tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX May 15, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT
ex below sieve new charges about donald trump's past, how will it affect his run for president? he's living with marla and he has three other girlfriends. >> today the new controversy over trump's behavior with women, both in his personal life and the workplace. and who was trump's publicist jon miller who sounds a lot like trump himself? we'll talk with rnc chair reince priebus about that and his effort to get trump and house speaker paul ryan working together. >> i was very encouraged with what i heard from donald trump. >> we agree on a lot of different items and we're getting there. then a debate between former house speaker newt gingrich, a trump supporter, and republican congressman tim huelskamp who is refusing to endorse him.
it's a "fox news sunday" exclusive. plus, we will ask our sunday panel about the new whitehouse order to schools across the country on transgender bathrooms. >> nobody should be discriminated against. our suggestion is that the rules should apply to everybody equally. and our power play of the week, the senate matchmaker. >> people hear about capitol hill and it's a mess and everyone is yelling and fighting. well, people are falling in love and establishing families. >> all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. donald trump was busy putting out fires this week, trying to get house speaker paul ryan on board his campaign. but this weekend trump faces new problems. a newspaper investigation into his treatment of women over the years, and a strange story that he often posed as a publicist to brag about himself. joining me now republican national committee chair reince priebus live from rnc head quarters. chairman, i want to start with
that article in the "new york times" today, it's called "crossing the line, trump's private conduct with women." they did more than 50 interviews over six weeks and they say they found repeated instances of trump insulting women and making unwanted advances, even in the workplace. chairman priebus, does that bother you? >> well, you know, a lot of things bother me, chris, and obviously i'm the wrong person to be asking that particular question, but, look, we've been -- >> wait a minute. why are you the wrong person? you are the chairman of the party, this this is your nominee and they're saying that he has mistreated women over the years. >> what i'd say is we've been working on this primary for over a year, chris, and i've got to tell you i think that all these stories that come out and they come out every couple weeks, people just don't care. i think people look at donald trump and say -- and hillary clinton and say, who is going to bring an earthquake to
washington, d.c.? i think the bigger issue when we make these judgments about people are, you know, whether or not individuals are throwing stones in glass houses and when people are hypocrites, obviously that's when these stories have an impact, but i don't think donald trump in his personal life is something that people are looking at and saying, well, i'm surprised that he has had girlfriends in the past. that's not what people look at donald trump for. so i think the traditional playbook and analysis really don't apply. >> but forgive me, it's not whether or not he had girlfriends, the question is whether or not he mistreated women, whether he made unwanted advances, whether he humiliated women in the workplace. i don't understand why you say that people don't care about that and are you going to look into the allegations? >> well, look, i'm not saying people don't care about it, i'm just saying i think the reason he's where he is at is that he represents something much different than the traditional analysis of individual
candidates. and, yes, everything bothers me, chris, but i don't know the truth of these things, i don't know other than reading an article whether or not these things are true. i think it's something that donald trump is going to have to answer questions in regard to. all i am saying, though, is that after a year of different stories, you know, nothing applies. and so that's all i'm saying and that i think the bigger question is between hillary clinton and donald trump who represents somebody that's going to bring a more efficient, accountable, effective government here in washington, a career politician or a total outsider with potentially some flaws and a businessman that can get something done. that's what this is about. now, whether it's going to be a race to the bottom or not, i'm not sure. >> i do want to ask you, though, because the question of character, particularly in a president, is important and donald trump, lord knows, has
been bringing up hillary clinton's character and bill clinton's character. there's also a story in the washington post that trump used to call reporters claiming to be a publicist named jon miller, but really it was trump, to brag about himself and his exploits with women. here is a clip from one of those phone calls back in the '90s and trump this week denying that it's him. >> he's somebody that has a lot of options and frankly, you know, he gets called by everybody. he is living with marla and he's got three other girlfriends. >> it was not me on the phone. it doesn't sound like me on the phone i will tell you that and it was not me on the phone. >> but back in the '90s trump admitted to that reporter later that it was him and he testified in a court case that he sometimes used the assumed name jon miller. i get the real question is what do you say, chairman, to women -- women voters out there who are going to hear these stories about trump bragging about his exploits, about him
