Skip to main content

tv   Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX News  May 8, 2016 3:00pm-4:01pm PDT

3:00 pm
24-hour headline sirius xm channel. and continue the conversation on twitter. i'm howard kurtz. we're back here next sunday, 11:00 and 5:00 eastern. see you then with the latest buzz. i'm chris wallace. with exactly six months to election day, donald trump will be the republican nominee. but can he unite the party? >> we want to bring unity to the republican party. we have to bring unity. >> saying we're unified doesn't in and of itself unify us. >> i didn't get paul ryan. i don't know what happened. the only important thing is the unification of the people. >> we'll talk with senior adviser paul manafort about trump's fight to rally the party and defeat the democrats in november. >> then, a showdown between the feds in north carolina over the legality of its transgender bathroom law. >> this conclusion by the
3:01 pm
department of justice impacts every state, every university, and almost every employer in the united states of america. >> we'll ask pat mccrory whether he'll defy tomorrow's deadline. it's a "fox news sunday" exclusive. plus, a navy s.e.a.l. is killed in an isis firefight. we'll ask about the deepening role there. and our power player of the week. the dish on a designer who's dressed both leading ladies and their tables. >> why would somebody spend $400 for a plate? >> because they love it. >> all right now on "fox news sunday." hello again and happy mother's day from fox news in washington. well, donald trump had barely put away the competition this week and become the almost certain republican nominee, when a new fight broke out within the gop. some top republicans said they won't vote for trump.
3:02 pm
house speaker ryan held off on endorsing him. joining me now is donald trump senior adviser paul manafort. paul, let's start with paul ryan's comments this week that he's not ready, as he put it, to endorse trump, and that it's basically on your candidate to unify the party. here is paul ryan. >> i think there's work that needs to be done in order to unify the party. i think our presumptive nominee needs to do that. i want to be a part of helping him do that. but right now, no, i think there's some work to do here. >> how seriously does trump take this split within the party, and how far is he willing to go when he meets with paul ryan later this week to try to repair the split? >> well, i think you need to put things into context here. a week ago, you had republican leaders in washington, some anyhow, saying there was going to be a contested convention. and last tuesday night in indiana, a state that trump was
3:03 pm
supposed to lose, he had an overwhelming victory and the race ended. it ended much sooner than anybody else expected, except maybe the people supporting donald trump, who knew he was on to something. so washington was in a little bit of an uncertain phase, and still is, but it's a healing process. it's a healing process that will happen over time. and frankly, the media's expectations, that the day after the indiana primary and everybody got out of the race, everything was going to come together in one moment. it was unrealistic. trump understands this. what's important to him is he unifies the party, that he unifies the voters, and that he then unifies the republican party. remember, he ran as an outsider. he ran as somebody who was representing the people's interest, who were frustrated with the gridlock in washington. he wasn't a candidate of the leaders. and so to expect everything to come together the day after the primary process ended, it was a bit unrealistic. but frankly, i'm very pleased to say that it's happening even faster than we thought. i mean, many of the candidates who ran against him, and there were 16, are now moving in behind him, endorsing his
3:04 pm
candidacy, expressing support for it. party leadership in the congress, and as well as members of congress, is coming together. the governors are coming together. so the process is happening faster than we thought. >> paul, does he think it's important that the party be unified going forward? >> well, he thinks it's important that the country be unified, and that his appeal be presented in such a way that his message is clear. but of course, he's the head of the republican party. he wants the party to get behind him and support him. there's never been a candidate for nominee for president of the united states who had every republican supporting him and everybody accepting every single position of a presidential candidate. ronald reagan had the same issues when he was trying to put the party together in 1980. so it's a process. it will be fine. we've got plenty of time now. there will be no contested convention. we have plenty of time to put the party together. and i think you'll see a successful united party in cleveland and they'll be ready to take on hillary clinton. >> but paul, there are real differences between trump and
3:05 pm
ryan. ryan is said to be offended by some of the things that your candidate has said about women and muslims and hispanics. there are substantive differences on issues like trade and entitlement reform. how far is trump willing to go to sign on to the agenda of paul ryan? >> well, let's make something very clear. donald trump just won a republican primary. he won it overwhelmingly. the largest turnout in the history of republican voters in all of the primaries and he's the historic leader now of getting votes as a republican nominee. so it's his agenda that has just been cemented as what the american people, or at least republicans and independents who voted for him, want. there will be a process. there will be meetings of minds. there's a lot that unites the leadership in the congress as well as donald trump. but the important thing to remember is the national head of the party is the nominee of the
3:06 pm
republican party. he just won that overwhelmingly, faster than anybody in washington thought and running as an outsider against washington. so his agenda is the people's agenda. he made it very clear. his vision was clear. he articulated it very well. there's no doubts where he stands. >> all right. i want to turn to another subject. trump had said that he was not going to go after hillary clinton and her personal life unless she went after him. that in effect, as he likes to say, he would counterpunch. but then, yesterday, in washington state, he went off on clinton about the way she treated the women that bill clinton had had an affair with. let's put it up. >> she's married to a man who was the worst abuser of women in the history of politics. hillary was an enabler, and she treated these women horribly. just remember this. and some of those women were destroyed not by him, but by the way that hillary clinton treated
