entire United States Senate was out all week. The House of Representatives takes seven weeks off every single year for essentially a summer vacation. There are days when all we vote on are procedural votes and post offices.

[09:25:07]

So I think that the chaos narrative is a bit overplayed, particularly in the beltway, because the lobbyists and the special interests want someone in the speakership that they totally controlled. They had that in Kevin McCarthy. And just because lobbyists and special interests have been disempowered by the motion to vacate doesn't mean it was the wrong decision. And it doesn't mean that like we're in chaos, because there were 10 days when the lights were off on the House floor. We have not put our pencils down.

This last week, we were getting classified briefings on the evolving situation in the Middle East. I was taking depositions of former and current Department of Justice officials as a pursuant to our oversight work. So don't believe that just because there isn't floor action, that somehow all of our representatives aren't working. We in fact, are continuing the work of the Congress.

SMERCONISH: I heard the point that you made. Everybody heard the point that you made about a, quote unquote, "auto pay for Israel." To the extent, there's congressional action required of any kind vis-a-vis Israel, will you be seeking to tie it to support for Ukraine?

GAETZ: Well, no, I'll be seeking to, to untether any question about Ukraine from any question on Israel. And it's important to ask that question, because when --

SMERCONISH: What does that mean?

GAETZ: Well, I think that they deserve their own vote and their own dignity, right? However you feel about Israel, and however you feel about Ukraine, I think that a responsible and reasonable government ought to address those questions separately, they shouldn't be lashed together. For example, I would support meeting additional requests for -- from Israel for aid, I would not for Ukraine. So, mushing things together, log rolling them, that is the old way of Washington. That's what I'm trying to change, whether it's our budgeting process are our foreign aid. I want individual votes on separate and disparate questions, I don't want everything mushed together.

SMERCONISH: OK. But your -- many of your colleagues -- many of your colleagues don't share that view. Is that your understanding? In other words, those who seek to diminish United States support for Ukraine are now looking to this Israel issue as a means of doing so? Like, unless we get a reduced role for Ukraine, we're not going to support Israel to the extent you'd like us to, that's a sentiment that I'm hearing.

GAETZ: Well, that is not the sentiment from the administration. The administration is trying to combine the question, I am trying to separate the question. And one of the concessions that we did get in House rules that will outlast speaker McCarthy is the ability in the rules committee to be able to raise points of order and raise questions to try to separate those things. In fact, when we had our defense bill, our $896 billion defense bill, Marjorie Taylor Greene was successful in getting a separate vote on the 300 million for Ukraine because of those single subject concessions we got in January. That 300 million for Ukraine still passed, but it passed with a majority of Republicans voting against it.

So now we have -- for anyone to move legislation to support Ukraine, they would have to roll a majority of the Republicans who now believe we should be less involved in that conflict but that in no way diminishes our support for Israel, which is very strong in a bipartisan fashion.

SMERCONISH: Final quick question, what's your answer to my poll question today? Should the Biden administration encouraged quote, unquote, "de-escalation in Gaza?"

GAETZ: I knew I was getting this question. I think the Biden administration should be most focused on really putting pressure on Egypt to set up refugee camps and passageways. You only de-escalate after the military operations are concluded. So my answer to the question would be no today, but I think our diplomatic efforts should be focused on humanitarian passageways to get civilians out of Gaza.

If we have a pile of, you know, dead Muslim kids that could increase the amount of terrorism in the world not decrease it. Though, I understand Israel's very sincere and legitimate efforts to destroy Hamas once and for all.

SMERCONISH: Catherine (ph), put the social media up there. It's probably a complaint either about Gaetz or me hosting him. So, maybe he'll want to respond, quote, "Jordan is the worst of the bad choices for speaker. Further proof that the GOP cannot govern effectively for all of America. You'd say what to that person at x?

