‘This Week’ Transcript: Ambassador Samantha Power
April 13, 2014— -- Below is the rush transcript for "This Week" on April 13, 2014. It may contain errors.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Starting right now on ABC's This Week, Ukrainian special forces clash with pro-Russian militants. Both sides report casualties. Is this the start of war? We're live on the ground with all the breaking details.
The Contender:
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are we supposed to consider you the frontrunner now?
ANNOUNCER: On the road with Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. How the rising star is shaking up the GOP.
And, Boston Strong.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is our (EXPLETIVE DELETED) city. Stay strong.
ANNOUNCER: One year later, a city facing new security fears ready to rise again.
From ABC News, This Week with George Stephanopoulos begins now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: Good morning, let's get right to that breaking news. A dangerous escalation in the crisis in Ukraine with gun battles between government troops and masked Russian protesters.
There are reports of new casualties. And the U.S. is warning Russia to stand down now.
UN Ambassador Samantha Power is here live for an exclusive interview after this report from ABC's Alex Marquardt on the scene in Ukraine. Good morning, Alex.
ALEX MARQUARDT, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, George. As you just said this is an extremely significant and dangerous escalation here in eastern Ukraine this morning. Ukraine says units from their equivalent of the FBI have now been deployed to the town of Slovyansk as part of what they're calling an anti-terrorist operation aimed against armed pro-Russia forces that yesterday seized government buildings, including the police headquarters.
Ukraine's interior minister says there have been dead and wounded on both sides. At least one Ukrainian officer has been shot and killed.
So far, the Ukrainian forces have not been able to take back the buildings.
We're about 10 miles outside of Slovyansk on our way there just passing through many of the new checkpoints that have sprung up around the town. They're manned by pro-Russian activists waving pro-Russian flags, stopping cars, looking inside. At many of them, they're blocking access to the town.
Across eastern Ukraine for the past week, we've seen government buildings violently seized by anti-government protesters, many of whom want to be closer to or even a part of Russia. The U.S. has directly accused Russia of being behind this new wave of unrest, which Moscow has denied.
Washington says many of the armed men that we've seen seizing these buildings over the past 24 hours have the very same uniforms and guns that Russian forces had when they annexed Crimea last month.
Moscow has warned Ukraine now to crack down on these protests, saying that violence against Russian-speakers here would provoke a response. And with around 40,000 Russian troops, as well as artillery and fighter jets lining that border with eastern Ukraine, the big fear now is that this new violence will give Russia an excuse to invade -- George.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK. Let's get more now from our chief global affairs correspondent Martha Raddatz. Martha, this raised a lot of alarm bells with U.S. officials. Secretary Kerry immediately on the phone with his counterpart.
MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Exactly George. This is the kind of encounter U.S. officials fear could ignite greater conflict. Secretary Kerry called and warned Sergei Lavrov of strong concerns that attacks by armed militants in eastern Ukraine were orchestrated and synchronized similar to previous attacks in eastern Ukraine and Crimea and there would be additional consequences if Russia does not take steps to back down. They clearly believe this is orchestrated by Russia and fear with this Ukrainian response could give Russia and excuse, as Alex says, to move in.
And just a short time ago, George, UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon urging maximum restraint. The national security council cautioning against further military intervention as well.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Of course, the big question is what more can the U.S. do? And also we know that Vice President Biden is heading to the region later this week. And there's been a report out of the Ukrainian parliament that CIA director John Brennan is actually in Kiev this weekend.
RADDATZ: Well, you know, you can try for more sanctions, try to isolate Russia more and support Ukraine's military with food and supplies, but that, too, can escalate this. And remember, Ukraine's military is far, far outnumbered 6 to 1.
Biden is heading over for meetings with the Ukrainians. And the CIA is not officially confirming the visit. The Russian news agency claims Brennan slipped into Kiev using a false name and gave his blessing to the Ukrainian forces, which is highly suspect.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But as you say, the U.S. not denying, not confirming. Martha Raddatz...
RADDATZ: Not denying, not confirming.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Thanks very much.
Let's bring in the UN ambassador Samantha Power. Thank you for joining us this morning.
You know, we heard Secretary Kerry say that there will be consequences if the Russians don't stand down.
Also, our GMA anchor Bianna Golodryga just spoke with Ukrainian foreign minister saying there is no question that Russian agents are behind this. That's what the U.S. believes.
SAMANTHA POWER, US AMBASSADOR TO THE UN: Well, it has all the tell-tale signs of what we saw in Crimea. It's professional, it's coordinated. There's nothing grass roots seeming about it. That forces are doing in each of the six or seven cities that they've been active in exactly the same thing, so certainly it bears the tell-tale signs of Moscow's involvement.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Martha also talked about the possibility of raising sanctions. But can the United States actually do anything that would really stop Russia at this point?
POWER: Well, George, already the sanctions that we put in place have brought the ruble to an all-time low in terms of its value. The Russian stock market has depreciated by 20 percent. Investors are fleeing. And that's just on the basis of the sanctions that we put in place up to this point.
The President has made clear that depending on Russian behavior, sectoral sanctions against energy, banking, mining could be on the table. And there's a lot in between.
So, I think we've seen that the sanctions can bite. And if actions like the kind that we've seen over the last few days continue, you're going to see a ramping up of those sanctions.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Those threats -- or initial sanctions have not stopped Russia from going in to Crimea. Do we believe that Vladimir Putin wants the eastern Ukraine?
POWER: I think the actions that he is undertaking certainly give credence to that idea. But I will say in the conversations that we have, of course, they keep insisting, no, that's not what we want, that's not what we want. But everything they're doing suggests the opposite.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And will they have control over the eastern Ukraine no matter what?
POWER: I think there are elections coming up. The leadership in Ukraine have made very clear that they're prepared to have a conversation about autonomy and decentralization. And that's what makes, again, this action so outrageous and so ironic, because just at the very time the prime minister was going to the regions to talk about how the legitimate interests of Russian speakers could be tended to, this kind of action takes place. And it makes you think that they -- that a military solution is what...
