Skip to main content

tv   The Story With Martha Mac Callum  FOX News  June 28, 2017 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT

4:00 pm
when it moves here in washington, we will bring it to you. so long. ♪ ♪ >> martha: braking device, the spotlight continues to heat up on the obama side of the obama side of the equation as it comes to russia and the election. now, a new interview with susan rice has raised similar questions. good evening, everybody, i am martha maccallum and here is "the story" for the former obama national security advisor choosing to write and once again on her role in the unmasking on trump officials. at first, she said she knew nothing about these allegations. >> during the transition, after president trump had been elected, he and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and their identities may have been disclosed. >> do you know anything about
4:01 pm
this? >> i know nothing about this. >> martha: weeks later, she came clean on the role that she played in this process of unmasking certain american citizens. but she claimed at the time that although it was done, it was not improper. >> within that process, and within the context of the trump campaign, the trump transition, did you seek the names of people involved -- did you unmask the people involved in the trump transition, campaign, people surrounding the president-elect deduced did do spy on them? >> absolutely not, for any political purposes, just buy, expose, anything. >> martha: tonight, something different, suggesting that a spotlight on her may be in part due to her gender and her race. chief national correspondent ed henry joins us with more on this growing story. from the white house tonight, hi. >> good to see. it was president trump at the white house in april who said
4:02 pm
that these charges that susan rice was involved in unmasking trump advisors was a massive story that much of the media was ignoring, as you say now, rice is firing back that this is an allegation that she says was made up out of whole cloth. she strongly suggests her race and gender played a role in the heat she faced, dating back to benghazi. rice choosing to air this claim and the friendly venue of the new york magazine profile in which the former national security advisor suggests other obama aides got close scrutiny because they were right. she says at one point, "why me, why not the press secretary who stood up more? she asked. she added, she doesn't know for a center gender is the reason before, well, invoking it. "i don't lead to the simple explanation that it is only race and gender, i'm trying to keep my theories to myself until i'm ready to come out with them. it's not because i don't have any." now, she left out of that the major factor that sparked a central role in benghazi, of
4:03 pm
course, when she misled the public and five sunday talk show appearances about whether in fact it was terror. in terms of unmasking a former trump advisors, like retired general mike flynn, the head of the national security agency under oath did not rule out recently that rice played a rol role. >> do you know if susan rice ever ask for an american citizen being unmasked? >> i would have to pull the data, sir, i apologize. >> now, rice told the magazine she was enjoying a two and half week vacation in the maldives with lots of tennis. but she may be soon volleying questions before the house intel committee. they have subpoenaed to rice and other obama aides to find out just what they do know about unmasking. martha. =speeone thank you so much. here now, marc thiessen and american enterprises scholar, and jessica tarlov, democratic pollster. both are fox news contributors. welcome to both of you. >> good to have you. >> martha: let me start with you, jessica. the suggestion, and it's very
4:04 pm
subtle and the way that she brings this up. as ed points out, she sends us, why not jay carney? he was out front and suggested at least one element of this is that she is black and that she's a woman. >> the reason it's not on jay carney right now is that jay carney is not giving interviews. we haven't seen jay carney in a long time. that is going to draw attention to you, of course. we know that the benghazi story line is a favorite. jay carney did stand up to the podium and played a role in that. there are those who would still want to talk about benghazi and any time in american life is lost it, it's a worthwhile discussion. i think that she is being focused on is because she's in public about it and because of the unmasking issue. we know that there are people on both sides of the aisle who said that the request to unmask individuals, not politically motivated, is completely appropriate. we'll hopefully hear more on that front. i don't think this is about gender. i don't think it's about race. i believe it's about partisanship. that is a problem that both sides have, we just go on these
4:05 pm
hunts constantly to tear someone down. >> martha: she's dangling from her right? then, that is the line of argument. nothing that i did was improper. but once you open up that can of worms then you start to suggest, well, maybe i'm being picked on, and we get into this in a moment in terms of other women that are in a similar category because they are involved in politics, they are in a seat of power, and let me bring you in on this, marc. either you did what it's right or not. >> absolutely. if susan rice is being criticized because she's a black woman does that mean all the people attacking donald trump are doing it because he's a white male? of course not. hiding behind your identity is pathetic. it sends a signal that i have no better argument to make for myself and hiding behind my identity. the reason susan rice is being criticized is because she has been serially dishonest with the american people. it started with benghazi but it continued when he said, bowe
4:06 pm
bergdahl had served with honor and distinction, continued in january, when she said that barack obama had verifiably disarmed syria of all of its chemical weapons, which we now know is untrue. then, considered in this case, when she was asked point-blank, do you know anything about this unmasking of trump officials? she said, i know nothing about it. only later did it come out that she did know about it because she had done it. you have this serial dishonesty with the american people. guess what? people won't believe your excuses. >> that is true. i would say, someone just listen to what you just said, that statement, it would seem as though nothing could be about racism or sexism. we all know that that's not true. yes, everyone opposes donald trump, it's not because he's a white man. >> it has nothing to do with and racism. >> but the way that you frames that belittles the issues that are out there that do revolve around sexism and racism. >> martha: there is no evidence to support that she is being asked these questions, that she is being subpoenaed.