allegedly mistreating women. what do you say to them if they have concerns and question whether or not they really want this man to be president? >> i think that each individual person out there should evaluate our -- our potential nominee based on the answers that he gifts to these questions, but also look at what's at stake in this country and whether or not hillary clinton represents someone that's going to bring the needed change that we have here in washington. look, a story of 30 years ago and whether donald trump impersonated someone or not that he denies is really not the most important thing for us to talk about when you look at hillary clinton and you look at the fact that just this past week the clinton foundation is being charged with exchanging access for cash, you've got four dead americans in benghazi and instead we're talking about, you know, a planted story by somebody in the washington post from 30 years ago that really has no consequence at all to the
issues facing this country. i think that's what every american is going to be faced with is that fundamental question as to which person is going to bring a seismic change to washington, d.c. and the only playbook, chris, the same old analysis isn't applying in this election. and so i get that this stuff is interesting, but, you know, we've been through this and it has not moved the dial one notch. >> let me ask you about another question, which is trump's continued refusal to release his tax returns. he says that he's not going to release them until an irs audit is complete, he was asked this week what his effective tax rate is, he said it's none of your business. look, you know, you talk about this, but every republican nominee since richard nixon who at one time was under an audit has released their tax returns. i mean, is this the kind of transparency that we can expect? >> you know, i'm not sure. i mean, romney released his
taxes very late and he paid a dear price for it by playing games -- footsie with releasing it or not. you know, it turned out to be something that was not good for us in 2012. but, you know, i'm not sure whether americans actually care or not whether donald trump releases his taxes or not. and that's a question for donald trump and he's either going to benefit or suffer from the decisions that he makes on that particular issue, but again, not to be repetitive, but, you know, whether this issue is going to apply to donald trump in a negative way or not i'm not sure of, but so far most things have not because he represents something far different than these particular individual issues. it's a bigger question, which is who is going to blow up the system? who is going to get the change that people want done? people are angry and they're angry and they want something done and they view donald trump as the person to do it.
that's what this election is coming down to. >> but don't you think -- i mean, just looking at this in a philosophical manner, obviously we know a lot -- and maybe we don't -- people don't like it about hillary clinton but at least she's been vetted. don't you think that it's legitimate for people to look into who donald trump is? for instance, the washington post, bob woodward, the famous reporter there now says that there's 20 reporters at the post looking into trump. we don't know much about his private life, we don't know much about his professional life, isn't that legitimate? >> no, i don't -- listen, i don't -- i'm not saying it's not legitimate, chris. it's all legitimate. i'm just saying i don't know if it's even going -- i don't think it's going to affect people's view of who and what donald trump represents to them, given this election and the electorate. granted, i don't -- i don't have a problem with reporters looking into things but i also think they should be looking at hillary clinton and her past and her treatment of women and her treatment of women in the workplace and the way she acted
on this e-mail scandal and whether she's going to be ind t indicted and the clinton foundation and benghazi. look, there is a reason why hillary clinton is stuck in the mud and still beating back a socialist in her own party. so, granted, i'm not saying there aren't going to be issues to be discussed, i'm just saying i think the issues that apply to donald trump are so big and so fundamental and universal across the board that these individual things that we're going to be talking about and reading about, i just don't think they're going -- i don't think they're going to hit him, i think they're going to bounce off of him. >> finally trump met this week with a lot of republican leaders, including paul ryan. you were the third man in the room for those meetings. yesterday ryan spoke to the wisconsin state republican convention and said he's not yet ready to endorse trump. here he is. >> we think it's important that we have real party unity, not
pretend party unity, but real party unity so that we can into the fall election at full strength. >> chairman priebus, how confident are you that speaker ryan in the end will endorse donald trump and, you know, he keeps talk being a process. how long is this process going to take? >> well, listen, i don't speak for paul ryan, but what i can tell you is that i think both of these guys came into the meeting expecting a good meeting, but i think they left and it was a great meeting. i think they made a lot of progress and i would be -- i would be surprised if we didn't get there, you know, not too much longer in the distant future. so i think it was a good meeting and i take paul at his word. he wouldn't go do a press conference and say the things that he has said just to say them. he believes it and he's sincere, but he wants to make sure it's real, he doesn't want to just put on a show. he wants to understand and make sure there's a real understanding of each other before he makes that endorsement.