STEPHANOPOULOS: If they continue, will the peace talks still go forward?
POWER: Unclear. Again, we're going to see how events transpire today and in the next few days.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you about another -- about another issue at the United Nations right now. The White House has made it clear that the United States is not going to issue a visa to the man Iran has chosen as their ambassador to the UN Hamid Aboutalebi. And I want to show the 1947 agreement that put the United Nations headquarters in New York says very clearly that federal, state or local authorities of the United States shall not impose any impediments to transit to or from the headquarters district of representatives of members or officials of the United Nations. The only exception, of course, is national security.
How would granting a visa to this ambassador harm U.S. national security?
POWER: Well, first, we take our host country obligations very seriously. But part of our obligation as the host country is to review visa applications. We've made clear to Iran that this nominee is not acceptable to us. And we think the best way to resolve this issue is for them to pull it back and put somebody else forward.
We're also focused, of course, on continue the P5+1 process on the nuclear issue. And, again, nothing in this quite public confrontation so far has had any impact on that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But they've made it clear that they're not going to pull the ambassador back. And this ambassador served in Italy, Australia, the European Union, are you confident this is not going to harm these other talks?
POWER: Again, so far we had talks just last week. We'll have more high level talks in the next month. And our experts are meeting every day. We have not seen this issue influence those talks in any way. And the urgency, of course, of that issue is plain to everyone.
So we are -- we would expect that Iran's own interest in getting out from under economic sanctions, which is what it says it wants -- our interests, certainly, in making sure that Iran doesn't possess or develop a nuclear weapon, that that's what is going to be paramount here.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, some disturbing video coming out of Syria this week -- and I think we're going to show it -- right now reports of another poison gas attack, the first since August. The rebels have put out the video. Syrian state television has claimed that actually the rebels are behind the gas attack not the government. Do we know who is behind this?
POWER: We are trying to run this down. So far, it's unsubstantiated. But we've shown, I think in the past, that we will do everything in our power to establish what has happened and then consider possible steps in response.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And if the government did this after the president draws the red line, after they promised to turn over chemical weapons, will we have any option but to strike militarily?
POWER: Well, I'm not going to get ahead of the president, but the president has made very clear how alarming he finds chemical weapons use, how outrageous he found it, that's why he put the credible threat of military force on the table, that's why we've been able to destroy and remove more than half of Syria's chemical weapons up to this point.
But certainly the point of what we've done so far is to prevent further use. We weren't just removing for removing sake, it was to avoid use. So we will have to look at our policy on this.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, Ambassador Power, thanks very much. And you can come back later to talk about this crisis in the Central African Republic.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But right now, we're going to move on to Boston, the city preparing to mark the moment one year ago when terror struck right at the heart of its historic marathon. They are back Boston Strong as we learn more about how the bombing might have been prevented.
Our GMA Weekend anchor Dan Harris, a Boston native, has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN HARRIS, GOOD MORNING AMERICA WEEKEND ANCHOR: It was a day my hometown will never forget -- two explosions at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, the city's secular holy day transformed into a hellscape. Three dead, hundreds injured.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As we come on the air, this is a country in search of a bomber.
HARRIS: It led to a nearly week long manhunt for the two suspects, the city on lockdown in those final chaotic hours before the capture of 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, hiding in a boat.
Emerging from the mayhem, the stories of bravery and survival.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We will rise and we will endure.
HARRIS: And a community united around a simple idea -- Boston strong. Perhaps most colorfully articulated by the Red Sox legend known as Big Pappy (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is (EXPLETIVE LANGUAGE).
HARRIS: One year later, a new report from the intelligence community points to some missed signals on tracking the suspects before the attacks, while faulting Russia for failing to share more intelligence.
But the report says U.S. agencies generally shared information and followed procedures appropriately.
Meanwhile, preparations for next Monday's marathon are now in full swing, with stepped up security planned, including more bag checks and barriers along the race route and with some 36,000 runners planning to hit the race path, the most ever, Boston has a new rallying cry, we run together.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
HARRIS: But before the race, the anniversary.
Coming up this Tuesday, the city will mark it with a tribute ceremony at the convention center downtown, after which hundreds of people, including the suvivas -- survivors -- will march to the finish line for a moment of silence at 2:49 p.m., the exact time the first bomb went off -- and, George, I will be there and talking to you...
(CROSSTALK)
HARRIS: -- an ABC News special report.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We're going to cover that on Tuesday.
OK, Dan, thanks very much.
Let's get more on this now from the governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick.
Governor, thank you so much for joining us this morning.
As Dan just said...
PATRICK: George, good morning.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning.
As Dan just said, the commemoration is Tuesday, the marathon next week.
Are you confident both will be secure?
PATRICK: I think we've made every possible provision. The planning has been very, very thorough. The teams are well coordinated. In fact, George, we had a -- we had a sort of table-top exercise, a -- a practice session, a full day, a couple of weeks ago with -- there were 450 people in the room from every state, federal and local agency and municipal leadership, as well, for each of the cities and towns along the route.
We'll be very prepared. And I think we have struck an appropriate balance between having more law enforcement presence, but also assuring that it continues to be a family outing and a civic ritual.
STEPHANOPOULOS: What's the biggest threat, some kind of knockoff copycat?
PATRICK: Yes, and, you know, you worry about that. You worry about the fact that an awful lot of attention is going to be focused on this year's marathon, really, on account of last year. It's a -- it's always, as you know, a big deal for us in Boston and in Massachusetts, but there is a record number of runners, a record number of reporters that I think will be present, as well.
But as I say, I think we are very well prepared and people should come out and enjoy themselves.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You've seen the intelligence review suggesting the FBI could have done a better job of tracking Tamerlan Tsarnaev and it faults the Russians for failing to share intelligence.
What did you take away from the review?