3:07 pm
them after everything went down. >> first of all, what specifically did hillary clinton do to those women? >> look, this is a clear case -- donald trump has made it very clear, he's not going to allow hypocrisy on the women's issue. he's not going to let hillary make the case that he's against women and she's this defender of women's rights. his business empire has put many women in leadership positions. gender, race -- >> respectfully, that's not what i asked. i asked you, what did hillary clinton do to those women? he says she destroyed their lives. how? >> i'll let him speak to it. the point is that the history is clear, she's been an enabler in the past. and i'll let him speak to those issues. but the point is, he made it very clear, he was not going to let hypocrisy exist on the women's issue. he's not anti-women. he's very pro-women. he's proven it in his business life. and proven it more so than her, because he's proven it with actions, not words. so for her to go after him on
3:08 pm
being anti-women, he's going to go back and talk about some of the things that she did that are less consistent as far as being pro-women. >> trump also this week got into a nasty twitter war with democratic senator elizabeth warren. now, to be fair, she started it. here's one of her tweets. donald trump has built his campaign on racism, sexism, and xenophobia. but trump fired back, i hope corrupt hillary clinton chooses goofy elizabeth warren as her running mate. i will defeat them both. if you're trying to win over women, and you do have a problem with women in the polls, do you really want to take on a fight with two of them, clinton and warren? >> he's taking on a fight with two politician who is are using political tms and being hypocrites about it. that's the fight he's taking on. as far as the women's issue is concerned, that's exactly the point he's making. he's not going to allow hillary clinton or elizabeth warren to hide behind their sex to make
3:09 pm
cases that are just hypocritical. >> and how is elizabeth warren being hypocritical? she wasn't involved in the clinton affairs. >> the statements that she was making, they were totally out of bounds and he gave it back to her. she can't take it, that's her problem. >> during the primaries, trump made a big deal of the fact that he was self-funding his campaign and also, he said, that other candidates, almost all of the other candidates, who did take money from big donors, he said were puppets. here he is. >> one of the things we're doing and one of the things i'm doing is i'm self-funding my campaign, so i can't be bought. >> but now, he announced this week that he won't be completely self-funding, that he is going to be raising some money. so does that mean that he can be bought? >> we're talking now about the general election. he made the case very clear that he wanted to be the nominee of the republican party with no question as to whose interest he was defending. he was defending the people's interest and they rallied behind that message. and he self-funded his campaign
3:10 pm
with millions of dollars. now we're entering into a general election where he's the head of a party and we'll be electing not just the president, but we'll be electing senators, congressmen, governors, local council people. it's a united effort, and the democrats have said they're beginning to be spending hundreds of millions of dollars to try and spread lies about donald trump and the republican party. trump has said we're not going to compete against them. he will support the party. and the party's efforts to raise money. he won't allow the process, which he doesn't agree with, but to be used against other republicans as well as him. >> but just to make it clear, because he named his own not republican, but trump finance chair, a fellow named steve manuchin. some of that money that's going to be raised, that's going to go to trump, not to the party, correct? >> it's going to go to the presidential campaign, trump being at the head of the ticket of the party. that is correct. the point is that donald trump is committed to not letting hillary clinton get elected president, to not letting nancy pelosi become speaker of the house, and for not letting harry
3:11 pm
reid be in control of the senate that will allow them to appoint maybe four justices to the supreme court and to continue with trade policies that are destroying jobs in america. so he is not going to, he said as head of the party, he has a responsibility, not just to himself, but to the party to make sure that these disastrous policies of democrats never get a chance to be in play. >> but just to be clear, he's still going to be taking money from big donors, so in that sense, forget whether -- i mean, he didn't say well, i'm not going to be bought in the primaries, but i will be bought in the general election. why is it that he won't be bought if he's taking that money? >> the one you needed to look at being bought is look at hillary clinton, who's been taking money all along, who's given secret speeches at goldman sachs and other places. that's when you need to talk about being bought. donald trump has proven in the primary process he put his money where his mouth was. he was nominated to be the republican nominee by the people based on a self-funded campaign. and his interests now are united only with the republican party against the liberal agenda of the democratic party. >> a pro-clinton super pac is
tv-commercial
3:12 pm
already running web videos that are contrasting trump's campaign promises with his actual business practices. here's a clip. >> the truth is, i'm doing damn well in life. if you're going to achieve anything, you have to take action. until now, you could only enjoy steaks of this quality in one of my resorts. that's going to change quickly. we'll cut taxes for the middle class, negotiate new trade deals. we're going to teach you business. we're going to teach you life. >> now, that group, priorities usa, has reserved $90 million in tv time between now and the general election to run a series of ads, not web videos, but ads on television. and it's pretty clear, i think you'd agree, that they're going to go after trump the same way that the democrats and obama went after mitt romney in 2012, which is to say he got rich while exploiting the little guy.