4:07 pm
samantha power is also in the same category, as is john brennan. neither one of them is putting forth any idea of optimization in this process. she herself has made the argument, as i said initially, that she feels that what she did was absolutely proper. other people have also made that argument, have also come to that defense and said, there is nothing wrong with it. >> if that is problem with this defense. it throws open this pandora's box, which many people will see as a crutch, as victimization, and a place where it's not necessary. >> i am just saying in reaction to what marc said there, to slander identity politics in full i think belittles the realities of how the system marks for many people. in my opening statement, i said, i don't think this is about sexism or racism in this particular instance and i think that she should answer all questions. i absolutely think that, so we can move on. if you think that identity politics and the role of sexism
4:08 pm
and racism in our system is not due a worthy conversation, i firmly disagree. >> martha: in order to claim it, you have to make some relevance, draw some line of relevance, which we haven't seen yet. >> exactly. she is the one who is belittling this issue when she hides behind her race and gender in order to cover up the fact that she did something wrong or potentially do something wrong. we know that a crime was committed here. unlike the russia probe, we know that a crime was committed. michael flynn was unmasked as susan rice's request and somehow, that information, got him to "the washington post." that is a crime. you may not have leaked it, she said she didn't. but somehow, it made its way from her office in the west wing, because she's not supposed to share that information, to somebody related to "the washington post." >> martha: she denied that she had anything to do with that. as we say, she has been subpoenaed. i want to move this conversation to one more place. susan rice also, and this interview, brought and another from a national security person into the conversation, saying in this interview, a former bush
4:09 pm
official, condoleezza rice, that she, "took a lot of stuff, not frankly, i don't think i might do the same extent i had," but that was ad hominem. in other words, directed at her because of who she was, not because of policy issues. coincidentally, earlier, at another venue, the former advisor to president bush, who rarely talks about politics these days, just happen to be speaking out as well about her take on president trump. watch. >> i believe every president of the united states stands for our values, while the language may be different, and we might talk about needing to deal with policy, i think you are going to see that the views that america's interests and values are always linked will come around. certainly, what's a rumor that. >> martha: susan rice suggested that she and the comparisons of hillary clinton and condoleezza rice has more to do with perhaps gender and race a pen pal policy, who they are, rather than policy.
4:10 pm
marc? >> first of all, i don't remember condoleezza rice ever blaming race or gender for how she was treated in the public domain. she never did that, like susan rice dead. second of all, in terms of what she just had come i think it is 100% right. i think what is shocking, quite frankly, our politics has descended so low that that's even a controversial statement the president of united states is working to advance american values. i think every president of the united states, whether they are liberal, conservative, republican, democrat, is doing their best to advance the american values. i think barack obama was probably the worst president our country ever had, but i think he woke up every day trying to do good for the country as he sought. the same is true of donald trump. why can't we just accept that they have differing views and they are trying to do the best for our country as they see fit and advance the values of our country? >> martha: good point. jessica? >> i don't disagree entirely, certainly in the rating of president obama, but that's a whole different segment.