And is there anything more you think either the federal government or Boston or Massachusetts could have done?
PATRICK: Well, I think that the, you know, it's obviously concerning that Russian intelligence was not responsive to questions asked by the FBI and by other United States intelligence agencies for a year or more. I knew this in the immediate aftermath, when we were getting this information. Now the public knows it, as a result of the inspector general's -- inspectors general report.
Obviously, you want as much coordination as possible, but I think we are past the point, in many respects, of could have, should have business. We are really focused on how to assure that this marathon is safe and fun and celebrating, in the coming week, the way that we have pulled together, the way that, you know, the medical teams pulled together to care for and comfort those who were hurt, the way the law enforcement teams pulled together to solve the crime and the way all of the citizens pulled together to help us heal and make us strong.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So Boston ready to send a message next week?
PATRICK: Say that again, George?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Boston is ready to send a message next week?
PATRICK: That is the message. We're going to be a -- it's going to be a great -- a great occasion and a solemn one, obviously, on Tuesday, when we acknowledge the tragedy of the last year, but, also, it has been a source of pride for us in the way that this community has shown the world what a community -- and a strong community -- looks like.
STEPHANOPOULOS: They certainly have.
Governor Patrick, thanks very much for your time this morning.
Up next, we're on the trail in New Hampshire. The Republican maverick, Rand Paul, is he now the GOP frontrunner?
The powerhouse roundtable weighs in, too, and takes on all the week's politics, including that Obamacare shakeup and a big fight over equal pay.
Back in just two minutes.STEPHANOPOULOS: And we are back now with our closer look at the maverick senator shocking up the GOP.
Rand Paul is running hard, going places Republican have not gone before, even leading the presidential field in some polls.
But can the libertarian firebrand broaden his appeal in a way his father never did?
ABC's Jon Karl joined him on the trail in New Hampshire.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In Manchester, New Hampshire this weekend, the Freedom Summit, a gathering of conservative leaders, including many positioning themselves to run for president in 2016.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good to see you.
Welcome to New Hampshire.
KARL: It's where we caught up with Kentucky Senator Rand Paul at a local pizza place.
(on camera): So you've won the last couple of straw polls. There's a poll here in New Hampshire that had you in the lead. There's a poll nationally, a CNN Poll, that has you in the lead.
Are we supposed to consider you the frontrunner now for the nomination?
PAUL: You know, I don't know if that's good luck or bad luck.
So why don't we not go there?
(LAUGHTER)
PAUL: But I guess it's better than not being noticed. And, also, no matter what happens, I think the Republican Party needs to evolve, change, grow if we're going to win again. And so I do want to be part of that.
Great to be here at Berkeley.
Thank you.
KARL: You've been out to Berkeley, Howard University, Detroit. I mean you are going after audiences that we don't see Republicans go after -- minorities, young people. They voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama.
What is your party doing wrong to alienate so many young voters and minorities?
PAUL: You know, it's a hardened resistance. It's been going on for decade after decade after decade. So it's not going to easy to change. We got 3 percent of the vote in Detroit.
There's not one Democrat that's offered to help the people in Detroit. I went to the people of Detroit and I offered them a billion dollars of their own money to try to help them recover.
KARL: But you're offering tax cuts. I mean if you don't have a job, if you're in poverty, tax cuts aren't going to help.
PAUL: That money would be left in the hands of businesses that people in Detroit are already voting on. Let's grow those businesses and they will employ more people.
KARL: So I'm sure you saw Jeb Bush's comments on immigration. He talked about how we shouldn't let the immigration issue rile people up...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEB BUSH (R), FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR: Yes, they KARL the law, but it's not a felony. It's kind of the -- it's a -- it's a -- it's an act of love.
KARL: Do you agree with him on this?
PAUL: You know, I think he might have been more artful, maybe, in the way he presented this. But I don't want to say, oh, he's terrible for saying this. If it were me, what I would have said is, people who seek the American dream are not bad people. However...
KARL: -- even if they came into this country...
PAUL: -- well, then...
KARL: -- illegally?
PAUL: -- but here's what I'd finish up with. They are not bad people. However, we can't invite the whole world. When you say they're doing an act of love and you don't follow it up with, but we have to control the border, people think well because they're doing this for kind reasons that the whole world can come to our country.
KARL: But there's also suggestion that Republicans in previous campaigns have vilified those who came over illegally.
PAUL: And some people perceived it that way, and that's a perception we do have to change.
KARL: So I want to turn to foreign policy, some tapes of you over the last few years have emerged recently. You were very critical of Dick Cheney. You suggested that he was opposed to going into Baghdad in 1991...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAUL: Dick Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton, makes hundreds of millions of dollars as CEO. Next thing you know, he's back in government it's a good idea to go to Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: Do you really think that Cheney was motivated by his financial ties to Halliburton.
PAUL: I'm not questioning his motives.
KARL: Sure looked like you were questioning his motives.
PAUL: Well, here's what I'm questioning, I don't think Dick Cheney did it out of malevolence, I think he loves his country as much as I love the country...
KARL: But you said we don't want our defense to be defined by people who make money off the weapons. Are you suggesting that's why we went to war in Iraq?
PAUL: No. No.
KARL: That our defense was being defined by people who make money off weapons?
PAUL: No. And that's why I'm also saying that I'm not questioning Dick Cheney's motives.
There's a chance for a conflict of interest. At one point in time, he was opposed going into Baghdad. Then he was out of office and involved in the defense industry and then he became for going into Baghdad.
KARL: Now, more broadly on foreign policy, I'm sure you saw Liz Cheney said Rand Paul seems to get his foreign policy talking points from Rachel Maddow. What's your response to that?
PAUL: It's kind of funny, because it's funny that my talking points would come from Rachel Maddow. She is not my biggest champion. So that's a kind of a funny remark, I think.
KARL: But if you look at it, I mean you look at drones, you look at NSA surveillance, you look -- you were one of two senators to vote against the Ukraine bill. You were one of two senators against the resolution on Iran and nuclear weapons. I mean, you're -- on these issues you are more closely associated with the left of the...