GAETZ: Yes, at x76, I guess I'm glad you're not a member of the United States Congress. Because if you weren't, you'd know that Jim Jordan is a good man, a virtuous man, someone who is broadly respected across the Republican conference. And you know where he stands. That's a distinction between Jim Jordan Kevin McCarthy, it's one of the reasons I'm so excited to make him House speaker.

SMERCONISH: Right. But people like me say, hey, McCarthy was willing to reach across the aisle and keep the government functioning. McCarthy was willing to reach across the aisle and raise the debt ceiling less we would have suffered default. Those are good things. Ten seconds, you get the final word.

GAETZ: Well, I think that Kevin McCarthy was ousted by Democrats and Republicans because he made multiple contradictory promises that he never intended to keep. Jim Jordan puts us back on a path to fiscal sanity and he gets the Republican Party back into the fighting posture we need to be in to win elections and push our policy objectives.

[09:30:00]

Congressman Gaetz, thank you for coming back.

GAETZ: Thank you, Michael. Always good to be with you.

SMERCONISH: Remind you go to Smerconish.com. He just answered the poll question. I need you to answer the poll question. Should the Biden administration encourage de-escalation in Gaza? Congressman Gaetz was a no vote.

Up ahead, in America the Hamas attack reignited battle over campus speech issues leading to consequences for teachers and students and job hunters and donors. At Harvard, after several student groups released a statement putting all the blame on Israel, this billboard truck circled the university displaying the names and faces of student members. Should times of war impact speech rights?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:35:01]

SMERCONISH: Is there any way to safely rescue the hostages in Gaza? The terror group Hamas is holding as many as 150 people hostage in Gaza ranging from Israeli army officers to the elderly to children as well as Americans and nationals from other countries.

In response, Israel has cut off electricity, water and fuel until the hostages are returned home. Israel has never dealt with a hostage operation on this scale before. The hostages are believed to be kept underground to hide them from efforts to locate and extract them.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in Doha on Friday that the United States and Qatar are -- quote -- "working intensively together to secure the release of the hostages, including Americans."

Joining me now is retired Colonel Christopher Costa, former special assistant to President Trump and senior director for counterterrorism at the White House. That's a role that gave him responsibility for U.S. citizens being held hostage overseas. He's also the executive director of the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C.

Colonel, thank you for being here. I have to say Richard Clarke, the former national security adviser, earlier in the program was rather pessimistic about the likelihood of being able to rescue these folks. I'm not sure if you heard what he said but do you share that sentiment?

COL. CHRISTOPHER COSTA, U.S. ARMY (RET.)/FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT: I did hear what Richard Clarke said. And I'm a little more optimistic. I've seen the Israeli capabilities. But because of the sheer scale there are going to be individuals that are going to be extremely vulnerable. I'm talking about the hostages, just because of the sheer number, the scale, and what you just outlined. They're underground. They are likely separated.

So, it is an immense, significant rescue operation and it's going to be difficult to get to all of those hostages simultaneously. So, it is a significant magnitude in terms of sophistication to pull something like that off.

SMERCONISH: How reliable are the Qataris as a partner to try and be the go between?

COSTA: So, I think, they are very reliable. I participated outside the U.S. government in a bilateral exercise with Ambassador Roger Carstens just in July. It was the first time we ever did that. The United States, of course, the embassy was there. The U.S. ambassador of Qatar kicked it off. And the bottom line is they are very capable.

They're enthusiastic. They want to be brokers in the region and they are very effective as interlocutors. We have seen that with the relationships that they have with the Taliban. So, I think you can't shut off any avenues you have to possible negotiations down the line.

SMERCONISH: Is shutting off food and energy and water an effective means of getting those hostages released, or do you really see the two as not being connected?

COSTA: I don't see the two being connected because when Israel decides at a time of their choosing and places at their choosing to execute their combat operations they're going to do that simultaneously, they're going to do it fast. And at the end of the day, it's not going to be prolonged in terms of the initial assault, if that does play out in Gaza.

So right now, you want to put pressure on the hostage takers. That's classic rescue SOP, if you will, standard operating procedures.