4:11 pm
i think what condoleezza rice says, and honestly how she has been for the entirety of the election and afterwards, she doesn't speak out, she has been on point, especially for moderate republicans and those who were slow to assess president trump, maybe even as a knowledge all of branch to the other side. his heart is in the right place. i disagree with a lot of the policies that are being implemented but i think condoleezza rice is an example for all of how we should be speaking about what is going on. we have four years. >> martha: grade points. i love having you guys here. thank you very much. good to see you both tonight. tonight, republicans elected to fix obamacare are scrambling to a new alternative as the days tick by. president trump is working on a behind-the-scenes with our next guest. >> this will be great for everybody. i always say it. i always say it. >> martha: just in case, you never know. two g.o.p. senators, two surgeons, enter go totally
4:12 pm
different ideas about how to do this, coming up next. plus, sarah palin has had enough. she is now going to sue "the new york times" after they tried once again to link her name to the 2011 mass shooting in arizona that wounded then representative gabrielle giffords. so, does she have a legal case here? fascinating story and not coming up right after this. -- ♪ what if we pull customer insights from the data in real time? wait, our data center and our clouds can't connect? michael, can we get this data to...? look at me...look at me... look at me... you used to be the "yes" guy. what happened to that guy? legacy technology can handcuff any company. but "yes" is here. so, you're saying we can cut delivery time? yeah. with help from hpe, we can finally work the way we want to. with the right mix of hybrid it, everything computes.
4:13 pm
went to ancestry, i put in the names of my grandparents first. i got a leaf right away. a leaf is a hint that is connected to each person in your family tree. i learned that my ten times great grandmother is george washington's aunt. within a few days i went from knowing almost nothing to holy crow, i'm related to george washington. this is my cousin george. discover your story. start searching for free now at
4:14 pm
are upgrading their watere filter to zerowater. start with water that has a lot of dissolved solids... pour it through brita's two-stage filter... dissolved solids remain! what if we filter it over and over? oh dear. thank goodness zerowater's five-stage filter gets to all zeroes the first time. so maybe it's time to upgrade. get more out of your water. get zerowater. (b♪by crying) minutes old. ♪ a baby's skin is never more delicate. ♪ what do hospitals use to wash and protect it? ♪ johnson's® the number 1 choices in hospitals.
4:15 pm
4:16 pm
>> senator schumer says he would like to have all 100 senators coming here to talk health care. would you be willing to negotiate with all of them? >> i will find out if he is serious. he hasn't been serious. obamacare is such a disaster, such a wreck. he wants to try and save something that is really hurting a lot of people. it's hurting a lot of people. it would have to be very, very serious. he's done a lot of talking, bad talking. he just doesn't seem like a serious person. >> martha: interesting. that was president trump casting doubt on a democrats claim that they are really willing to compromise on on this health ce issue. the democrats aren't the only hurdle. more than half a dozen republicans currently stand against their own party. some of the g.o.p. are offering warnings about what might lie ahead.
4:17 pm
watch. >> republicans ran for office and four elections, saying that obamacare should be repealed. they eventually amended that to say it should be repealed and her place. conservatives are going to feel awfully hoodwinked, held to pay, if they don't pass some version of health care reform. >> if we don't reach agreement on friday, it is probably the end of a sole party effort for health care, then if we don't reach by friday, then some of the way forward is obamacare collapse, challenging democrats to work with us to print something better. >> martha: joining me now, one of those who are looking standing against the bill, ophthalmologist in kentucky senator rand paul. senator, go to happy with us, welcome to the program tonight. you are sort of the outlier in that you have put out some proposals today that you yourself said went over like a lead balloon. many of them are about repealing in the truest sense in offering some marketer form. are you surprised that you are not getting more traction with
4:18 pm
these ideas? >> i think there is a breakthrough idea. i slipped on mike's book with the president this afternoon and he and i came up with an idea that is a break. this would be to separate this into two bills. one would be the spending bill that has keeping obamacare spending and a lot of things, the moderate one, then, the other one would be more of a repeal bill. the repeal bill will be their budget reconciliation bill that only has a simple majority. the spending bill would be a bill that actually is something that many democrats support. it is the strip program. you put the spending that many of the moderates want on one bill, then, on the other bell that is purely or more purely a repeal bill, you stick with repealing the taxes, the regulations, and is a medicaid reform. it is a much more narrow repeal bill. some of the things that republicans want that required new spending or keeping obamacare, if they are on a separate bill, i think you can make both factions of the
4:19 pm
republican party ultimately happy with that. >> martha: are you saying that you could basically pass this repeal bill that would kind of denying democrats and also some of the moderates in your own party from the opportunity to retain the parts of obamacare tt you don't like? >> no, they would get it in a separate bill, is what i am saying. there will be a repeal bill that i think everyone could vote for. it will repeal a certain amount of taxes and regulations, and read also use a medicaid reform. then, there will be a separate bill for the people who watch more spending programs. some of the moderates in our caucus want more spending. we can put that on bill, a bill that every democrat in congress typically supports, and if you separate the bills, you could get to a passage where you repeal on one bill and you actually have some of the replacement spending on a separate bill that is one bill i democrats would support. >> martha: you yourself said that the proposals that you made that i mentioned when we started