PAUL: I think that's an incorrect conclusion, you know. I would say my foreign policy is right there with what came out of Ronald Reagan.
KARL: But Reagan went through a huge defense buildup. One of the first things you did when you got elected was propose a 50 -- nearly $50 billion cut to the Pentagon, I mean bigger than the sequester.
PAUL: In proposed increases in spending. I haven't really had a dip down in spending. Sequester actually didn't cut spending, the sequester cut the rate of growth of spending over 10 years.
KARL: But the point is you proposed curbing defense spending more than the sequester.
PAUL: Even though I believe national defense is the most important thing we do, but it isn't a blank check. Some conservatives think, oh, give them whatever they want and that everything is for our soldiers and they play up this patriotism that -- oh, we don't have to control defense spending. We can't be a trillion dollars in the hole every every.
KARL: In 2012, there was a resolution saying that the United States should do anything possible to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. You were one of two, I believe, to vote against that. Everybody else, all the Republic -- why did you...
PAUL: I've repeatedly voted for sanctions against Iran. And I think all options should be on the table to prevent them from having nuclear weapons. The way they wrote the resolution, and I'm a stickler on what the wording is, because I don't want to have voted for something that declared war without people actually thinking through this.
They said containment will never, ever, ever be our policy. We woke up one day and Pakistan had nuclear weapons. If that would have been our policy towards Pakistan, we would be at war with Pakistan. We woke up one day and China had nuclear weapons. We woke up one day and Russia had them. The people who say, by golly, we will never stand for that they are voting for war.
KARL: So do you think the United States could live with a nuclear armed Iran?
PAUL: I think it's a mistake for them to get nuclear weapons and we should do everything possible...
KARL: Clearly, everybody agrees with that. But if they cross the threshold, is it something we could live with? Could we contain it?
PAUL: I think it's not a good idea to announce that in advance. Should I announce to Iran, well, we don't want you to, but we'll live with it. No, that's a dumb idea to say that you're going to live with it. However, the opposite is a dumb idea too.
KARL: While Rand Paul looks and sounds like a presidential candidate, he says the final decision on running will be a family one.
PAUL: My wife Kelly, I couldn't have done it without her.
KARL: Have you convinced your wife to run?
PAUL: In my place, that's what I really need to do.
KARL: Well, you've said, though, it's going to depend on her decision.
PAUL: There's two votes and at least one undecided still in the house. And I'm working on her. So we'll see.
KARL: When are you going to make the decision by?
PAUL: Not until after 2014 elections.
KARL: OK. Senator Paul, thanks a lot for joining us near Manchester.
PAUL: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE) ABC's Jonathan Karl sat down with Senator Rand Paul on Friday in NH for an interview for "This Week". Click here for a full transcript of this interview.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Thanks to Jon Karl for that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let's bring in our roundtable now, joined by our political analyst Matthew Dowd. Our newest ABC contributor talk radio host Laura Ingraham, welcome.
LAURA INGRAHAM, TALK RADIO HOST: Thank you. Great to be here.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Democratic strategist James Carville, former labor secretary, star of the film "Inequality for All" Robert Reich; and Republican strategist Ana Navarro, also an ABC News contributor.
Matthew, let me begin with you. OK, these early polls, we don't they don't mean all that much, but Rand Paul is at the top and he does seem to be striking a cord with this call for the GOP to change.
MATTHEW DOWD, ABC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think this is a unique territory for the Republican Party, because normally they have a candidate or somebody chosen and people begin to line up. That's the way it's been for the last 40 years. It's totally different this time.
I think Rand Paul does have some of the elements that I think you need to get the nomination and then win the general election. I would -- he's got the passion -- sort of three Ps -- he's got the passion, there's a lot of people out there that want him. I don't think he's of yet to lay out some policy vision that we know that people know they can all get behind. And the third thing, which actually has become very important in a Republican primary, which people forget about is does he have the probability that he can win the general election. And that still is a very important element in the...
STEPHANOPOULOS: That's a huge question.
Laura, you were up at his freedom summit in New Hampshire with Rand Paul. How did he do?
INGRAHAM: I think he was very well received. I mean, I think he was well received. Huckabee -- you know, he had them on their feet and Ted Cruz was walking the stage, again, without notes speaking off the cuff, very comfortable.
But I think Matthew is on to something, Rand is trying to peel off support from traditionally Democrat constituencies -- African-Americans, Latinos, women. And I think his appeal.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Young people, goes back to Berkeley.
INGRAHAM: Yeah, well received at Berkeley, Secretary Rice told me. And it's interesting. It's early, right. He's out early and he's saying a lot. You wonder at times whether maybe it's too much, too early.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And James, Matt talked about this point -- probability. You actually think that probability, or another word for it is electability, that's going to be the number one...
JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: That's going to be the dominant issue. Fast forward to January 2015. The most likely, not the only scenario, is Hillary Clinton is the presumptive Democratic nominee.
Everybody is going to have a poll showing how they fare in the general election against Hillary. That is going to be -- they're not going to not nominate somebody because of common core, just me. The party knows -- and I use this word advisedly -- that if it loses the 2016 presidential election, the Republican Party as we know it today will be extinct, it will...
INGRAHAM: We heard that in 2008...
CARVILLE: And (inaudible) six out of be the sixth out of seventh election they've lost the popular vote. The Republicans want to win this. And they will do -- that's going to be the biggest issue in January 2016. I can beat Hillary Clinton. We have to win this election.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And Ana Navarro, that's why a lot of top Republicans -- a man you know very well, the former governor of Florida Jeb Bush. But also he's going to really have some trouble with Republican base. We saw those comments about immigration.
Donald Trump took those on at his freedom summit yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, ENTREPRENEUR: I didn't get -- that's one I've never heard of before. I've heard a lot. I've heard money. I've heard this. I've heard sex. I heard everything. The one thing I never heard of was love. I understand what he's saying, but you know, it's out there. I'll tell you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: The crowd was on Trump's side.