SMERCONISH: And finally, Colonel, obviously a lot of planning went into the attack, the unprovoked attack of last Saturday. But one wonders whether sufficient planning went into what you do with 150 hostages once they are under your charge. That's not easy.

COSTA: That's an outstanding point and I agree with the premise. The bottom line is I don't think Hamas thought through the second, the third order effects of having to feed, clothe, move, secure their hostages. So, I think that they went well beyond their maligned capabilities candidly and they're going to be extremely vulnerable. So, they might be looking for ways out of the situation that they created by their own making.

SMERCONISH: Colonel Costa, thank you for your time and expertise. We appreciate it.

COSTA: Thank you for having me.

SMERCONISH: Let's check in on your social media comments. From the world of YouTube, I believe.

"Does the U.S. still operate under the philosophy of do not negotiate with terrorists," asked Madison. Madison, I don't know the answer to that question. But it seems to me that the Israelis are the ones who are answering it now and their answer heretofore appears to be no and can you blame them in this circumstance?

I want to remind you answer this week's poll question at Smerconish.com. I'm asking, should the Biden administration encourage de-escalation in Gaza? We had reporting at the outset of the program, in case you missed it, that there have been some e-mails, some advisos given to a small audience within the government saying, it's not a word that we want to use. We want to make sure that we're not publicly perceived as putting limitation on the Israeli response.

[09:40:00]

Still to come, the Hamas attack on Israel also ignited pro-Palestinian protests on several American college campuses leading to schools losing donor money and students seeing job offers rescinded. Should students who participated be blacklisted by perspective employers? We'll get to that in a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: The brutal attacks against Israel by Hamas reigniting debates across college campuses about where to draw the line when it comes to free speech. And several companies, universities and donors have been taking punitive actions.

Stanford University students reported an instructor for downplaying the holocaust and separating all the Jewish students in class by labeling them as -- quote -- "colonizers," according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The university removed the teacher and is currently investigating the matter. When Columbia students held competing pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian rallies, the university closed its gates over concerns for public safety.

[09:45:00]

And after the University of Pennsylvania failed to condemn an event held last month by speakers with a history of making anti-Semitic remarks, alum Marc Rowan, a Wall Street CEO and prominent donor, is calling for university leaders to resign and asking that other donors protest by giving only a dollar. The repercussions have also extended to employers. One law firm rescinded its job offer to a former summer associate who is president of NYU's Student Bar Association saying the associate's -- quote -- "inflammatory comments" on Israel and Gaza profoundly conflict with the firm's values.

But perhaps the biggest fallout came at Harvard University after 34 student organizations co-signed a statement that solely blamed the Israeli government for the atrocities carried out by Hamas. A non- profit organized the truck to drive near campus and displayed the names and faces of students affiliated with the letter on a virtual screen under a banner that read -- quote -- "Harvard's leading anti- Semites."

And billionaire hedge fund CEO and Harvard alum Bill Ackman is calling for the university to publicly release the names of the students affiliated with the letter so that his company can blacklist them from getting hired. Several CEOs have echoed Ackman's request including the CEO from Sweetgreen, Jonathan Neman, who tweeted, I would like to know so that I never hire these people.

Joining me now is Greg Lukianoff. He is the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression or FIRE. He's also the co-author of the best-seller, "The Coddling of the American Mind, and a new book, "The Canceling of the American Mind."

You're a First Amendment advocate. You're a defender of free speech on campus. So, where is the line in these circumstances?

GREG LUKIANOFF, CO-AUTHOR, "THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND": Well, it depends on the case. When it comes to the Stanford case, and I'm a Stanford alum, that was a case where the professor literally made Jewish students raise their hands and told them to take their stuff, get in the far corner and then started telling them that, you're colonizers. As many Jews have been killed by the colonizers -- were killed in the holocaust. And that's something that they can punish a professor for. So, that's a case where actually Stanford's actions are almost certainly appropriate.