4:20 pm
talking, went over like a lead balloon, i think were your words. then, you spoke to the president about the possibility of splitting the bill. how much support is that? have you spoken to mitch mcconnell? >> the idea has been talked about for i think at least a year in private that there may be another opportunity of a separate bill that has more bipartisan support that would include some of the spending that people in the republican caucus launch. i think if you separated it into two bills, you could get it done by friday, you could come to an agreement. >> martha: is this an idea that is getting traction? what is mitch mcconnell say about this? is he saying to you, yes, let's push this through? i think i can get it through? >> i don't want to characterize his response. i would say that i have discussed the idea with him previously and also disgusted in front of all of the senators at a lunch. basically, we would have two different vehicles and then we separate the vehicles. i think this is -- it similar to the henry clay compromise of
4:21 pm
1850. they split their bill into four bills, and different majorities pass different parts of this. this would be a bifurcation into two bills, the spending, which all the time you add more spending, conservatives like myself don't want to vote for more spending. so, every time they add more deregulation, the moderates don't want to get rid of the regulation. why don't we separate them into two bills? one is primarily a repeal bill and one is primarily a spending bill. conservatives will in all likelihood oppose the second bill. but it will be spending the democrats support. >> martha: before i let you go, because i'm out of time, do you think you could get the eight or nine dissenting g.o.p. votes on board with this? can you narrow that margin to a point where it could pass? >> yeah, i think there is a certain amount of repeal that everybody in the caucus is for. all 52 are for it, but not all 52 are far more spending. to separate the spending, the new spending, and put it into a
4:22 pm
bill that will likely get democratic support. >> martha: can you get a bye friday? >> be separated into two bills. let's see. >> martha: thank you, senator. good to see you tonight. despite senator paul's concerns, most of her book and senators to support their bill. as it turns out, most voters really look like they don't. today's fox news poll show just over one and four voters support, 54% oppose what they know so far up by the senate measure. joining me now, orthopedic surgeon and wyoming senator john barrasso. good to have you here, senator. >> thank you, martha. >> martha: your reaction to this poll and then we will get to what senator paul was talking about. according to this poll, the american people are not at all on board with this version. >> let me make sure that people know exactly what is in the bill. number one, stabilizes the insurance markets and over the next couple of years, lowers premiums by about 30%.
4:23 pm
people will find that very popular. we eliminate all of the mandates that mandated that people had to buy a government approved product. that is very popular. we are eliminating the taxes, many of which drove up the costs of obamacare. we are getting the decisions out of the hands of washington and back into the hands of patients with decisions being made at the states. i would think that that is going to be very popular. and then, we make sure that we know mike in regard to medicaid, we stabilize it in the long terr people who are most in need. also, for people with pre-existing addictions, everyone gets to keep their plan and 26 euros get to stay on their parent's plans come up to the age of 26. >> martha: basically what rand paul cited that there there are way too many goodies in this bill. he wants to split them in half. he wants to do a repeal bill and replace bill. he talked to the president about this idea and he liked it a lot. have you heard that? is that something that has traction? >> i met with the president yesterday and along with all of
4:24 pm
the republican senators. we won't negotiate this on television. we are focused on fighting the 31st that we need to be able to make a fundamental change of rescuing people from obamacare. the prices them gone up, the options have gone down, many people are finding themselves with only one choice on the exchange for next year. many places, no one is telling obamacare. >> martha: i hear you. >> is a bus going over a cliff. the democrats are saying, stay on board. i'm saying, we're just trying to rescue people from this collapsing debacle. >> martha: what i'm hearing is that you are willing to let the rand paul vote go by the wayside. is that true? >> i want to work with every member. we are trying to get to 50. mike pence is there as vice president. i think rand paul has been very constructive. he has been in all of the meetings. we continue to discuss this. we need all of the members on board because we are all committed to fundamentally changing the direction of health care away from this one-size-fits-all government
4:25 pm
control and getting the decisions back to home. i was in wyoming over the weekend, i was a doctor for 25 years, talking to patients, doctors, nurses at one of our local hospitals. they all want out of what has become obamacare. >> martha: all right, thank you very much. always good to speak with you. thanks for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> martha: coming up, protesters make their claim in d.c. as the battle rages over exactly what this would look like in the end. >> i don't think this and it will produce a bill that is as extreme as what came out of the house. >> martha: is the bill the victim of bad policy or unfair media treatment? dana perino on chris stirewalt here on that, coming up. plus, another day, another media retraction, of a story involving president donald trump. laid a must here update on the story of an alleged view between the president and the happiest place on earth. look at all of those wacky presidents. we'll be right back. ♪ just like the people
4:26 pm
who own them, every business is different. but every one of those businesses will need legal help as they age and grow. whether it be help starting your business, vendor contracts or employment agreements. legalzoom's network of attorneys can help you every step of the way so you can focus on what you do. we'll handle the legal stuff that comes up along the way. legalzoom. legal help is here.