ANA NAVARRO, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Oh, George. Please do not make me pretend on national TV that Donald Trump is politically relevant and what he says and does matters, you know, in a Republican primary, because frankly it doesn't. People understand that he is an entertainer.
On Jeb Bush, look, I think what you saw from Jeb Bush when he gave that interview is that he's not going to bend himself into all sorts of shapes, into a human pretzel, in order to appeal to one group or another. He's going to be himself.
And frankly, after we went through an election in 2012 where that was one of the problems -- consistency was one of the biggest problems that Romney had -- I think it's refreshing, as a Republican. We can either vote for him or vote against him. But for the love of god, tell me what exactly you stand for and stick by it.
STEPHANOPOULOS: What's your sense of where his thinking is right now? He said he's going to make the decision by some time next year, but wants to do it only if he can, what, run joyfully. Is that what he said?
NAVARRO: I think -- look, I think he's being very transparent on where he is. What he's saying publicly is very consistent with what he's saying privately to his friends. And he's a very difficult man. I think he's going to stick even for his own internal decision making process by his time line of sitting in the -- you know...
INGRAHAM: It helps him not to say he's running, right? I mean, it helps him.
ROBERT REICH, FRM. LABOR SECRETARY: I mean, the wrap on him is he has not run for 12 years. But I think actually that is ironically a help, because over the past 10 years there has been some war in the Republican Party, a lot of taint has occurred. Anybody who has been in the middle of this battle really is not appreciated, I think, very much by the American people. I think it is -- they want somebody who sticks to his principles, but also has not been in this place.
DOWD: But the problem continues to be, the problem continues to be is his last name, just like I think the problem Hillary has is her last name that in a country this large that we still have to settle on these two. It reminds me, a paraphrase of a Monty Python movies, like bring out the Jeb, bring out the Jeb. Like that's what's going to save the Republican Party.
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: ...economic dynasty in this country, why not a political dynasty. We're moving in the same direction.
DOWD: But I think in the end what this -- you're going to focus on is whoever the Republican nominee is, if they're reasonable, the political environment is going to be such that even if Hillary runs, which I'm not convinced she will run, even if she's leading, it's the likelihood that the country wants to vote for another party.
INGRAHAM: I bet -- I think Jeb Bush's big problem is the base of the Republican Party. We had three million people stay home for Romney...
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- for those people who (INAUDIBLE)...
INGRAHAM: I mean it wasn't -- it wasn't -- whatever you think of Donald Trump, he spoke and the crowd reacted. It was a -- a broad base of people, young people, older people at the summit yesterday.
When you mentioned Jeb Bush's name, it was like a wisdom tooth extraction, OK?
There was groans from the audience.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But this (INAUDIBLE) up something important, James.
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: You've got -- that's maybe what the activists thought...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you've got all these...
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- big money Republicans saying no, we need Jeb.
CARVILLE: Right. And with the collapse of Chris Christie, they have to go somewhere. The two other people that should be in the craziness, Scott Walker, because he...
STEPHANOPOULOS: The governor of Wisconsin.
CARVILLE: The governor of Wisconsin, because he has access to (INAUDIBLE) candidate, believe it or not, is Rick Perry. And I -- and I say that and I'll give you my reasoning.
First of all, the Kentucky Derby is coming up. He's been around the course once. He knows what the track is like.
Secondly, he can raise a bucket load of money. He's governor of Texas.
Third, unlike Scott Walker, he's got a compelling economic story to tell. To somebody from the Bush -- Scott Walker, I think Rick Perry would be my dark horse. And I think these are more likely -- are going to challenge...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was at this rodeo before and I...
(CROSSTALK) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- advocated the idea that Rick Perry was the leading candidate in 2012...
CARVILLE: I didn't say leading, I said...
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: -- dark horse -- a dark horse is not...
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: -- not leading...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it's very dark horse.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let me...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let me tell you something...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- I want to...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- I want to go back to this point about the -- the last name, which I think, frankly, you know, a lot of people who don't know Jeb Bush yet are judging him by that last name. And, you know...
STEPHANOPOULOS: That's politics.
NAVARRO: Yes, but, look, frankly, George W. Bush's numbers are better than Obama's...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- they are today.
(CROSSTALK)
DOWD: That's not actually true.
NAVARRO: Whenever you see George -- you see George W. Bush in three instances. He's either helping a kid with malaria in Africa...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- he's helping a wounded warrior...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- you know, doing paint by numbers.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I want -- I want to get one more...
NAVARRO: He -- he's become non-controversial. And I think, you know, I think...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- Jeb appears to be...
(CROSSTALK)
INGRAHAM: -- he's non-controversial?
(CROSSTALK)
INGRAHAM: In the Republican ranks?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You've got to be kidding me.
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: Hold on, everybody. Stop. I want to get one more thing in here.
INGRAHAM: What?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Bob writes -- before (INAUDIBLE) -- Hillary Clinton is still out there. Here's what happened to her this week in Las Vegas.
INGRAHAM: Uh-oh.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: Thing about to...
(THROWING SHOE)CLINTON: Is that somebody throwing something at me?
Is that part of Cirque de Soleil?
My goodness, I didn't know solid waste management was so controversial.
Thank goodness she didn't play softball, like I did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: And as we're talking about dynasties here, isn't Hillary Clinton also -- a long-time friend of yours -- going to have to change a lot if she's going to seem fresh in 2016?
REICH: Well, this is her biggest problem, George. It's two and a half years to the election. She's already so far ahead, there's no other Democratic hopeful.
And what does she do?
How does she keep her name in for two and a half years and not just have, literally or figuratively, things thrown at her for two and a half years?
I mean she's got the best campaign manager in American history, and that is her husband, who probably wants to be first gentleman at the White House more than she wants to be the president.
