Guests on Sunday’s political talk shows discussed the ongoing violence in Ferguson, Missouri, Texas Governor Rick Perry’s indictment and the continuing threat of the Islamic State terror group.
“There are times when force is necessary, but we really felt that that — that that push at that time was a little aggressive, obviously, and those images were not what we were trying to get to,” Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon said on ABC’s “This Week” in response to criticism over police response protests in the town.
On Sunday, a curfew was put into place in the town in an effort to quell violence without hampering legal protests.
“We are trying to use the least amount of force to provide people to — the ability to speak, while also protecting the property of the people of Ferguson,” Nixon said during another appearance on “Meet the Press.”
Nixon also noted that a decision to place state police in control of the Ferguson situation rather than the local officers who were initially in charge had changed the dynamic of the situation.
“We are trying to use the least amount of force to provide people to — the ability to speak, while also protecting the property of the people of Ferguson.”
Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Sunday continued to question two felony abuse of power indictments handed down by a grand jury last week, calling the accusations political.
On Friday the governor was indicted on charges of improperly vetoing $7.5 million in funding for an agency which handles Texas political-corruption cases after a Democratic prosecutor refused to resign following a drunk-driving arrest.
“I very clearly, I very publicly, said that as long as that individual is going to be running that agency, I had lost confidence in her, the public had lost confidence in her, and I did what every governor has done for decades, which is make a decision on whether or not it was in the proper use of state money to go to that agency, and I vetoed it. … I stood up for the rule of law in the state of Texas, and if I had to do it again, I would make exactly the same decision,” Perry said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“If we allow ISIS to get bigger and bigger, they’re going to plot homeland attacks on us,” Rep. Eliot Engel (D., N.Y.), ranking House Committee on Foreign Affairs member, told “Fox News Sunday.”
Engel wasn’t alone on Sunday, as a number of lawmakers said that not eliminating ISIS as a threat now means dealing with a terror threat at home.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R., Ill.) told ABC’s “This Week” that things couldn’t get much worse for the U.S.
“What we’re watching in Iraq and in Syria, frankly, is the worst-case scenario for the Middle East. This cancer that’s growing; that is consuming all over the place … Today, we see [ISIL] in the tens of thousands, and they’re only continuing to metastasize.”
The bottom line, according to the lawmaker, is that the U.S. must take the steps to neutralize ISIS as soon as possible.
“It’s something that we have to be involved in stopping with the Iraqi government, with the peshmerga. I think we’re on the right start, but there’s a lot more to do,” said Kinzinger.
“At the end of the day, I think the defeating of ISIS is the mission, and so I think everything has to be on the table for that end result. I understand the president doesn’t want to put troops on the ground. I don’t either. You can’t reintroduce 200,000 American troops, but I think things like special forces embedded with the Iraqi military as the Iraqi military regrows its spine to take its country back is going to be essential and important.”