3:13 pm
the question i have is when they go after trump's bankruptcicies and trump university, how is trump going to handle that? >> look, donald trump's businesses employ hundreds of thousands of people that you call the little people. >> i call them the little guy. >> the little guy. the point is, he's got a record of creating jobs for people. of helping people rise up in business. this campaign will talk about those things. yes, we know the democrats will talk about those things. that's precisely the reason why the republicans have got to come together, be well-funded to deal with the hypocrisy, to deal with the lies and the distortions. >> paul, thank you. thanks for taking the time today. we very much appreciate it. >> thank you. up next, we'll bring in our sunday group to discuss trump's big meeting with paul ryan this week. plus, what would you like to ask the panel about the challenge trump faces in unifying the gop? just go to facebook or twitter. @foxnewssunday, and we may use
3:14 pm
your question on the air. or tw. @foxnewssunday, and we may use your question on the air. at ally bank, no branches equals great rates. it's a fact. kind of like bill splitting equals nitpicking. but i only had a salad. it was a buffalo chicken salad. salad. real is touching a ray. amazing is moving like one. real is making new friends.
3:15 pm
amazing is getting this close. real is an animal rescue. amazing is over twenty-seven thousand of them. there is only one place where real and amazing live. seaworld. real. amazing twell what if i told you that peanuts can work for you? that's right. i'm talking full time delivery of 7 grams of protein and 6 essential nutrients. ever see a peanut take a day off? i don't think so. harness the hardworking power of the peanut. whoa. what's going on here? oh hey allison. i'm val, the orange money retirement squirrel from voya. val from voya?
3:16 pm
yeah, val from voya. quick question, what are voya retirement squirrels doing in my house? we're putting away acorns. you know, to show the importance of saving for the future. so you're sort of like a spokes person? no, i'm more like a metaphor. okay, a spokes-metaphor. no, i'm... you're a spokes-metaphor. yeah. ok. see how voya can help you get organized at voya.com. billions are spent to confuse and, dare i say it, flummox the american public. "save 16% on car insurance." "switch now..." well at compare.com, we say enough's enough. so we constantly scrutinize millions of rates... answering the question once and for all, who has the lowest. just go to compare.com and get up to 50 free quotes. choose the lowest, and hit purchase. so you can get back to whatever it is you civilians do when you're not thinking about car insurance. compare.com thank you! thank you! what a week! we sat down, we kicked back, and we watched tv!
3:17 pm
[ cheering ] this win is just the beginning! it doesn't end here. because your laundry can wait! keep those sweatpants on! order another pizza! and watch on! [ cheering ] don't wait a whole year for xfinity watchathon week to return. upgrade now to add the premium channel of your choice so you can keep watching. call or go online today. i'm just not ready to do that at this point. i'm not there right now. i hope to and i want to, but i think what is required is that we unify this party. >> house speaker paul ryan delivering a highly unusual rebuke of this party's presumed nominee. and it's time now for our sunday fox news political analyst brit hume, julie pace for the associated press, kimberly strassel from "the wall street journal" and charles lane. brit, how serious is this feud
3:18 pm
between trump and ryan? i found it interesting today that paul manafort was making it clear who's the head of the party and it isn't paul ryan, in his mind. what do you expect from their big meeting on thursday? >> well, i think that this is an excellent example of how divided this party is and is likely to remain. after all, remember what trump said. he said i don't support paul ryan's agenda. paul ryan's agenda is essentially the current conservative agenda. it is reform conservatism. he's a true blue conservative. donald trump ran as something else and he ran to gather the support of people who were alienated and deeply disappointed in the republican leadership in washington. now comes the moment. does he need to pull these people who were part of the party establishment behind him? i think he believes he doesn't have to. that if they want to get onboard with him, great. but he's not going to -- he doesn't seem to be willing to adjust his way of looking at things, his agenda, his issue positions, his sense of what the constitution requires to
3:19 pm
accommodate them and bring them on board. >> do you think he can run as a free agent, basically aside and apart from the republican party establishment? >> i think he thinks he can. >> but do you think he can? >> well, i think if you look at his numbers, he needs every vote he can get. after all, mitt romney got 93% of the republican vote. with trump so deeply under water with women, hopelessly under water with hispanics, african-americans, and others, i think he's got to figure out how to make it all add up to give him some kind of a majority. and if he begins basically by turning off a lot of mainstream republicans, i don't see how he gets there. maybe he can find in this country so many alienated blue collar democrats that will come to his cause that he can win, but i doubt it. >> meanwhile, president obama piled on this week, making his first comments about trump since he became the presumptive republican nominee. and he challenged republican voters. here he is.