(CROSSTALK)
DOWD: But I think, still, her biggest problem -- and this is she is a creature of the two things America dislikes the most. She is a creature of Washington and she's a creature of Wall Street. And she can't separate herself from those things...
(CROSSTALK)
DOWD: -- and that's a huge problem.
STEPHANOPOULOS: All right...
CARVILLE: I -- I disagree with my friend, the professor. I generally do. I think her challenge in the next two years is to keep her name out as opposed to keep her name in.
(CROSSTALK)
INGRAHAM: -- a campaign can be...
(CROSSTALK)
INGRAHAM: I have a feeling...
(CROSSTALK)
INGRAHAM: -- Hillary is going to say things like do we want to go back to the Bush era...
CARVILLE: Right.
INGRAHAM: -- of politics, or do we want to go back to budget surpluses, parties working together, coming across party lines?
CARVILLE: Yes.
INGRAHAM: I think she's going to go...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- with the Clinton arguing that a -- that we shouldn't...
STEPHANOPOULOS: Right.
NAVARRO: -- have another Bush in the White House.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Right.
NAVARRO: And I -- you know, Hillary is also rusty. She's another one who hasn't had a political...
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: -- in eight years.
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: My guess is her argument will be prospective and her argument will be what do we do to rebuild the middle class in this country?
We can't get -- what difference does it make what happens...
DOWD: That's exactly right...
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: -- bubbled and that's the central question.
NAVARRO: Well, I think part of the -- part of the election now has to include a shoe-ducking contest. Whomever does it best...
(LAUGHTER)
STEPHANOPOULOS: That will be the last word right now.
We are going to be back.
And coming up, the married congressman caught kissing a staffer. She lost her job.
Will he lose his?
And later, back to Boston. Football star Tom Brady shines our Sunday spotlight on a mother and daughter's emotional marathon.
We're back in just two minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: Kathleen Sebelius called it quits this week. The president claiming ObamaCare's climbing enrollment means her rocky tenure is a success.
But many Republicans are wondering why she wasn't fired months ago.
The roundtable is going to debate that after this from ABC's Jeff Zeleny.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEFF ZELENY, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A changing of the guard for the guardian of ObamaCare. As Kathleen Sebelius steps down...
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, FORMER HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: I knew it wouldn't be easy.
ZELENY: -- President Obama looks for a new start, nominating budget director, Sylvia Matthews Burwell, for one of the toughest posts in the cabinet.
The bungled health care rollout still fresh on everyone's minds. So now, a hard sell on how Burwell will be different.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: She's a proven manager...
A proven manager...
A proven manager...
ZELENY: But still so many questions about how the law is working, including how many young people were among the seven million who signed up, which is key to the plan's success.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is the White House going to take -- going to break down that 7.5 million number prior to (INAUDIBLE)...
JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We will have data available when the data is reliable enough to provide.
ZELENY: While some Republicans praised Burwell's nomination, the top Republican on the Budget Committee says she has a comparatively thin resume. This exchange from a hearing last month could offer a window into what's next.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You look really innocent the way you look at me. You're like you don't know what I'm talking about.
Can't you just simply answer the question?
SYLVIA MATTHEWS BURWELL, BUDGET DIRECTOR: I think there are some questions that are not simply yes or no questions.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This one is...
BURWELL: -- therefore the...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- is a yes or no question. You're refusing to answer it. I will answer it.
ZELENY: With the midterm elections six months away, ObamaCare is once again under the microscope.
For THIS WEEK, Jeff Zeleny, ABC News, Washington.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, let's get in there now with the roundtable.
We are back again.
And Bob Reich, you saw the president out there claiming success. I know that's something you believe, as well.
REICH: Yes, I think that, actually, Kathleen Sebelius, had she been sacked or had she left six months ago, you know, would have been a terrible failure. It would have been a failure for her and for the Obama administration.
But she is leaving on a high note. This is a success. It's harder and harder for Republicans to claim that The Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, is a failure. You've got seven million people signed up.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Larva, do you want to take a try?
INGRAHAM: Six point, what, five million people lost their policies. We think probably the majority of people who signed up of the 7.5 are people who lost their policies because of ObamaCare. The fact that we have the signups, yes, they can hold that up as a -- a, quote, "achievement." But when you dig into what's happening to health care, the doctor-patient relationship, increasing out of pocket costs, increasing premiums, these are real world consequences to people who are having a hard time having their family budgets do what they need to do.
DOWD: And on Kathleen Sebelius, she was basically lauded as a great governor of Kansas when she was. And she came to Washington then. I think this actually in staying -- you know, getting away from the personality which is Kathleen Sebelius, this is what's wrong with our system of government in our cabinet. And I've had this conversation with many people in Washington.
We have a cabinet that no longer -- it doesn't operate like a -- like you would normally want in a state or in a company, so that -- that the people are given delegation and then they're -- and their accountability is held.
Today, all the power is held by the White House, in the administration of the White House, and the cabinet is getting very little. And it's all photo-ops. And we have a country and a trillion dollar economy in an international system -- situation where we don't really have a delegated system of government that actually works that way.
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: But the implementation of -- of -- of the Web site and the execution...
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- was her responsibility.
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: It was (inaudible). I don't know -- I got to say something, the idea that Sylvia Matthews has a thin resume is the dumbest thing I have ever heard in my life. This woman is a Rhodes Scholar, was chief of staff to the secretary of treasury, was a director of OMB, ran the Walmart Foundation, and ran the Gates Foundation. How much a thicker resume can you get?
She's daughter of West Virginia. Her daddy is an optometrist. She probably one of the most competent people who would ever serve in Washington. And I think literally -- I can't wait. I hope that Jeff Sessions is going to try that again.
DOWD: Listen, she'll get in. Look it, she was confirmed 96 to 0.
NAVARRO: Kathleen Sebelius leaving is frankly the best thing that could have happened to President Obama, the best thing that could happen to Democrats, and the best thing that could happen to Obamacare.
