tv Shepard Smith Reporting FOX News September 24, 2018 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
lot of great people including president moon and we are -- over the next couple of days we are meeting with many countries tomorrow giving a big speech. i will be back on thursday and when i get back we're going to have a meeting. i spoke with rod today and we're going to have a meeting on thursday when i get back to the white house. i want to say the country, the united states as president moon pointed out when we first met, the united states is doing better economically than we have ever done before. the numbers are outstanding. new numbers will be released that i think will just continue this forward march and i think we have tremendous potential on the upside. i'm very excited about our new trade agreement and this is a brand new agreement. this is not an old one requinn. this irerewritten, this is a brd new agreement. i'm excited about that for the united states. i believe it's good for both countries. but the numbers that we're doing in the united states whether it be unemployment numbers or whether it be
employment numbers. we have right now, this moment, more people working in the united states than ever before in our history. that's some number, mike, right? and, you know, it's a number that people did not expect to see. it's got a number nobody thought would happen, certainly within two years. we are not even up to two years of the administration. so we have more people working in the united states today than we have ever had. our unemployment numbers are among the best they have ever had. for african-american it's the lowest we have ever had. for asian american, for hispanics, the lowest we have ever had. we're very proud of that on top of that we have many companies moving back into the united states. and in most cases it's back. they left and now they are coming back. they all want to be where the action is so i appreciate your kind words. but, our economy is the envy right now of the world. we're the fastest growing economy in the world.
think of it as large as we're, we are the fastest growing economy in the world up $10 trillion. so we're very proud of that thank you very much, everybody. [multiple reporters shouting questions] >> thank you very much, everybody. [laughter] >> trace: that's the president of the united nations, of course meeting moon jae-in. you heard the president say he plans to meet with the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who still has a job at least for the next few days. that's after reports that rosenstein was at the white house to either resign or get fired. the white house says discussed the recent news stories with rosenstein. that apparently includes the "new york times" report from last week that rosenstein suggested secretly recording the president and talked about using the 25th
amendment to remove the president from office for being unfit. the deputy attorney general denies all of this. the times report this happened in the spring of last year after president trump fired former fbi director james comey, which of course, led rosenstein to appoint special counsel robert mueller to take over the investigation. investigation into russian meddling in the american democracy and whether members of the trump campaign colluded with the kremlin. rosenstein overseesee mueller's investigation which president trump has repeatedly called a rigged witch-hunt. so if rosenstein steps down or loses his job, it would immediately affect the mueller probe. the chief white house correspondent john roberts is live for us at the united nations in manhattan. the president is in town, of course, for the general assembly. john, what are you hearing about the drama today? a lot of drama today surrounding the deputy attorney general? >> there was an extraordinary amount of drama surrounding the deputy attorney general rod
rosenstein when he was headed over to the white house for a prearranged meeting. this wasn't something that was suddenly called. we were told by sources familiar with rosenstein's thinking that he was believing that he would be fired when he went over to the white house. and so that sort of flew around the world as rumors do. although this one was based in fact because he thought that he was going to get fired. nothing of the sort happened. we heard the president just there say that he is going to have a meeting with him on thursday. i was interested to hear the president call him by his first name saying i will be meeting with rod on thursday, which, to me, suggests that the president isn't hang kerring to fire him. the president says he wants transparency. maybe what this is all about the president who had a conversation with rosenstein this morning just wants to sit down and say let's talk this through. what's this all about? what were you really thinking? how did all of this go down? we do know from the excellent reporting of our justice department producer jake gibb son that rosenstein was asked to come
over to the white house to meet with john kelly on friday. after that meeting rosenstein put out a much more forceful denial of the allegations in the "new york times" than he had up until that point. kelly and rosenstein, we're told, also talked about it over the weekend. at which the subject of potentially rosenstein resigning came up but nothing ever came of that. and then rosenstein went to the meeting today and now we know that the president is going to talk with him on thursday. if i were a betting man, looking at the body language of the president, i think that rosenstein survives. but, a lot could change between now and thursday. trace? >> trace: three days a s. an eternity, john. if rosenstein gets fired or resigns, what could happen with special counsel robert mueller? >> well, there is a line of succession at the department of justice, if the attorney general recuses himself or herself. it falls to the deputy and so on down the line. the number three position which would be next in line is an acting official right
now. the next person in line who is senate confirmed would be noah francisco. he is the solicitor general of the united states. he's a conservative lawyer, said to believe in broad presidential powers. no fan of james comey or the fbi. so he is the one who, if rod rosenstein were to be fired or were to resign would likely take over that investigation. but, if something happened where francisco was, let's say, promoted to deputy attorney general of the united states, then it would fall to a fellow named steve angle the assistant attorney general for the office of legal counsel, a bush administration alum. i think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves in talking about who might take over. because, again, i think if i know the president like i think i do, i think rosenstein's job is safe at least for now. >> trace: okay. roberts is with him staying. john roberts live at the united nations in new york. john, thank you. we should also note you missed the big headline there the south korean
president was meeting with president trump and president trump said he would, again, be meeting with north korean leader kim jong un. the location, the time, still yet to be worked out. for some context in all of, this where things stand and where they could be headed, let's bring in the chief political anchor of "special report" bret baier. i guess you heard it there, bret. john roberts is a definite, i they that rod rosenstein is staying if the president's body language and he did use his first name which tends to kind of think that they are on a little bit friendier terms than we would have thought about this morning. >> i'm with roberts. i think that rod rosenstein sticks around, actually. and i think that this -- you know, there may have been talk about offering a resignation or not, but, there is no indication that the white house is taking it. if it was offered or was talked about. i have heard all kinds of things. spiculation that thursday's meeting is to make -- to eventually line up rosen sometime to be attorney general. who knows where this goes?