>> i've got one last question for you and we have about a minute left. there is a report today that a number of leading conservatives are talking about trying to mount an independent conservative campaign for president. how seriously do you take that? >> well, i always take things like that seriously, but i also know that the law makes it very difficult. they could try to hijack another party and get on the ballot, but, look, it's a suicide mission for our country because what it means is that you're throwing down not just eight years of the white house but potentially 100 years on the supreme court and wrecking this country for many generations. and so i think that's the legacy these folks will leave behind. i think it's very dangerous and there's other ways to get assurances on the things that they are worried about, which is what paul ryan is doing, and making sure that some things are understood before moving forward with some particular people and
i think paul ryan's approach is much better. >> if i may, real quickly, what would you say to people like mitt romney and bill kristol who have involved in this effort? >> i think they should consider the ramifications of what's going to happen on the supreme court, get assurances from donald trump that they're satisfied with that would show that he's committed to those conservative justices, make sure the justices that are being considered are people that the federalist society and heritage and other groups think are great and i think that's the better way to go as opposed to this third party route. >> chairman priebus, thank you, thanks for your time today. always a pleasure to talk to you, sir. >> you bet, chris. thank you. coming up, trump and paul ryan may be working out their differences, but there is still a big split inside the gop. former speaker newt gingrich debates congressman tim huelskamp's camp of the freedom caucus on whether trump is a real conservative. we're out of ink.
donald trump is making progress getting the gop behind him, he picked up some endorsements this week and won the backing of big donors. but some in the party still oppose him. to explore the debate among republicans, here in washington former house speaker newt gingrich a trump supporter and in cast republican congressman tim huelskamp's camp who says backing trump presents a moral
dilemma. let's start with these stories about trump's behavior towards women over the years. congressman huelskamp you already have said that you won't let your nine-year-old son watch trump on tv because you're concerned about the language that comes out. do these reports add to your concerns about trump's character and you are a senator ted cruz supporter, do you think he should get back in the race now? >> i don't think ted is going to get back in the race, but, yes, it raises questions, and it's not just -- it's not just me, but i think there are millions of soccer moms, football dads, baseball dads across america and they're trying to raise their children in a tough culture. here they have a presidential candidate who is demeaning the women, he's vulgar, he's crass, i don't know where they're going to go. the best thing about donald trump today is he's not hillary clinton, but he's certainly not a conservative, either. >> speaker gingrich, what do you make of these reports about trump's treatment of women over the years and do you have any problems with his behavior? >> i think for "the new york
times" to have this week the reports on bill clinton flying around with a pedophile, dismissing his secret service agents and decide that we need to worry about trump tells us everything you need to know about "the new york times" and washington post. they are in the tank with hillary. it will be unending from now until the election. trump makes no claims about anything in terms of his life before he ran for office, what he does say is he's been a have he successful businessman, he has learned a great deal and he would do more to change washington than any other candidate. 16 other people competed for that and they lost because people decided the voters largest vote for any republican in history was for donald trump because voters decided, you know, he will change washington. >> all right. well, let's get to the big picture here. congressman huelskamp, do you trust donald trump as a reliable conservative? >> well, he's certainly not a conservative. you look at the issues, particularly issues of the heart
like issues of life and marriage and family that are clear in our party platform. here is the guy who suggested he was going to appoint his pro abortion sister to the u.s. supreme court and that seems to be the remaining issue is conservatives are supposed to vote for donald trump because of supreme court nominees. certainly we don't want hillary clinton making those nominations at the end of the day, though, donald trump has a problem, i think, with soccer moms, football dads like myself. again, i have a nine-year-old and he can't even listen to the guy on television. how will he bridge that gap? i don't know. but when you live and die by the media and that was his entire primary campaign, it's going to be a tough election moving into november 8th. >> look, i think first of all, congressman huelskamp is exactly right, donald trump is not a traditional conservative, he has never claimed to be a traditional conservative, but he has said that he will nominate very conservative judges, people worthy of scalia and thomas, he is clearly working with the federalist society and others to
put together a speech on the judiciary that will draw a very sharp line with hillary. the question that congressman huelskamp and others have to ask themselves is real simple, hillary clinton represents and i think reince priebus said it perfectly, she represents eight years of bad government in government and maybe 100 years of a left wing supreme court. now, are we really prepared to say that trump is more dangerous than hillary clinton? because if he's not more dangerous than hillary clinton for any rational conservative then he is dramatically safer as a vote. >> congressman huelskamp. >> well, the old style of campaigning, the old ideas that supposedly donald wants to throw out is that it's still here, we're being told vote for the lesser of two evils and i understand that, we don't want hillary clinton, she will unify the republican party, but again i think there are millions of moms and dads out there that are going to say, do you know what, am i going to go to the polls to vote for someone who is demeaning to women? i don't think "the new york times" article is a surprise, you live and die by the media.