4:27 pm
4:28 pm
4:29 pm
♪ >> martha: is it for policy or is it unfair treatment? and bring to the early days of obamacare, the health care performed seems to be taking he. trace gallagher trace trace gal.
4:30 pm
>> martha, this isn't just the tomato-tomato debate. there are stark differences in how the g.o.p. bill is be covered today versus obamacare. for example, when the affordable care act passed in 2009, the three major networks called it historic. when the g.o.p. health bill passed the house last month, the same networks labeled it "risky." we are not think the g.o.p. bill is the magic potion for what ails the country but it is also accurate to point out that obamacare is struggling and the numbers bear that out. in october, president obama's own health and human services department estimated that premiums and 39 states would rise by an average of 29%. hhs led to some states like arizona would see rates jump 116%. health pocket, a nonpartisan consumer insurance comparison site, says nationwide, health insurance deductibles for the lowest level plans will jump 21%
4:31 pm
this year alone. of course, when costs go up, insurers get out. a few weeks ago, anthem announced it was pulling out of ohio. the ohio department of insurance says that means that next year, 20% of the counties in the buckeye state will have zero insurers selling individual plans. but as an op-ed deadly hill pointed out, quoting "cbs evening news," nbc nightly news, and abc world news tonight, we are left with the impression that obamacare was a popular law that was humming along. here is a sample of network coverage then and now. watch. >> the health care debacle is especially devastating, given with the president said during the campaign. >> first major piece of legislation went down in flames. >> a critical milestone was reached overnight in the government's bid to overhaul the nation's health care system. today, the president had many of his fellow democrats are celebrating last night's passage of the house covered by the house, they health care reform
4:32 pm
bill. >> did you hear that? health care reform. the conservative media research center says another three months leading up to the passage of obamacare, the networks called it reform 344 times in the three months leading up to yesterday's delayed vote of the g.o.p. health bill, it was called reform 30 times. martha. >> martha: very interesting. here is more, dana perino, former white house press secretary and chris stirewalt, fox news politics editor. welcome to you both. >> thank you. >> martha: a very different ways of presenting this, dana. >> there is also different ways of selling this. were they were talking about her being historic, president obama gave 53 speeches over that 16 month. mark. he detailed it out and he would try to get his democrats to be with them. this time, that has not actually been the case. the republicans have benefited from obamacare at the ballot box. they won in 2010. in the congress, 14, i think the obamacare, remember those rates that came out in october?