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Listen, if she had been asked to resign or fired during the debacle of the website rollout, it would have been an admission of failure. They had to wait.
DOWD: That's what makes the myth of Washington. She has basically said, oh, she didn't do her job well, she didn't do her job well. She was given very little power as every cabinet member is given...
INGRAHAM: Guys, what does it take to get fired in the Obama administration. Let's ask a very simple question -- if this were an NCAA coach, if this were a corporate CEO and we had a product rollout as bungled and as disastrous as this, it wouldn't be five months later that she was fired. That's what people...
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: If you started the season 0-10 and you ended the season the season 30-12 you'd say, hey, that's pretty good and that you deserve some credit.
(CROSSTALK)INGRAHAM: Why is Obamacare not popular then. If it's so great, why is it not popular?
CARVILLE: Again, it's working. There are problems -- you know what, you all said it was going to collapse, you said no one it was going to cost part-time jobs.
INGRAHAM: It's costing 2 million jobs.
CARVILLE: You said -- you said the (inaudible) were going to go broke. None of that has happened. Get over it. It's working. It's going to work. And it's...
NAVARRO: James, we don't know who those 7 million people are. Until we do, we won't know whether it is working or it is failing.
CARVILLE: It won't work perfectly. It'll go back some. It'll go forward some.
NAVARRO: There's going to be lot of problems still in this. And let's just also remember, the number of extensions and delays that haven't been implemented yet.
REICH: This is the Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act will continue to be a bone of contention, but the fact of the matter is it is finally up and running. It was a terribly botched...
INGRAHAM: Democrats are going to lose big.
REICH: Well, wait and minute, wait a minute, before we get to that, I want to get back to something that Matt raised about cabinet members, I was a cabinet member -- I was a cabinet secretary. And this administration...
NAVARRO: In a very different presidency...
REICH: Well, but it's also a change, this administration does have and holds a lot of the responsibility in terms of policymaking. Cabinet members have been downgraded to some extent, and I think that may be a trend, you know, to some extent a long-term trend. So even holding a cabinet member responsible is an odd thing to do with regard to this kind of diverse responsibility.
I'm not apologizing for what happened. I think that the rollout was awful. But, I think it's just unfair to blame one cabinet member.
And Matthew, I do want to move on to this question of what this means coming up in November, as well. Laura says the Democrats are going to lose big. That may be. A lot of Democrats on the defensive, but they do seem to be showing a little more spring in their step on the issue of Obamacare.
At least in the last couple of weeks, you have people like Mark Pryor down in Arkansas doing better than a lot of people expected.
DOWD: Well, to me, I mean, obviously Obamacare is going to be a pall over the election. Democrats trying to defend part of it, or avoid part of it, Republicans talking about it. I think the November election and these mid-term elections in the second term of a presidency are all about where the direction of the country is.
Now Obamacare feeds some of that. But it really is about a state of the economy and whether we got the great majority of people feel like they've moved in the last five or six years of the presidency.
They don't feel like they've moved in the last five years of the presidency. That's why, in the end, Republicans are going to pick up seats in the House, they're going to pick up seats in the Senate, whether they take the Senate is an open question. But it really is about the direction, fundamental direction of the country and it's negative.
STEPHANOPOULOS: James, 30 seconds.
CARVILLE: I'll go to Matthew, the direction of the country is down. Six years are historically bad. I think the Democrats right now would be glad to walk away with losing a few House seats and holding the Senate.
No, I actually think things get better. And if they do, I'd lift...
INGRAHAM: I have a conversation every day with millions of people across the country about how their lives are going on the radio. And can tell you, Democrat, Republican, our middle class is under so much pressure with increasing food costs, fuel costs, they don't feel like the country is on the right track. That right track, wrong track metric is a killer for the party in power.
NAVARRO: Obamacare. I think Obamacare is going to be a very big part of the election. But it is mistake by Republicans to base their campaign solely on that issue.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Laura and Matthew are on something far bigger, that direction of the country. Got to take a break right now.
And we're going to turn to our Powerhouse Puzzler. It's inspired by that "Rolling Stone" cover of Veep star Julia Louis-Dreyfus constitution tattoos signed by John Hancock. Now I know all of you know that he signed the Declaration of Independence, not the constitution.
So here is the question -- two future presidents signed the Constitution, who were they?
And a bonus question -- who is the oldest person to sign the Constitution? We'll be right back in two minutes with the roundtable's answers. We'll see if you got it right, too.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, here's the "Powerhouse Puzzler," which two future presidents signed the constitution? Let's see who got it right. James Madison, John Adams, half right for Robert Reich.
Same. Madison and Adams. Madison...
No clue on the (inaudible) I'll get to that in a second...
Madison and Adams.
CARVILLE: John Quincy Adams.
INGRAHAM: Who was it?
Oh, I'm thinking Sam Adams.
CARVILLE: I got two out of three.
I always go with something odd, that's why I went with John Quincy.
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, we're back in just one minute with Samantha Power.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: 20 years after the genocide in Rwanda, another horror has been unleashed in the Central Africa Republic.
As a journalist Samantha Power uncovered how America and the UN failed in Rwanda. Now as America's UN ambassador, she was in Africa this week to make sure that doesn't happen again.
ABC's chief foreign correspondent Terry Moran traveled with her.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TERRY MORAN, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: In a stadium in Rwanda, they held a memorial service this week and it climaxed with a striking moment, an image of the genocide that happened here 20 years ago. The crowd hushed. They remembered. They remembered the darkness that came down on this land, a frenzy of slaughter, 800,000 people, nearly all members of Tutsi ethnic group, men, women and children killed in only a 100 days that 7 murders every minute, by members the Hutu group who were their neighbors, colleagues, even relatives.
20 years later, the horror is still so fresh for so many survivors that dozens of them broke down during the memorial.
In the stands representing the United States, Samantha Power, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
We come up with her in Rwanda.
(on camera): Why was it important for you to come here?