these are things he said -- he has a long pattern of these kind of things that are vulgar and crass. i have a 14-year-old son i would never let him say the things donald trump says and i think that will show up in people's minds between now and november and those moms and dads who like his opposition to common core but are worried about his statements about women and so -- but the problem about the fact on who he's going to appoint to the supreme court, mr. speaker, he said the other things, i mean, he is all over on all the issues and that's a problem with the platform, that's a problem on basic life issues and certainly on marriage issues, this bathroom issue he is all over the map on t folks are looking for some certainty and you don't see that in the positions of donald trump. >> well, i think what you do see is absolute certainty that he will be dramatically more conservative than hillary clinton, you see absolute certainty not just his judge ships but his cabinet and appointments will be dramatically more conservative and there is a deeper issue u why does he get more votes than any republican in history in the primaries? because the country is desperate
to overturn the bureaucracy in the city. you just cited an example example. we no longer need school boards because a bur extra the in washington with issue a letter and change policy with no local control. if you want to keep going down that road hillary clinton is your answer. if you want to break up the left wing monopoly of these bureaucracies trump is the only person who can do it. >> let me break in here. we've talked a lot about life, a lot about values and treatment of women. when it comes to economic issues like trade, like immigration, like entitlement reform, where do you have the biggest problem with donald trump? >> i think he said last week he wanted to raise taxes again on the rich. i mean, that is not a conservative position. i think the speaker and i agree on that. i mean, the idea of slamming down the border shut, that's not a conservative position. allowing us to compete in the world, that's what conservatives want to do. i mean, but the problem with donald trump is his position changes sometimes in the same
speech. when he says he's flexible i see insiders in washington not the speaker but say, hey, it's good to see flexibility, that's exactly what the people don't want. they want someone who takes a stand. the problem is trump's stands are going to change as we move forward. on basic issues of life you can't win as a republican in this country unless you're 100% pro life in my opinion. if you don't stick with the party platform and what i'm hearing from the trump campaign is they're flexible on issues of life as well. and that to me is going to be very damaging to the millions of values of voters. you might say they are not going to vote for hillary, no but they will vote by staying home and that's my fear about november and donald trump. >> mr. speaker, i do want to talk about this issue of flips because there's no question that trump has taken various positions over time. minimum wage, he was against raising it now he's for it. tax cuts, first he was going to cut taxes dramatically for the wealthy now he says he's still going to cut them but not as much, that the tax increase will be smaller. then there was this change just
this week on banning muslims. take a look. >> for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. >> it was a suggestion. look, anything i say right now -- i'm not the president, everything is a suggestion, no matter what you say it's a suggestion. >> mr. speaker, at some point doesn't what trump calls his, quote, flexibility become a problem? >> sure. i think except it's always within a framework. notice on the rich he said he's going to have a smaller tax cut. i mean, one of trump's problems is he insists on speaking for an hour and 15 minutes off the cuff and while i do a fair amount of that, i can tell you anytime you do that day after day with the news media watches as they should for a presidential candidate you will have moments you wish you hadn't had. let me go back as an example of conservati
conservatism. ronald reagan in his diary in 1986 says he is signing the simpson mizouli act which is the immigration bill because we have to control the border. it's not accurate to say that conservatives can't be in favor of controlling the border. on trade frankly -- and i helped pass nafta, i think it's good for us to be a little bit tougher on trade. when you hear, for example, that the chinese last year probably stole $360 billion intellectual property from the united states, i think being tough about that's a good thing. i think conservatives can be for very tough-minded trade, not -- you know, not automatically -- you yell free trade, you get ripped off. >> congressman, your response. >> donald trump has no clear position on anything and those are interesting positions that the speaker articulates, but it isn't that he talks for a long time, it's that he says different things as he talks and that's what i think we're going to lose. conservatives, i think we agree on this, conservatives don't have to be vulgar and they certainly are not demeaning to
women. in our culture we have moms and dads across america that are looking, want to see someone of character and here we have a chance of a lifetime to take out the clinton machine and it looks like we're going to nominate someone that doesn't share the character. he has the new york values, there is no question about it and i don't believe it plays well in kansas or other conservative parts across america. will voters show up and still vote for a guy like this, i don't know, that's my fear. >> congressman huelskamp it does appear he is going to be the nominee. if it comes out trump versus clinton what are you going to do? >> i don't think it matters. when congress has a 9% approval rating it doesn't matter what a congressman from kansas thinks. >> it matters to me. i mean, it matters to your constituents. what are you going to do, sir? >> i don't know. i need to talk to my wife. i mean, we're both so upset about these vulgar statements. i mean, why does he have to talk like that? why does he have to talk in a brash manner that's so attacking and demeaning to women. i think he's got to find a way