4:33 pm
i think the republicans have benefited from obamacare failing. now, they have to decide how will they sell this one? i think they feel like that they have talked about it a lot. but there is something about the president and his ability to reassure people and their anxiety, for example, an example in my life, i see somebody a couple of times a week to work out. he buys on the independent market. he says, all i want to know is, well i rates go down? i can't guarantee that, i don't know. nobody actually knows. but that is what people, if you look at the polls, the anxiety is what is fueling these numbers. i think the president could reassure them and maybe he will if he gets out there. >> martha: there's a bit of a vacuum, chris. president obama did present obamacare and sell into the country, as dana says. what we have heard from president trump, we will get this terrific thing through. the people have no idea how it
4:34 pm
will impact them. >> also, to dana's point, he also told them that obamacare is failing. he might just let it fail. there is catastrophe everywhere. dogs and cats sleeping together, the world -- everything is going to fall apart. it's a total catastrophe. we don't know if we will be able to pass it. understandably, people are nervous. beyond that, republicans don't seem to like the bill. they don't seem to like their own bill. they are doing it in the spirit of high-minded regard to resignation, yes, we have to do this. not this story. bailing out raman care in the short term and making some trim trims, cutting the increase to make it more fiscally sensible. that is at. it is not something that they are particularly proud of. unfortunately, they are the ones who have to vote for it. >> it is something that they need. they need to have something that they have acted upon in order to talk about it. it is easier and better for them to defend something back home, to say, this is why we voted for it, these are the good parts,
4:35 pm
rather than trying to explain in action. i think they are hearing that from a congressional hearing. >> martha: we have seen it in the polls in the recent months. it's the one issue that people are dissatisfied about among republicans, health care. they want to see it happen. >> and yet, they trust republicans on the economy by a long shot over democrats. the two are inextricably linked. it's not 170 of the economy. the republicans have an opportunity. perhaps, what mitch mcconnell has done, said, i will give this some breathing room, i will figure out a way to get tsb for the august 1st recess. see what i want to squeeze in one more topic with you guys. this is a tweet from jim acosta. the issue of the press and how they are copping this presidency. he says, "sarah huckabee sanders taking questions from reporters at a white house briefing. video of this has been banned by the united states of america." i also want to put up a quote from ariel fleischer, former press secretary at the
4:36 pm
white house. they wrote this in january. very interesting. "we recommend the president keep the press briefing but no longer make it a live televised event for the briefing today has become an occasion is too much posturing about size of the o camera. the president spokesman should and must be available for questioning, especially in those days and the president schedule to not include a public appearance. bipartisan press secretaries, dana, saying, you don't need to do that, really. >> they are very specific in saying it shouldn't be live. they do say that it should be on video and it could be embargoed. it will all get out there. i think of that is fine. i actually thought that the briefing was a good tool. yeah, it's difficult and sometimes you got to suck it up and do it because there are some show borders in the room. i think that everybody in the room, for the most part, tries their best and everybody can do a little bit better. these are jobs that are really wonderful, to be in the white house at the podium or in those seats, asking questions, america deserves a little better from everybody i think. whether the videos are embargoed our life, i don't think it
4:37 pm
matters. the 2:00 anchor -- [laughter] i never get to do a show. >> martha: what do you think? >> i don't think right now is a particularly good luck for either side. we have a tendency to use it to see political conflicts a zero-sum games. i think in this case, both sides are losing because it looks like the administration is ashamed of itself and reporters are out there, being banned in the usa, come on. it's the. >> it's a little overdramatic. but mike mccurry was the first want to say that he didn't want to make them live for a technology advance. it's hard with facebook live in treating life very hard. >> martha: thinks, you guys. great to see you. still ahead tonight, and upcoming visit to mcdonald's, a robot may be asking you to supersize edge. what does this mean. this is scary stuff, folks. our world is changing so dramatically. james rosen did an amazing better reporting on this and he joins me in just a moment.
4:38 pm
also, sarah palin versus fake news. what the former alaskan government just did to take a very strong stand against "the new york times." ♪ i thought i was doing okay... then it hit me... ...managing was all i was doing. when i told my doctor,... ...i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease... ...even after trying other medications. in clinical studies,... the majority of people on humira... saw significant symptom relief... ...and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability... fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened;... have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where... ...certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb,... ...hepatitis b, are prone to infections,... ...or have flu-like symptoms or sores.
4:39 pm
don't start humira if you have an infection. just managing your symptoms? ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. hi..and i know that we have phonaccident, so the incredibly minor accident that i had tonight- four weeks without the car. okay, yup. good night. with accident forgiveness your rates won't go up just because of an accident. switching to allstate is worth it.
4:40 pm
4:41 pm
the only bed smart enough to change sleep as we know it. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides to keep you comfortable. and snoring.... does your bed do that? right now save on sleep number 360 smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed. ends saturday. ♪ at johnson's we care about safety as much as you do. that's why we meet or exceed 15 global regulations for baby products.