3:20 pm
>> we are in serious times, and this is a really serious job. this is not entertainment. this is not a reality show. this is a contest for the presidency of the united states. >> julie, how big a role does president obama plan to play in this campaign? he seems to take particular to light and he has for a few years in going after -- well, i guess since the birther issue in going after donald trump. >> i think if the president has his way, he will play a very large role in this campaign. right now, the clinton campaign would like to see him play a large role. they think that he is still an effective messenger for democrats, for young voters, for african-americans, who clinton would need in a general election. but they think what's interesting with both obama and clinton in the last week or so is you hear them making these very specific appeals to republican voters.
3:21 pm
clinton talked about thoughtful republicans. and they think that with trump at the top of the republican ticket, that they could appeal to people who may not believe in policy positions that clinton has. but at least would feel comfortable, that you wouldn't necessarily drive the country into a ditch and maybe able to come around and vote for her for at least one term. >> do you think it's personal with obama? >> i do. i really do. you have to remember, when trump was leading the birther movement in obama's first term, what a shot at the president's credibility that was. and i think that he is surprised, and his staff is surprised, that trump has gone from being the showman on the side of the political arena, to actually now, the presumptive nominee. if he were to be succeeded by donald trump as president, what would that say about obama and his stewardship of the country as well? >> we ask you for questions for the panel, and we got a bunch like these from craig on facebook, who writes, no wonder the gop is dying. party members would rather let a
3:22 pm
democrat win than vote for a non-perfect candidate. no wonder "we the people" are uprising. kim, how do you answer craig? and there's this interesting question. we're talking about the negatives. but the fact is that trump ran as the anti-establishment candidate. now he's getting hammered by the bushes and by romney and lindsey graham. they say they can't support trump. in a sense, doesn't that certify him as the outsider? >> look, when we talk about a non-perfect candidate, i keep hearing everyone talk about trump's agenda. paul manafort was on saying his agenda and he articulated it so well. what part of that agenda are we talking about, when he put out his tax fan and disavowed it this week and said he wasn't a big fan of his own tax plan? when he said we cannot raise the minimum wage, and he said well, yeah, we probably can do that after all. this is why paul ryan can't support donald trump at the moment. because paul ryan is a conviction politician who believes in certain ideals. so those voters out there who have an understanding of the republican party as something that has certain principles, are not going to be able to rally
3:23 pm
behind this person. and yes, some of them -- obama is on to something. there will be a number of them who look and say, i would rather have somebody who i felt had a consistent viewpoint, maybe not one i agree with, than one who i don't know what he's going to say from one day to the next. >> so, having said that, do you really think they're going to go to this meeting, the nominee of the party, the chairman of the republican national committee and the speaker of the house, they're going to sit down together and come out and basically say, nope, no deal? >> no, i think they probably will -- i don't think there will be a deal. but what paul ryan essentially did here is he sort of said this is a little bit of a test. you've got to go out and prove that you can get the people who are the foundation of our party. because nothing is set in stone, really. i mean, the reality is we keep talking about him as the presumptive nominee in a race where everything has been up for grabs, anything can happen. there are a lot of delegates out there who still do not support donald trump. who knows what can happen. >> i want to pivot this conversation with you, chuck. i want to take a look.
3:24 pm
a fascinating story this week in "the wall street journal" at the electoral map, which shows just the enormous advantage that democrats begin with. all the states that you see there in blue, particularly on the east coast and the west coast, have voted democratic for the last six elections in a row. they represent 242 electoral votes, just 28 shy of a majority. all the states in red have voted republican for those same six straight elections. that's 102 electoral votes for 168 shy of a majority. the only way, the only way that trump can possibly win is to flip some of those blue states that have voted six times in a row like michigan, like pennsylvania, like wisconsin. >> there's sort of two theories about that. trump's theory is look, i'm talking about immigration, i'm talking about trade. those are issues that resonate in the rust belt.
3:25 pm
the areas you just described. so i can bring people who used to vote democratic over to the republican side. that's the trump theory of the case. the case that i think is a little bit more correct is that that might work if he didn't have all the other negatives going against him. because he's going to push -- or at least right now, he's pushing women away. he is pushing -- even in those heavily white states, there are a number of hispanics. those are all pushed away. in other words, the question that i think that all revolves around is does he bring in more than he pushes away? right now, it looks to me like he's pushing away more than he's bringing in. and those handful of red states that you showed there is really all he can count on. >> let me argue a different theory of the case, brit, in the time we have left. which would be, there was a huge disgust with washington in the establishment. we see it not only in the republican side. we also see it in the democratic side with bernie sanders. hillary clinton represents that. she's been around for a quarter
3:26 pm
of a century. there may be just a sense of we'll try it. and if he's no good, we'll fire him in four years. >> certainly trump's great advantage is that the democratic nominee is weak, discredited, old in the sense of people having known her for a long time. he has terrible negatives. hers are not as bad as his, but they're pretty bad. so her weakness is a tremendous asset to him and gives them a a chance to appeal to voters that may go to him. but remember this about him, chris. this is, above all, this trump mania is a cult of personality. and the people who support him, basically what they believe in is whatever he says. and if he changes his mind, they'll believe that, too. i just don't know how many people are willing to get on that train. people with convictions. people who are conservative and all that. when your negatives with as many
3:27 pm
groups are as bad -- the bad negatives, the first thing you shouldn't do is alienate the conservatives in the republican party. it is, after all, still to this day a conservative party. >> we have to take a break here, but we'll see you all a little later, panel. up next, we'll sit down with north carolina governor pat mccrory who's facing a federal deadline tomorrow to suspend a state law limiting bathroom access to transgender people. what do you think? should the federal government cut off funds to north carolina over a law it says violates civil rights? let me know on facebook or twitter and use #fns. ♪ (music pl♪ throughout)
3:28 pm
uh oh. what's up? ♪ ♪ ♪ does nobody use a turn signal anymore? ♪ it's everything you've ialways wanted. and you work hard to keep it that way. sometimes... ...maybe too hard. get claim rateguard® from allstate. it helps keep your homeowners' rate from going up just because of a claim. so protect your home and your rates. talk to a local allstate agent and discover how much more their personal service can do for you.