but i think what you are seeing here is the evolution of what started out to be a big, big story this morning, that took a lot of oxygen out of the washington air. >> trace: bret, can i stop you right there? we have breaking news. please stand by because we will get your take on this afterwards we have the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell speaking on the senate floor about brett kavanaugh. watch. this democrats have signaled for months they would put on whatever performance the far left special interest demanded and throw all the mud, all the mud they could manufacture. well, it's not like they didn't warn us. but even by the far left's standards, this shameful, shameful smear campaign has hit a new low. i will get into the specifics in just a moment but i want to be perfectly clear about what has taken place.
senate democrats and their allies are trying to destroy a man's personal and professional life on the basis of decades old allegations that are unsubstantiated and uncorroborated. that mr. president, is where we are. this is what the so-called resistance has become. a smear campaign, pure and simple. aided and abetted by members of the united states senate. eight weeks ago democrats on the judiciary committee received a letter from dr. christine blasey ford with an uncorroborated allegation of misconduct. she had requested the matter be handled discreetly and confidentially.
the responsible next step would have been alerting the full committee so a confidential bipartisan investigation could begin. committee staff would have followed their standard practice for investigating background information. senators could have questioned judge kavanaugh in their meetings, or in closed session while respecting dr. ford's request for confidentiality. oh, but democrat didn't do any of that they sat on dr. ford's letter for seven weeks. seven weeks, kept it secret, they did nothing. bid their time. and then they threw professor ford's wishes overboard and leaked it, leaked it to the press. our colleague from delaware has himself indicated that either the ranking member's
office or the democratic committee staff likely leaked the document. as i have noted, we know the chain of custody of the left went through the democratic side of the judiciary committee. so, mr. president, does this sound like democratic senators take their responsibility wills seriously and want to get to the truth? or does it sound like a choreographed smear campaign that ignored dr. ford's request for confidentiality in order to inflick maximum damage, maximum damage at the last minute on judge kavanaugh and his family? this is an allegation of misconduct which all four supposed witnesses either flatly contradict or are unable to back up. in addition to judge
kavanaugh, the other three supposed witnesses have said they have, quote: no knowledge. no knowledge. no recollection. no recollection. and no memory of the alleged incident. it's not just one alleged witness disagreeing with the agencies allegations, it's literally every person who was supposedly there. one of those supposed witnesses says she does not even know judge kavanaugh. so, all the witnesses that dr. ford says were present at the party have told the committee on the record and under penalty of felony, under penalty of felony, all confirm they do not remember any such party, do not know judge kavanaugh, or have never seen him do anything
remotely, remotely like has been alleged. and this unsubstantiated allegation stands entirely at odds with everything we have heard about judge kavanaugh's character from those who have worked with him, socialized with him. dating all the way back to high school. but democrats wouldn't let a few inconvenient things like a complete lack of evidence or an accuser's request for confidentiality to get between them and a good smear it's despicable. and the contrast completely professional conduct of chairman grassley could not be starker. as soon as chairman grassley learned about this allegation, he handled it through proper channels. he immediately began gathering the facts. his office promptly
conducted a transcribed interview of judge kavanaugh in which, under penalty of felony, he unequivocally denied the last minute allegation. and the office received statements from all the other supposed witnesses that they either directly contradicted the story or denied knowing anything about it. what's more, chairman grassley ensured that dr. ford could be heard in a forum of her own choosing, either here or in california, either in public or in private, either with the staff or without the members. he has gone above and beyond to accommodate her requests. thanks to him we have a fair and open hearing scheduled for thursday. dr. ford will be able to state her allegation under oath and judge kavanaugh will be able to respond.