4:42 pm
and where standards differ, we always go with the toughest. johnson's. >> martha: sarah palin is taking legal action against "the new york times," suing the paper for defamation. following an op-ed that they ran, since retracted, that falsely linked her to the 2011 mass shootings that included former congresswoman gabby giffords. prior to the correction, this is how it read. "the link to political incitement was clear. before the shooting, sarah palin's political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put mace giffords and 19 of the democrats under stylized crosshairs. they since corrected that, and away. so, does she have a case here? bringing austan goolsbee, former chief economist under president obama. charlie hurt is a political
4:43 pm
columnist for "the washington times" in a fox news contributor. mrs. charles and his bielenberg we call him charlie. welcome to you both. do you think she has a case? >> i'm not a lawyer but it feels to me like she might have gotten for legal advice. i publicly said that "the new york times" editorial was a vast overstatement and that she deserves an apology. eventually, she got one. they should have been more forthcoming with it at the beginning. but to move then to defamation, i think i'm up by the standards, if this were defamation, then, barack obama, for sure, whatever the grounds to sue governor palin for defamation for what she said about there being death panels in the aca or for what she said about his hiroshima speech, that she claimed he had apologized for u.s. involvement in world war ii. none of which were true.
4:44 pm
i think we all need to take a step back and recognize that in the marketplace of ideas, they are going to be people who say dumb things, offensive things, overstatements, like the one in this "new york times" editorial. but that doesn't mean that we should engage in kind of snowflake lawsuits and say, you owe me hundreds of millions dollars because i was offended. >> you raise a number of interesting points. no surprise. one of them is, what is the responsibility of a newspaper? even though this is an editorial comments. they didn't really apologize to her. they were attracted and amended it but there was never an actual apology, which might have saved them some of this lawsuit and missed trouble perhaps. fun, there is the issue, charlie, you are a public figure, you go out there and say, i'll kinds of inflammatory things on both sides come i do have the ability to sue someone when they come back i do? >> i agree with austan is when i aspect. you probably won't be
4:45 pm
successful. it was a political move. she is winning it very nicely. what she is trying to do is highlight the fact of "the new york times" was reckless with this editorial. and highlight, i think i'm of the unfairness that they show more often with republicans than i do the democrats. she is winning on all of that. there is purposefully a very high bar for suing public officials, especially politicians. because we cherish a raucous and free wheeling press and that's a good thing. but i don't think it was a legal move. i think it was entirely designed to embarrass "the new york times" and she succeeded. >> martha: the differences here, austan, when you look at it, it's not just saying she is a terrible person. we are saying she is a lousy politician. whatever you want to say. they tied a specific pamphlet to an event that was proven not to have any connection, so, that's
4:46 pm
a little bit different, isn't i it? >> it might be. >> martha: is it fake news? >> the flyer itself was not in very good taste, i thought, to put literally a gun crosshairs on the site. i don't think that it was caused, a cause of a man manned -- mad band to shoot some people. >> martha: he said he had never seen it, and facts. >> and he was obsessed with her at the time. >> yes. i just think, it doesn't make it different, from a legal standpoint. i think charlie's point is an interesting one. i hadn't thought about it. it does seem like as a political gesture, being able to say, i sued "the new york times" for defamation, that might succeed. but on legal grounds, i don't think, if "the new york times" said it was their opinion of this was true and she's a public figure, i guess i don't understand. >> martha: it established to not be true. gentlemen, thank you very much.
4:47 pm
good to see you both tonight. coming up next, they must must here update on the story of alleged feud between the president and the happiest place on earth. how could this be happening? plus, james rosen is here with a really important look into the future. >> martha, when the robots take all of our jobs, maybe even yours and mine, should the government step in and give us all a paycheck to make ends meet? stay tuned. ♪ hey richard, check out this fresh roasted flavor. looks delicious, huh? -yeah. -richard, try to control yourself. -i can't help it. -and how about that aroma? -love that aroma! umph! -craveability, approved! -oh, can i have some now?! -sure! help yourself. -wait, what? -irresistibly planters.