to rule that out and say that's not going to happen anymore. again, it's all words he has no actions to back that up. he's clearly not a conservative. is he pert than hillary? he is. and that didn't work out well for romney versus obama in 2012 and i'm in fear we are going to have to vote for the lesser of two evils and i don't think that's going to work out very well unless we see clear consistent changes from donald trump. >> finally, mr. speaker, and you knew this was coming, there has been a lot of speculation -- don't give me that laugh -- about you running -- >> i thought you were above this. >> no, i'm not above it. this is what i do for a living. and i know you didn't think i was above it. there is a lot of speculation that he is going to ask you to be his running mate. now, if he asks you you're certainly going to why he. >> if he asks me i'm certainly going to say i want to sit down and talk about it. i don't think it's an automatic yes, i think you have to think through what does evening the job involves. >> and if he indicates as i'm sure he would you're going to play a big role -- >> if he can convince clis is that and me that it's doable and
serious and we would contribute i think we would be very hard pressed not to say yes. >> would you like to do it? >> i don't know. it's certainly a great challenge, but as you know i have a pretty interesting exciting life, we're premiering a new movie on washington on friday night, we have a new book coming out rediscovering god in america this week, so we're pretty busy, but we could be lured into a new path. >> i was going to say you could take the vice presidency and the house isn't bad, either. mr. speaker, always a pleasure to talk with you, congressman huelskamp, thank you very much, too. up next, more on trump's treatment of women. we will bring in our sunday group including bob woodward of the washington post to discuss media plans to investigate trump's path in department. plus what do you think, are reporters treating trump the same way they're treating hillary clinton? let me mow on facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday and use the #fns.
he's a good guy and he's not going to hurt anybody. he treated his wife well and he treated -- and he will treat marla well. >> well, that's john miller representing himself as a trump spokesman in 1991, a voice that sure sounds like donald trump. the washington post which obtained the audio says it is the businessman posing and his own publicist. it's time now for our sunday group. fox news senior political analyst brit hume. >> amy walter from the cook political report, syndicated columnist george will and bob woodward from the aforementioned washington post. >> bob, you were quoted this week as saying the washington
post has 20 people working on every phase of donald trump's life. >> that's correct. we've announced a month ago that we're doing a book and we're going to do stories as this evolves. the equivalent effort will be made on hillary clinton. it's traditional and i think particularly in this campaign, which is one of those pivot points in the history of the country, we need to tell people everything we can find out and that means a massive effort. >> are you making an equal effort because that's something that we're hearing from folks, an equal effort on hillary clinton? you have 20 people on here? >> well, it's not necessarily the number of people, it's who is working on it. >> so you have smarter people on hillary clinton? >> no. no. no. no. believe me, you know, the goal here is the best obtainable version of the truth. you can't find out everything and as we know biography is
character. look, hillary clinton's time in the senate, we should do a full excavation of it. her time as secretary of state. with trump every business deal. he said on his tax returns that there are 500 entities that he has. so lots of work needs to be done. >> brit, do you think that this kind of probing into trump's life is legitimate and what about complaints that you hear from a lot of conservatives that this is the mainstream media trying to sink trump and help elect -- and we heard this to a certain degree from newt gingrich just now -- and help clinton? >> i think it's legitimate and in the case of trump -- >> the probing is legitimate? >> yes, i think it's utterly legitimate. i think when you think of trump who for all of his celebrity is nonetheless a newcomer to politics who is -- you know, the fullness of who is record has
really not been fully explored and i think that's worthwhile. you know, i hope and trust that a similar effort will be made with secretary clinton. i cannot -- the record on this, however, is not so good. the media have shown -- mainstream media have shown precious little interest in stories like the benghazi story. while it was "the new york times" i guess who broke the story about the clinton foundation and it's multitude of dealings, some of them quite controversial, the thread there seems to have largely been lost. perhaps the slack will be taken up on that. a guy can hope, right? >> how would you respond to that? >> it will be done. it's done. you know, you can't do these things in an afternoon or a week. you have to find people who are knowledgeable, ideally people who have not talked before, ideally people who have records and notes and that's possible and, you know, the commitment is