3:29 pm
3:30 pm
the state of north carolina faces a deadline tomorrow to start to enforce the new law that people must use bathrooms of the jegender on their birth certificates. the government is threatening to cut off several thousands of dollars in funds if the government refuses to comply. joining me is governor pat mccrory. welcome to "fox news sunday." >> thanks for having me. i appreciate it. >> let's start with this deadline you start tomorrow to suspend implementation of the so-called bathroom law, or to face the potential loss of billions of dollars in state funding. governor, what are you going to do? >> first of all, the bathroom law only applies to government buildings or schools in universities and highway rest
3:31 pm
stops. it doesn't apply to anyone in the private sector. in fact, our ruling say that is the government shouldn't make bathroom laws for anyone in the private sector. what i've asked for is i asked for friday was an extension. it gave the ninth largest state in the united states, the civil rights division of the justice department, three working days to respond to a pretty complex letter and to a pretty big threat. we don't think three working days is enough to respond to such a threat. >> did they respond to your request for an extension? >> yes, they said no unless we will give you a one-week extension if the governor at mitts publicly that the ruling, that their language regarding bathrooms does, in fact, discriminate. well, i'm not going to publicly announce something that discriminates, which is agreeing with their letter, because we're really talking about a letter in
3:32 pm
which they're trying to define gender identity. and there's no clear identification or definition of gender identity. it's the federal government being a bully. it's making law. and by their interpretation. >> so you asked for an extension of a week. they said no. i've got a copy of the letter, too. and they say you've got to make a decision on whether or not you're going to step away from house bill 2, this law, by the close of business tomorrow. so what are you going to do? >> first of all, i don't have the authority to change the law as governor of the united states, or as governor of north carolina. that is made by the north carolina legislature. so they've already made one unrealistic expectation. and second, they've also sent a letter to our universities, and our university by state law has to go to the board of governors, which cannot meet until tuesday.
3:33 pm
so this unrealistic deadline by the federal government is quite amazing to the ninth largest state. but i'll make a decision on the next 24 hours on how to respond to them. i believe i have until 5:00 tomorrow. >> and how are you going to decide? >> i'm discussing all of our legal options, all of our political options, because frankly, there are two ways the federal government can determine this. one is a bathroom policy determined by the congress and signed by the president. or a dictate from a regulatory agency in the united states federal government. >> obviously, i'm doing my job. i'm trying to pin you down. are you willing to rule out at this point that you will disavow and however you phrase it, in effect say i'm walking away from this law? >> i'm looking at all my options. one thing the nation has to realize, this is no longer just a north carolina issue. this letter by the justice department is saying that every
3:34 pm
company in the united states of america that has over 15 employees are going to have to abide by the federal government's regulation on bathrooms. so now the federal government is going to tell almost every private sector company in the united states who can and who cannot come into their bathrooms, their restrooms, their shower facilities for their employees and they're also telling every university in the united states of america. this is not just north carolina. they're now telling every university that accepts federal funding that boys who may think they're a girl can go into a girl's locker room or restroom or shower facility. and that begins, i assume tomorrow. >> governor, you call this a case of washington overreach. i want to explore that with you. would it be overreach for the justice department to send you a letter like this to say you cannot have bathrooms in the
3:35 pm
state capital, one for white and one for black? >> i don't think there's any correlation between the two. >> but would you agree that that is within the federal government's purview? >> absolutely. but we can definitely define the race of people. it's very hard to define transgender. or gender identity. >> but the point is, and the reason i ask is, that the justice department says that just like whites and blacks, that transgender people are a protected class. that has a legal mean iing -- meaning a protected class under the 1964 civil rights law. >> that's what they say, but that's not what the federal law says. the federal law uses the term "sex," and congress does not define sex as including gender identity or other terms that the justice department has currently used. so right now, the justice department is making law for the federal government as opposed to enforcing law. >> it sounds like basically, you're going to challenge this in court. >> we're looking at all of our
3:36 pm
options right now. but we also want to get feedback from the business community, throughout the nation, and all universities throughout the nation that are impacted by this. but we're literally talking about billions of dollars. if it is challenged, i assume there's no way -- i'm not going to risk any money for the state of north carolina. and now even the d.o.t. -- >> department of transportation. >> the department of transportation here in washington is doing press releases saying they're examining whether they can take away north carolina's money for roads and other transportation needs. over a bathroom issue. >> i want to get to the money issue in a second. but how many cases have you had in north carolina in the last year where people have been convicted of using transgender protections to commit crimes in bathrooms? >> this wasn't a problem. that's the point i'm making. this is the democratic party and the left wing of the democratic party -- >> but have there been any cases of this? >> not that i'm aware of. >> have there been any cases in the last five years?