4:48 pm
4:49 pm
4:50 pm
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call
4:51 pm
for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. ♪ >> martha: an object of a story route we brought you last night about a report that there was drama between the white house and disney world over president trump's debut. advice media, reported that it has retracted to regrow stories, they say after investigating the sources, they found several factual errors. no word on when president trump will make his disney debut. we'll keep you in suspense. we'll let you know as soon as we get more on that breaking news story. now, time for the back story tonight. last week and we told you about the robots that are on the rise at mcdonald's and we are -- they are likely not the only company. to be doing this by the growing trend now sparking a discussion on guaranteed income for americans. is that something that the
4:52 pm
country will need? joining us not to explain, james rosen, who is not a robot, he is a human being, and he does not have mandatory compensation yet. james, good evening. >> i am subject to glitches from time to time. whether a universal basic income would replace the social safety net already provided by state and federal governments, or what a supplement that, it's just one of the many critical aspects of this plan that arouses debate, but the concept of a guaranteed income is undeniably experiencing a revival of sorts. facebook founder mark zuckerberg endorse the idea and his harvard commencement address last month and tesla ceo elon musk has spoken in favor of it twice in recent months. with some credible projections forecasting 40 to 50% of all jobs in the u.s. today will be eliminated due to automation within the next ten to 15 years. futurists, labor market analyst, and leading ceos are asking, what will become of all of those workers displaced by technology? whether the society at large, seeking stability in such a
4:53 pm
radically transformed economic environment, might not benefit from some orderly redistribution of wealth? an additional question is whether federal agencies like the pentagon's advanced research projects agency should be using taxpayer funds to pursue robotics, at the very projects that will displace those taxpayers from their jobs. >> the challenge, i think for public policy, is to make sure that workers are equipped to work in the new kinds of jobs the economy is creating. i think the wrong course of action is to throw in the towel and to say, well, there is simply nothing that can be done, and there is going to be this large, large segment of society that can't contribute in the leg labor market. >> one modern president of the united states has actually proposed a guaranteed income, it was richard nixon, who had fallen under the seduction of his liberal advisor, daniel patrick moynihan. they unveiled something called the family assistance plan night wow back in 1970. a dyed in the senate, martha.
4:54 pm
>> martha: fascinating. just to reiterate one sentence about you said, and the next decade, 40 to 50% of the jobs that we now know, will disappear and be replaced by robots. it's just stunning, james. >> yes, it is. it is not that far away from now, it's only about 13 years. what is striking to me, that we heard so much about jobs from hillary clinton and donald trump and in 2016 campaign cycle. in the three presidential debates, one word that never came up, jobs was uttered 86 time, between the two of them. the word automation never came up. >> martha: stunning. the idea that you might need to give people a basic income to get through this period of huge timeouts in the jobs market is stunning and shocking. james, thank you so much. great report tonight. thank you for being here. coming up next, a novel question. recommitting to stability on capitol hill. howard unlikely bond may lead us to the answer, when we come back with a quote of the night.
4:55 pm
♪ it doesn't, does it? actually, it does. type 2 diabetes can make you twice as likely to die from a cardiovascular event, like a heart attack or stroke. and with heart disease, your risk is even higher. you didn't know that. no. yeah. but, wait, there's good news for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit. jardiance is proven to both significantly reduce the chance of dying from a cardiovascular event in adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease and lower your a1c. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction. symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling,
4:56 pm
and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. so now that you know all that, what do you think? that it's time to think about jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. and get to the heart of what matters. the toothpaste that helps new parodontax. prevent bleeding gums. if you spit blood when you brush or floss you may have gum problems and could be on the journey to much worse. help stop the journey of gum disease. try new parodontax toothpaste. ♪
4:57 pm
4:58 pm
4:59 pm
>> tucker: senator orrin hatch with a record of the night, and i say he writes about the dave division our nation and his determination to fix it. he uses his example as a way forward. he says, i am grateful for the late senator ted kennedy, who taught me that the bonds of friendship are stronger than any partisan poll. when i first rent-a-center, i thought he would be an adversary, instead, we became the best of friends. we were a case study and contradictions. he was an east coast liberal, i was a reagan conservative. he was a catholic, i was a mormon. yet, time and again, we were able to look past our differences and find areas of agreement and forge a consensus. by unlikely friendship with ted kennedy is a small example of what our nation can accomplish if we choose respect and community. ">> martha: the rest of that peace is recommended reading tonight. that is his story. we would like to hear yours.
5:00 pm
tweet us at @thestoryfnc using the hashtag #thestory. we'll be back here tomorrow night at 7:00. we look forward to seeing you again. tucker carlson comes up next. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." it is a week that will live in infamy and history of cnn. if anything, it is getting worse by the day. we've not yet installed a countdown clock to the next ethics scandal, but we are considering, though. in the meantime, here is the latest raid earlier today, project veritas released yet another undercover video discrediting that channel. fox hasn't yet confirmed the authenticity of the video but it appears to show cnn contributor van jones admitting that the story his network has obsessed over, from breakfast until bedtime, for the past seven months, at least, is basically a


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on