SAMANTHA POWER, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: President Obama wanted us to come back and pay our respects and show that even if it's 20 years later, this genocide is something that stays with us.
MORAN: (voice-over): Power won the Pulitzer Prize 10 years ago for her book, "A Problem from Hell," a blistering indictment of U.S. inaction in the face of the Rwandan genocide and other 20th century atrocities.
Now, she's on the inside, a key policymaker, and still an advocate.
POWER: It matters to those people that the world is coming and saying that we're still with them, because that's the first haunt of the perpetrator is people will forget, they'll never believe you.
MORAN: But Power's trip here this week was not just about remembering a genocide, she was trying to stop one from happening.
We flew with her to the Central African Republic, where madness has been unleashed. Muslims and Christians killing each other in untold numbers and the U.N. warning of the risk of genocide. One hundred thousand people huddle in squalor at the airport, terrified and hungry.
POWER: But what you can see, this is like nothing else. I mean the only way they feel safe is to literally be bumping up against the runway where the international community can see them.
MORAN: Help is on the way. On Thursday, back in New York, Ambassador Power joined a unanimous U.N. Security Council vote to send 12,000 peacekeepers to the Central African Republic. Maybe it's a sign that the world learned from what happened in Rwanda, learned that the problem from hell can and must be confronted.
POWER: There's still depravity that lies in the human heart and gets unleashed that is pretty hard to put back in the box.
MORAN: For THIS WEEK, I'm Terry Moran, ABC News, in Kigali, Rwanda.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
STEPHANOPOULOS: And Ambassador Power is back with us now.
Are you confident that this new peacekeeping force in the Cen -- going to the Central African Republic, will prevent a genocide?
POWER: Well, the peacekeeping force is what we make it. I mean right now, we have to go door to door in the international community and get countries to commit troops and police. President Obama has made $100 million available in order to lift and equip those troops...
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is that hard to do if we don't commit troops ourselves?
POWER: No, I think the world recognizes that the United States does more than its fair share in terms of keeping international peace and security and that we bring our unique capabilities to bear in flying troops in from other countries who are willing to go.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And, you know, many argue that we have a moral duty on humanitarian grounds to intervene.
But what do you say to those who say -- who want more?
They say this may be terribly sad, but we should act only when U.S. national security is at stake?
POWER: Well, take the Central African Republic. You both have the devastating, heartbreaking, systematic targeting now of the Muslim population. You also have retaliatory attacks against Christians.
That is just so painful to see these people suffer, to see parents who have had their children who were killed before their very eyes. I met a man who had been -- I met the widow of a man who had been doused in gasoline and eat in fire -- on fire in front of her.
That matters. And I think you can appeal to the heart strings of the American people, who are extremely generous, very empathetic and have proven that time and again.
But on the other hand, or on the other side, this is a population that can be radicalized. Most of the Muslim population now in the Central African Republic has been displaced. They're all gathered together. And we know how dangerous that can be as unsavory elements get in and take -- try to exploit that.
So they are both interests, humanitarian and national security.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, in many ways, in your previous life, you were the ultimate outsider. And your book is a kind of a classic example of speaking truth to power.
What has being on the inside taught you about power and its limits?
POWER: Well, in order to do the book, I did interview hundreds of people who are on the inside, so I tried to situate policymakers and how they were. And I think it's a fairly accurate portrayal of what it's like on the inside.
I will say you can never give up inside. I mean sometimes, uh, for instance, now with Ukraine and Syria and so many of the crises that are on our doorstep, issues like the Central African Republic, you know, the temptation maybe by some to -- we can wait on that. but, in fact, if you -- if you push and with the president's leadership and his commitment to dealing with these issues, we're able to elevate even when we have all these other things going on.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Have we learned the lessons of Rwanda?
POWER: I think we've come a long way. We can't affect, again, people's desire, it seems, to want to kill one another on ethnic, religious or other grounds. But we're much quicker. And we've learned the lesson that you can't make the choice one, between doing nothing, on the one hand, and sending the U.S. Marines, on the other. There's lots in between and we're doing all of them so far (INAUDIBLE).
STEPHANOPOULOS: Ambassador Power, thanks very much for your time this morning.
POWER: Thank you, George.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We'll be right back with Tom Brady, Boston strong.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: Our "Sunday Spotlight" shines this weekend on Boston strong exemplified by a remarkable mother and daughter who have written a marathon story for the history books. It's part of an ESPN special brought to us by the super star quarterback of the New England Patriots Tom Brady.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TOM BRADY, NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS QUARTERBACK: The second bomb had just exploded. Confusion. Terror. Kris and Kayla Biagiotti scrambled across the finish line, two of the very last runners to make it that day. But it also was a first, the first mother/daughter team ever to run the Boston marathon.
KRIS BIAGIOTTI, MOTHER: I remember looking down and she still had her arms up and she's still smiling. And I'm saying, OK, she's OK.
In her mind, she's thinking that this commotion that's going on is fireworks or, you know, some sort of celebration because she just finished the marathon.
I have never seen her that happy as she was that day.
BRADY: Kayla Biagiotti's was born with midochrondrial disease. Her body can't properly convert nutrients into energy. As a result, the 19-year-old's physical and mental development is stunted.
BIAGIOTTI: Yeah, we're going to go for a run.
BRADY: In may 2013, one month after the attacks, they ran a 5k race in Ashland, Massachusetts. There, they were finally awarded their Boston marathon medals.
BIAGIOTTI: It was definitely very emotional, it helped us heal a little bit because you're trying to balance what has happened on the negative side with, you know, being happy for what we have accomplished.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
STEPHANOPOULOS: And congratulations for that. Thanks to Tom Brady and ESPN.
And we end with some good news, the Pentagon reported no deaths of service members in Afghanistan this week.
Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out "World News" with David Muir tonight. And I'll see you tomorrow on GMA.
Until then, take a look at Washington's favorite sign of spring, the cherry blossoms in full bloom.
END