But when it comes to some of the other ones it may be -- freedom of speech -- they have the freedom of speech to decide, freedom of association to decide who they hire. But in "Canceling of the American Mind" our definition of cancel culture is the uptick in campaigns to get people fired for their political opinion, for example, since 2014.

And in this case while certainly again employers can decide who they hire, actually deciding to blacklist them for their opinion is cancel culture. It might be cancel culture that many people agree with, but let's not pretend it's not cancel culture.

SMERCONISH: At the University of Florida, former United States senator now president Ben Sasse had a different approach. I'm going to put on the screen and read to you and everybody else the statement that he released.

He said, I will not tiptoe around this simple fact. What Hamas did is evil and there is no defense for terrorism. This shouldn't be hard. Sadly, too many people in elite academia have been so weakened by their moral confusion that when they see videos of raped women, hear of beheaded babies, or learn of a grandmother murdered in her home, the first reaction of some is to provide context and try to blame the raped women, beheaded baby, or the murdered grandmother. In other grotesque cases, they express simple support for the terrorists.

This thinking isn't just wrong, it's sickening. It's dehumanizing. It is beneath people called to educate our next generation of Americans. I am thankful to say I haven't seen examples of that here at U.F., either from the faculty or our student body.

Your take on what Ben Sasse had to say?

LUKIANOFF: That being critical of speech is within bounds of what a president can do. I mean, our personal position -- our position at FIRE is that we think universities should express more political neutrality on big issues of the world.

But, for example, the University of Virginia came out and said, we're concerned about our students in Israel. We're concerned about our students who are there and their families. And I thought that was perfect.

I think that -- actually in many schools they comment on too many political issues. But I think Ben Sasse was clearly within his rights to say that. And I'm pretty sure he also came out with a pretty good statement defending the free speech rights of his faculty and students at the same time.

SMERCONISH: In a different era at the end of the Vietnam War, maybe in the midst of the Vietnam War at the University of Chicago, I think it was 1967, academics were tasked with the responsibility of how do you address these political and cultural hot spot topics. What did they determine?

LUKIANOFF: The Calvin Report is something I really advocate for, that was what came out of the '67 moment where they said, listen, we are not supposed to be -- the institution itself is not the one producing the political positions. We shouldn't create orthodoxies on our campuses. So, we're going to withhold that. And we're going to let the discussions actually take place among professors, among students.

[09:50:03]

And we think that's very wise. And we have been watching some schools including Stanford, for example, really come out in favor of political neutrality.

Now, at the same time, having done this for 22 years, the fact that it took this incident for them to decide to suddenly -- decide to be neutral, I understand the cynicism and skepticism. But my hope is that -- Harvard has also come out with some good statements about free speech right now. And I got the cynicism and skepticism that it took this long. I mean, Harvard finished dead last in our free speech rankings this year. So, you know, the proof will be in the pudding but, you know, I welcome the change and I hope it's for real.

SMERCONISH: Greg Lukianoff, thank you. Good luck with the new book.

LUKIANOFF: Thank you so much, Michael. Always great seeing you.

SMERCONISH: Still to come, more of your best and worst social media comments and we'll give you the final result of the poll question today at Smerconish.com. Should the Biden administration encourage de- escalation in Gaza?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:55:20]

SMERCONISH: There's the result of the poll question so -- whoa. Isn't that interesting? A stone cold 50/50. Should the Biden administration encourage de-escalation in Gaza? More than 28,000 have voted.

I'll leave it up. Keep voting. Time for just one social media reaction. What do we have?

War is hell. De-escalation would prolong the hell. Let the Israelis finish the job.

Well, 50 percent of the audience agrees with you, Timothy Gumm. You know what I find interesting? I find interesting that according to our reporting -- we had Jennifer Hansler here earlier in the hour. And she said that this was advice. Stay away from de-escalation shared with just a few people. Well, somebody among the few must not have agreed with it because it got leaked.

CNN's war coverage continues. Wolf Blitzer will come aboard at 11:00 a.m. Stay right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)