3:37 pm
>> why did the democratic party in houston, texas -- >> but i guess the question is. forgive me, if i may, sir, why not just let it go? if there's not a case of transgender people going in and molesting little girls? >> i haven't used that at all. this is an issue of expectation -- >> well, you did say a boy who thinks he's a girl going into a girl's bathroom. >> that's where there's an expectation of privacy. when you go into a restroom or your wife goes into a restroom, you assume the only other people going into that restroom or shower facility is going to be a person of the same gender. that's been an expectation of privacy that all of us have for years. >> but if there's no problem, why pass the law in the first place? >> there can be a problem, because the liberal democrats are the ones pushing for bathroom laws. and now president obama and one of my successors as mayor of charlotte wants government to have bathroom rules. i'm not interested in that. we did not start this on the right. who started it was the political left. in houston, texas, and charlotte, north carolina. and now, frankly, in washington, d.c. >> let's talk about the issue of
3:38 pm
money. because north carolina's attorney general roy cooper, who is running against you for governor in your re-election fight this year, says you made a big mistake signing this law. here he is. >> not only is this new law a national embarrassment, it will set north carolina's economy back if we don't repeal it. >> now, you're campaigning against cooper for re-election in large part on what you call the carolina comeback, which is the fact that there has been dramatic economic growth in carolina for over the last few years. but let's take a look at the fallout from this law. paypal canceled a 400-job operation center, since the law was passed and you signed it in march. deutsche bank shelled plans for facilities that would have employed 250 people. one study found the law has cost north carolina $77 million and 1750 jobs.
3:39 pm
governor, you say you're not going to risk money, this has all happened since just march. >> let me first say north carolina has had the greatest economic recovery in the united states of america, more than any other state. >> but this isn't good. >> but since i've been governor. let me finish this sentence, chris. and second, i need to say paypal, for example, is kind of selective hypocrisy. this is the same paypal company that did business with sudan, did business in iran, does business with saudi arabia. and they're lecturing north carolina because the majority of north carolinians because i think a man who's a man ought to use the restroom that is on the door, and the same thing applies to women. and this is specially true in our schools, in our junior highs, our high schools. this is a basic change of norms that we've used for decades throughout the united states of america and the obama administration is now trying to change that norm.
3:40 pm
again, not just in north carolina, but they're ordering this to every company in the united states of america starting tomorrow, i assume, or tuesday. and also, making this an order for every university in the united states of america. >> governor mccrory, thank you, thanks for flying here today and talking with us. and of course, we will be looking forward to finding out what you decide and what you say by the close of business tomorrow. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you very much. >> good to talk with you. coming up, a navy seal was killed in iraq this week after getting caught in a firefight with isis. is the u.s. war on terror becoming more of a combat mission? we'll bring back our sunday group. capable full-sized pickup on the road today. and, the ram 1500 is the most fuel-efficient, full-sized pickup. ever. so what does that mean? it means ram trucks give you the best of both worlds. so go big.
3:41 pm
and go far. guts. glory. ram. every auto insurance policy has a number. but not every insurance company understands the life behind it. those who have served our nation. have earned the very best service in return. ♪ usaa. we know what it means to serve. get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life.
3:42 pm
3:43 pm
these people are in combat, these people are in combat, senator, and i think that we need to say that clearly. >> defense secretary ash carter telling a congressional
3:44 pm
committee about the increased u.s. military role in the fight against isis. and we're back now with the panel. well, we got bad news this week. navy s.e.a.l. charles keating iv was killed in northern iraq, the third service member to die since the campaign against isis began. the white house continues to say this is not a combat mission. isn't that getting harder and harder to maintain? >> yes, it is, chris, but i don't think we should be believing here that what we really have is some kind of a covert serious major combat undertaking. the president is clearly doing this in very small steps. i don't think he intends to go beyond that. you're always reminded of the slippery slope that we've encountered in other conflicts. where you start with a few and the next thing you know it's a few more and it's more. pretty soon you're in full-fledged combat role. i don't sense that that will come here.