there. jeff bezos, the owner of the "washington post," said to the editor of the "washington post," marty barry, you will have the resources to do this on both candidates, final nominees. must be aggressive, fair and bipartisan. >> not surprisingly trump fired back at today's "new york times" story about his treatment of women over the years. here he is, trump's tweet. why doesn't the failing "new york times" write the real story on the clintons and women? the media is totally, all caps, dishonest. >> amy, do you think that this adds to the problems that trump already has with women voters? >> i don't know -- i don't think it helps him, but when i sit and i talk with women voters, i just sat in a couple focus groups this other past week in pennsylvania, the women there not happy with many of his past statements about women, but what they were the most concerned about was the issue of his
overall judgment. i heard woman after woman saying i worry that he's going to get us in trouble, meaning with the rest of the world. one woman said, you know, we know what an eye for an eye, how that works, and it usually doesn't work out very well. so i think the concern for many of these women is not what his past was but what he's going to be when he's president of the united states. i think that that's what you're going to hear much more about from whether it's the clinton campaign or democrats focusing on what is it going to mean if he is commander in chief and the president of the united states. >> and i'm curious, were they asked about the clintons? >> about -- do you mean in the focus group what they thought about it? >> yeah. >> i think the perceptions of hillary clinton -- let's be really clear, these women even some were swing women vote e, some were democrats they are not in love with hillary clinton. right now their vote for hillary clinton is much more a vote against donald trump than it is a support of her. >> george, the other big trump story and i thought what we were going to be talking about this week was the fact that he came here to washington to meet with
republican leaders, including house speaker paul ryan. here was speaker ryan after their meeting. >> i was very encouraged with what i heard from donald trump today. i do believe that we are now planting the seeds to get ourselves unified. >> how do you think trump's charm offensive is going and in the end do ryan and other republican leaders have any choice but to at least make a show of being unified with trump? >> well, a lot of republicans are engaging in semantic somersaults making distinctions without a difference at this point saying i support trump but i don't endorse trump. i'm not sure what the voters should take away from that. there are a few different ones, senator heller of nevada was quoted as saying i vehemently oppose our nominee. the interesting thing is the may get dance between donald trump and paul ryan. in a statement issued after their meeting but i bet dollars to doughnuts written before the
meeting they refer to our few differences, they spoke of our many important areas of common ground and urged the republicans to unite around our shared principles, to which one response is name one. one shared principle. for example, paul ryan feels very strongly about restoring the article i powers of congress and reigning in the executive overreach of the current president. trump says if ford moves a plant to florida -- to mexico he personally will stop it. and he says carrier is going to bring back those jobs to indiana. he as president will make it happen. no idea what inherent or explicit presidential power permits that sort of thing. >> let me just interrupt to say that i talked to a source close to paul ryan this week who said that trump reassured him -- this was a big issue in the meeting -- that trump reassured ryan that he understood the separation of powers and the limits on executive authority. you can question and i can see it in your face whether he would
do that as president, but he did reassure him on that very issue. >> request he understands the separation of powers then he understands that what he has been promising rally after rally after rally can't be done. >> what do you think of the story that we see today and we've been hearing about this for some time that there are a number -- it's a small number, but a number of conservatives who just can't stomach trump, our colleague bill kristol, mitt romney and they are going around to a variety of different people saying even if you can't run in all 50 states let's put you on on the ballot in some states to stop trump. >> you can't beat something with nothing so far they have gone down a predictable list of people all of whom have said no. horses for courses and they need a horse. >> and briefly -- go ahead, amy. >> what i'm looking at is not so much who is lining up behind donald trump in terms of big names, members of congress, et cetera. i'm looking at one number and that's the percentage of republican voters right now who say they will support donald
trump, the last nbc "wall street journal" poll it was 72%. hillary clinton is at 87% of democrats supporting her. if that 72% starts to get to 90 then it really doesn't matter which big names say they are with him or without him. if the voters start to move then it doesn't matter what the washington -- whether the washington folks are with him or not. >> all right. panel, we have to take a break here. up next, states push back against a white house order to public schools to let transgender students use the bathrooms and locker rooms of their gender identity. plus, what questions do you have for the panel about the administration directive? just go to facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday and we may use your question on the air.
