From Special Report with Bret Baier | Monday, April 9, 2012

On North Korea’s preparations to launch an observation satellite using a three-stage rocket, the same kind that could be used to deliver a warhead:

Well, first we have to see it in the context of the ridiculous deal we negotiated with Pyongyang on the 29th of February in which we were going to give them food aid in return for acting nice, meaning they would shut down the uranium program and not launch missiles. So in a month they are already in gross violation of it. The best we can muster is for our State Department spokesman to say, “it would be inconsistent with the recent undertakings if that were to happen.” It’s a gross violation of the treaty, spitting in the face of [the administration]….
In relation to missile defense, the Japanese defense ministry announced it would shoot down the rocket if it goes over Japan. But it’s not clear if it would shoot it down only if it’s going to land in Japan or if it goes over Japan on the way up. I think we ought to say that we support and will assist the Japanese in shooting it down. And perhaps I would suggest we deploy our own Aegis cruisers and shoot it down, because the only reason for a missile of that sort is to hit the United States, and one day it will have a nuke on it.

On why China has tolerated North Korea’s defiance:

Because China for decades has seen Pyongyang as a way to distract and weaken and preoccupy the United States and the region. It’s a thorn in our side. For Chinese national interest, which is ultimately to have control of the west Pacific and have us out of it, it helps.
So when you say China ought to step up, China understands its own interests. Its interest is to have us out of there. And the more attention we have to devote to Pyongyang the less we do to [China’s] threat against Taiwan and the South China Sea. So China is never going to help us. And if the Chinese are offended if we shoot down a rocket, so what?

On the gubernatorial recall campaign underway in Wisconsin:

What the Democrats are deciding right now is whether they want this to be a single issue campaign or whether they want it to be a judgment about the governor, a broader judgment. The mayor of Milwaukee ran against Walker in the previous election cycle and he lost. And he’s less steady on the union issue. The unions aren’t backing him. So it would be more of a “do you like Walker, his governorship? …”
But if it isn’t him, it will be a single issue campaign, which is what the unions want. And if it is a single issue campaign, then it becomes national.
I don’t think in any way it’s a microcosm of the presidential election. I don’t think how it’s decided will tell us anything about which way Wisconsin will go if it’s a Romney-Obama race. But it’s national in the sense that other states will look at this and decide: Are the governors going to risk curtailing the power of the unions after Wisconsin, if the governor is recalled?…
The unions understand if they lose in Wisconsin it will be the third attempt of repealing [the law curtailing government-worker power]. The state Supreme Court election was lost by the union. The recall election did not succeed in changing the Senate and making it Democratic.
This is the third attempt. Three strikes you are out. The unions understand they’ll be wiped out in other states as well. And that’s why they are pouring millions of dollars into this.