3:45 pm
it is getting silly to say the white house is not in combat. i don't believe president obama is going to be waging any major wars here. >> but it is more than just a few tragic deaths, julie. president obama recently announced that he's sending 250 more special ops forces. i think there were already 50 on the ground. now 150 more special ops forces to syria. our military advisers are working more closely with iraqi troops and closer to the front lines on battlefield decisions. we've got a-10s and f-16s dropping bombs on isis positions. forget the critics who may think they're doing too much or too little, at the white house do they worry about the slippery slope, and that we're slowly getting sucked back into a greater involvement? >> yeah, i think they are mindful of it. but it gets to brit's point, they do not want to get into a position and have our military
3:46 pm
posture be like it was under the bush administration in the middle east. that is the thing that they look at as the barrier. i think that you've seen happen, though, is they sometimes take smaller steps to avoid the idea that they are on a slippery slope, and that they are building towards some kind of larger combat role. and you do have to ask a hundred people, 200 people, how much ger?erence does that make? and do they not go larger because they want to avoid the idea of being on a slippery slope? >> they're in kind of a mess of their own making, in the sense that if you send these troops in such small numbers into iraq and syria, then some people are going to say, you know, it's a band-aid. and on the other hand, if they send more, the people are saying well, they're not doing enough. >> you go back to june 2014, the president said he was going to send 275 uniformed personnel. we're now up to more than 4,100 in iraq. by the way, people in congress say the number is actually quite
3:47 pm
higher because of the way they do the temporary troop rotations, and the white house is hiding the real number that is are over there. and the white house is hiding the real numbers that are over there. we are at a war. the president doesn't want to admit it because he doesn't want to have to come out, and he promised the american people that this was not something he was going to do. so instead he's sliding along hoping to get to the end of the term because he wants this legacy to be able to say, i pulled this out. in the meantime, his vow to dismantle isis, he has not included the enforcements he needed to make that happen. now it's spreading. syria, afghanistan, everywhere you look. >> i want to turn to a revealing profile in today's "new york times" sunday magazine. it's about ben rhodes, who is not a household name, but he's one of president obama's top foreign policy advisers. rhodes says the white house spun a false narrative to sell the iran nuclear deal, claiming that they had worked with moderates when rouhani took over, when in fact they had been dealing two years before that with the
3:48 pm
hard liner, even including ahmadinejad and the supreme leader. how big a deal that you have the president's deputy national security adviser saying basically we misled the american people on how this all came down? >> big deal, because that is, in essence, what they are saying. that the president had the objective from the minute he walked into office with cutting the deal with iran so he could further disengage from the region and then use the excuse of the election, which everyone understood, there were not moderates necessarily elected, this was not a major change in the ma reregime there. but they spun that to the public, as an excuse to then pull the pin on this. revealing, although not necessarily surprising for anybody who has actually watched this administration, because their foreign policy does tend to be mostly spinned. >> and does it make a difference? does it make the iran nuclear deal more objectionable to know that they began negotiating it with -- >> it was objectionable from the
3:49 pm
start. yes. and now we just know that, in fact, what drove that deal were not, in fact, a series of imperatives about how we were, in fact, trying to change the behavior of the iranians, but simply getting a deal. which is not one in the long-term benefit of the united states or any members of the region. >> and rhodes also brags in this piece, it's worth looking at, it's online, about how the white house was able to get the media to tell its narrative. this is what rhodes said. this is a quote from him in the article. the average reporter we talked to is 27 years old and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. that's a sea change. they -- the 27-year-old reporters, i'm glad i'm not one of them, they literally know nothing. chuck? what do you make of that? >> i know nothing. >> well, you know, it's not new that a white house would spin reporters and try to mold them to its narrative. it's a little new that they would be so brazen about it. it's really new that they would
3:50 pm
brag and express such contempt for the media that they deal with. i must say that description he offers of the people he was dealing with could almost have fit ben rhodes himself when he arrived at the white house. arrived at the white house. he was a little older than 27. he had no foreign policy experience and had come up through campaigns. >> and prided himself on being a novelist. a story teller. >> and somebody who was unburdened. >> and don't we know it? >> because another thing he says in this piece is that there's something in washington he calls the blob, which is all the talking heads and foreign policy establishment people. i must say, i think there's something to it. it was kind of a refreshing dose of irreverence by ben rhodes there. people had made a lot of mistakes in iraq and i can understand that. but you know, nevertheless, there were some very seasoned people out there, some like leon
3:51 pm