from the president of the united states. white house spokesman josh earnest explaining the administration directive on transgender bathrooms, but push back from texas lieutenant governor dan patrick about the order and the threat that federal funds will be cut off to school districts that resist. we are back now with the panel. >> george, the obama administration is basically acting on its own on this issue, there has been no consultation with congress and congress has done no legislation on the issue of transgender rights. on the other hand, there last month was a ruling by the fourth circuit court of appeals that held a title 9 basically protects transgender rights on the issue of bathrooms and other matters of their choice. what's your take on all this? >> first of all, they do this with a guidance letter, which is supposed to be not mandatory, but that's their way of getting around the administrative procedures act that requires public hearings and public comment. three lessons here, the governor says they can keep their 30 pieces of silver.
most at this late stage in the game public schools, every institution in america is so tied in with federal money that as soon as they take the pieces of silver they become appendages of the federal government and subject to this unilateral executive edict. second, this is bound to be a stimulus to the growth of private education in this country. people say we really don't want to be in public schools in they are manipulate this had way. third the most important thing about this is the manipulation of language, george or well's 1984 novel was a genius because it said the government controls language, it has ultimate control. the '64 civil rights act bans discrimination on the basis of sex. the administration is saying sex is a synonym for gender identity. not true. the party of science ought to know that sex is a matter of chromosomes. and those advocating for transgender rights have been
saying for years that indeed it is a matter of sexual gender identity that is not the same as sex. so what is sinister here is the president saying the language of the law simply doesn't mean what it says. >> amy, you can't get an issue that will polarize people much more than this. the obama white house and their supporters are saying that this is the extension of a basic civil right, but the skeptics, the opponents, are saying you've got federal overreach, you've got washington going into the public school and saying, this is how your kids are going to have to live. it's a tough one. >> well, what's interesting is when we had the debate earlier, i guess, that was this week when it was over north carolina and you saw a lot of republicans kind of shying away from that fight, not getting as engaged in that battle. in many cases they didn't want to engage on a cultural war that they felt like was not a winner for them. when barack obama got involved in this then it became as much
about obama and overreach and the debate that we've been having now for the last few years about a president that they feel is just buy fiat doing these executive orders. what i feel that's happening right now rather than it being just cultural war dividing red and blue it's really once again the battle against barack obama. one thing i will say, though, the folks who are frustrated about the overreach don't think this is going away when barack obama is gone. when congress doesn't get anything done which they haven't in a long time, do you think they're going to handle this issue? absolutely not. that gives more power to the executive and the next president is going to do exactly what this president does until the legislature starts getting things done. >> we asked you for questions for the panel and we got a number from people who were opposed to this new white house order. paul sent this on facebook, what other social issues are out there for obama to overstep his authority? he is in year eight so i imagine this could get bad. brit, how do you answer paul?
>> i don't disagree really and i would say about what amy just said that while i understand the poi point, this isn't just about congress not dealing with this issue. this is an issue that came out of nowhere. it's not as if this has been before congress and congress has refused to act. in fact, congress has acted on this, as george pointed out in 1964 and you have to accept the idea of somebody's claimed gender over biological fact and as a practical matter how is this exactly going to work? what happens when a man with male parts decides that he is really a woman and would like to take a shower in the ladies locker room and there he is with his male parts exposed? now, is this really something that people are going to think is really okay in the name of -- in the name of civil rights? i don't think so. i think the absurdity of this is so strong that it's hard for me
to imagine that the public wouldn't be repulsed by it. >> but it's complex and amy is right, it's been politicized and so you can't really get down to the substance of it. >> but there is a substance of it. when you get the administration -- i mean, it's one thing to fight back against north carolina's law, but when you have the administration directing every public school district in america, this is what's going to go on in the bathroom and in the locker room, there is a substantial issue there. >> there is. and to lots of people it's an important civil rights issue and a lot of people advocates of this say it is the last civil right. but brit also has a point, practically how do you do this and how do you deal with it? happily i think it's something we can be optimistic about over the coming months and years, i think this will be worked out. >> i have a thought what the policy ought to be, don't ask,