panetta and bob gates who helped this president, or at least tried to, and probably don't deserve to be thought of as part of a blob. >> julie? have you since this article came out, have you talked to people at the white house? >> yeah. i mean, you know, it's interesting, because this white house really prides themselves on being the smartest kid in the room. that's their approach to so many things. they take that approach in dealing with the media, in dealing with capitol hill, in dealing with think tanks. i think what you saw in this hospital is a little bit of how the sausage is made, which is an ugly thing to look at. but i think they look at this article and i think that they will probably take the criticism of it, which is plenty coming from people that are friendly to them, as just another example of how washington doesn't get what the obama administration is trying to do. they really have this attitude frankly that they are the only smart ones in town and the only ones who kind of understand. >> i thought you were going to
3:52 pm
tell me that they're in a cold fury about what ben rhodes said. >> no. i think that they are, if anything, being pretty defensive of what he said. maybe they don't necessarily like the way he said some of it. but i don't necessarily think that they disagree with the larger message of the piece and what he was saying. >> it is a different world in which we live when a white house staffer promoted in this piece as someone who is largely anonymous who has actually been anything but anonymous, and he's one of the most widely quoted figures in washington, allows a profile like this to come out and build him up, in which i think the white house probably approves of and agrees with most of what he said, especially about the media. and i think it's, you know -- they didn't realize that the criticism was coming, and julie, you've said that. and here it is. and i think they were a little surprised by it, because i think this is their little star, this young whippersnapper, smart
3:53 pm
though he may be ben rhodes, comes out. >> there you go. the 27-year-old doesn't talk about whippersnappers. >> i'm sort of the opposite. he's 27, i'm 72. but i think this is something different. it's a reflection of the president himself. in fact, rhodes has said to be in a constant state of mind meld with the president. he says in the article that he doesn't know where the president ends and he begins or vice versa. these are quite extravagant claims. maybe they're true. what's remarkable is the white house is onboard it seems to me with all of it. >> i commend the article to you. thank you, panel. see you next sunday. up next, our power player of the week. the designer of hand-painted fine china that's used at the white house and buckingham palace. i'm terrible at golf. he is.
3:54 pm
but i'd like to keep being terrible at golf for as long as i can. new patented ensure enlive has hmb plus 20 grams of protein to help rebuild muscle. for the strength and energy to do what you love. new ensure enlive. always be you.
3:55 pm
3:56 pm
hello?!n presents the yardley's. you do? really? ding dong? -oh, pizza is here! -oh! come on in. [claps] woah! lose the sneakers pal. kind of a thing. this is more than a lawn. this is a trugreen lawn. sorry! live life outside with trugreen, america's #1 lawn care company. spring is on. start your trugreen lawn plan today. bye now. trugreen. live life outside. there there are certain designers whose names signify quality and elegance, whether in dresses or buildings, or other objects we live with. here's our power player of the week. >> i decided that i will do something, which is not practical, not sensible. >> that is the unique business
3:57 pm
philosophy of anna weatherly, a world famous designer of fine china. the signature are butterflies and flowers and even bugs that are all painted by hand. >> less the mass marketers do the mass market. i just want to be very different from any other designer or manufacturer. >> if you're curious who eats off anna weatherley plates, there are 75 place settings in the white house. >> it's taken from the magnolias, the big trees that you can see from the blue room and the yellow oval room. >> and there was a special commission to create 250 plates. this was a dinner for the prince of wales at buckingham palace. how did that make you feel? >> it's an absolute fairytale. >> anna showed us what a table of her creations looks like. a wondrous garden of plants and flowers and butterflies. >> it's a happy table. and i cannot cook. so therefore, if i set the
3:58 pm
table, i can put the canned soup in one of those plates and people will think it's a gourmet food. >> born in hungary, anna started out designing dresses in the '70s that were just as beautiful and impractical. >> look how pretty that is. >> silk chiffon and hand painted. >> you must flirt and never pay for dinner. >> in 1990, she opened a small china studio in budapest with 20 artists who each specialize. >> butterflies or bugs. these are the woman's work. and the big flowers are painted by the guys. >> she's just as meticulous when it comes to leaves, which must have little holes or ragged edges, where the bugs have lunch. so you would be unhappy if this was a perfect leaf? >> boring. very boring. just a plain old green leaf. >> this precision takes time. a place setting of six pieces can take her studio three days.
3:59 pm
how much does a single anna weatherley plate cost? >> just one single plate is between $200 to $400. >> why would somebody spend $400 for a plate? >> because they love it. if you like to buy a piece of art and put it on your table, that's the only time you buy it, otherwise don't buy it. it's not a plate. it's a hand painted object. >> anna's work is based on 17th and 18th century botanical art. she says the 19th century is too modern. she has created her own world and she couldn't be happier. >> i don't live in the 20 th century. i cannot drive. i don't do anything high-tech. i just live in my world of beautiful impractical not sensible. >> and this spring, anna had another project, she designed
4:00 pm
the official easter egg for the white house historical association. and that's it for today. for all you moms, especially mine, have a wonderful mother's day. and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." we begin with a fox urgent. we are in the heart of tornado season. here is the evidence. a busy and dangerous system. this is colorado. with a twister that touched down ripping apart homes and buildings. i'm harris faulkner. this is "the "fox report"." we are watching a path of powerful and dangerous storms. the latest batch capable of dropping those monsters from the sky. warnings going into effect right now. so far this weekend, the national weather service says at least four twisters hit colorado last night near the nebraska-kansas

91 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on