don't tell and don't show. >> okay. let me -- i do want to switch because we have promised to talk about another subject to something that we can all agree on does involve the government and that is that the lines at airports are just too darn long and getting longer, sometimes as you can see here this week, more than an hour to clear check points and they're going to get even longer this summer. george, the tsa blames congress for -- well, wait a minute -- for cutting its staff. they have 4,000 fewer screeners than they had three years ago. the airports, some of them are under pressure to hire private screeners and everybody blames the airlines for making you pay a fee to check your bags which means more people take their bags through the checkpoint. >> the tsa, the tsa stands for transportation security, they
have found time to have officiated that and done security at 252 campaign rallies this year. have nothing to do with transportation security. every federal agency that files up says it does so because they don't have enough money. the irs said we got into monitoring conservatives and suppressing their speech because we were overwhelmed by new applications and we didn't have enough money, give us more money. the same thing is happening with this. first question is what are they doing at these rallies instead of being at the airports. this is another impetus for privatization, a number of airports a across the country are saying we're going to go to private screeners, contract this out and that's a net gain. >> do you know what i would love to see, instead of airports spending all this time and energy on the new beautiful restaurants and manicure places, reengineering the way that they do screening. it's not that complicated. so when the person takes their bag that has water in it or has keys or forgets that he put something else in there, that
person immediately gets pushed over to the side so other people can go through. it's not hard. reengineer the airport. >> do you have a solution, brit? i've got to imagine that you waiting in a line for an hour would be about as unpleasant as me waiting on a line for an hour. >> i went out to an office i guess it was downtown here and had a meeting with the tsa people, which is available to anyone, and i got this little tsa pre check number which means that i can more quickly go through the line. it would be good if a lot more people did that, that would make that line more crowded. >> we don't want to tell people about that line. >> but it would help. >> and i have it, too. anybody can get it, all you have to do is go to the tsa, thank you, panel, see you next sunday. up next our power player of the week, capitol hill's very own matchmaker. amazing sleep stays with you all day and all night.
congress is known as a rough and tumble place where these days not much gets done. but there's one office on capitol hill that's all about bringing people together. here is our power player of the wee week. >> it's instinct. you feel it. you know, you feel for people. it's a little like politics. >> charles schumer isn't talking about passing legislation, he's talking about his skill as a matchmaker. in three decades in congress there have been 13 what he likes to call schumer marriages. >> the positive spin on why there are all these schumer marriages is we are the closest
knit staff on the hill. of course, there is a negative spin which is he makes them work so hard they don't have time to meet anybody else. we have a bunch of dinners. >> sometimes schumer picks up on an office romance that's already blossomed, but he is not above setting things in motion. >> some of these people say you do more than get a little involved. they say you cajole, you peer, you nag. cajole, yes, pester, no. >> they met on schumer's first campaign for the senate in 1988. >> he was very happy and at that moment took ownership of it. >> i care about them. my staff is sort of like my second family. >> but that's not the end of it. as soon as a schumer couple gets married. >> i say anything new. >> meaning? >> any new off spring on the way? >> no. >> one of them took 11 years. 11 years, they finally had a kid just last year. bravo. >> scott and marla married in
2012. >> once you get married then when you see him every time it's, you know, when is there going to be a schumer baby. >> when we had our kids he was like the first call or the second call in the hospital. >> there are 14 schumer babies, which the senator says is proof positive congress is not completely dysfunctional. >> people hear about capitol hill and it's a mess and everyone is yelling and fighting. well, people are falling in love and establishing families. >> not surprisingly the senator's reputation has spread across capitol hill. >> schumer marriages are sort of known. i have gotten mothers particularly who have a son or daughter who is single saying, could you hire him, you know, maybe something good will happen. >> are you serious? >> yes. >> schumer says match making is not a criterion for who he hires, but he admits there are couples in his office he's working on right now. >> two that i didn't know, i found out in the last few months. >> and are you starting to cajole? >> i think people know that i
care about them and i want them to be happy. >> and if that's not enough of an endorsement, how about this. >> you never know. you can -- you can meet your future husband when i did working for senator schumer. >> one of schumer's daughters got married earlier this year while the senator doesn't take credit for that one, she did meet her husband working together at the white house. now this program note, be sure to tune in tuesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern for megyn kelly presents, a prime time special that includes her first sit-down with donald trump. that's on your local fox station. and that's it for today. have a great week. and we'll see you next "fox news sunday."
>> announcer: this program is a paid presentation for omega xl and is brought to you by great healthworks. ♪ on this episode of "larry king reports," we'll discuss the benefits of omega-3s in fighting chronic inflammation. we'll meet ken meares, the c.e.o. of great healthworks and creator of omega xl, and sharon mcquillan, m.d., an expert in clinical studies and research. we will learn about omega xl and how it can help to reduce joint pain and improve mobility on "larry king reports." >> welcome. i'm larry king, and i'm here today to report on a significant health-related investigation that's been ki