but the smear campaign didn't stop there. that was just act one. just act one. according to the reporter of this second allegation, the accuser, quote: came forward because senate democrats began looking and now they are calling for even further delays and further obstruction over a second decades old allegation that is so thin and so unsupported that the "new york times" refused to even run a story about it. this claim is so dubious that the "new york times" passed on the story entirely after looking into it. here is why the "new york times" declined to publish. quote: interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story and
could find no one, no one with first-hand knowledge. not one person with first-hand knowledge. to support the allegation. but, rather, multiple on the record denials. again. the timsz also reported that the claimant said she, herself, is uncertain of her claim. that's the "new york times" whose creed dough is all the news that's fit to print. it found this latest last-minute allegation not even fit to print. oh, but that hasn't stopped judiciary committee democrats from shoveling it to their smear campaign and demanding for further delays. they kept this one secret from republicans, too, by the way, evidently several
democratic offices knew of this allegation for at least a week but, like with dr. ford's claim, they sat on this one, too. so the committee could not take any proper action. they just wanted it to wind up in the press. another orchestrated last-minute hit on the nominee. and now they are acting like it's a legitimate reason to delay things -- to delay things each further. as though they hadn't already announced themselves as completely opposed to this nomination anyway. as if they hadn't promised the far left they would lead to bring this nomination down, whatever it took, whatever the cost. whatever it took, whatever the cost. let's put aside this last-minute unsubstantiated
smear. let's return to the facts. let's have a fair hearing on thursday. hear the facts that we do have. hundreds of men and women who have known brett kavanaugh across his life have written or spoken out that he is a man of strong character and tremendous integrity. numerous witnesses testified before the judiciary committee that he is a trusted mentor, a loyal friend, and a life-long champion of women. more than 75 women gathered last week to share their decades old knowledge of judge kavanaugh as a, quote: responsible guy who treats us with kindness and respect and a true gentleman in all aspects of his life. and separately, of course, it remains beyond reasonable ree dispute judge kavanaugh's legal excellence on the bench make him one of the very most qualified supreme court nominees in the history of our country.
all of these facts are quite clearly on one side. maybe that's why the democrats are so panicked. maybe that's why they are so willing to try to bring down this nominee. in the meantime a good and honorable man and his family are receiving death threats. there is the subject of smears and are facing senate democrats who say he has no presumption of innocence because they don't agree with his judicial philosophy. well, before the week is out, both judge kavanaugh and dr. ford will testify under oath before the judiciary committee. chairman grassley has made sure the facts will be heard. judge kavanaugh and the american people deserve nothing less and i want to make it perfectly clear, mr. president judge kavanaugh will be voted on here on the senate floor.
up or down. on the senate floor this fine nominee to the supreme court will receive a vote in this senate, in the near future. now on an entirely different matter, last week our efforts to restore regular propositions hit another milestone. the president signed into law our first appropriations package it will fund critical efforts in energy research and security, waterways and infrastructure projects and improving care at the v.a. >> trace: you see mitch mcconnell being very adamant saying this hearing will go on as scheduled on thursday. of course, on the flip side and we may hear from the senate minority leader chuck schumer any moment now but
dianne feinstein has already said that she wants this meeting, this hearing including christine blasey ford and brett kavanaugh to be delayed. let's bring back our chief political anchor bret baier. this is both sides, bret. we have protests going on capitol hill and it's clear that mitch mcconnell is saying, look, this thing needs to go forward. >> bret: trace, that's about as heat you had as the senate majority leader ever gets on the senate floor talking about this process and how he feels that brett kavanaugh has been mistreated by the action of senate democrats and holding the original allegation since back in july and now this other allegation for more than a week. detailing how the "new york times" wouldn't go forward with the story because they had no corroborating witness to this latest accuser. so we are in a different place here in washington ahead of this hearing on thursday, which is going to be, as you can see, heated and much watched.
>> trace: yeah. i know you and martha are going to be covering this thing. one ear on the road going on in the white house and one ear on the kavanaugh hearings. it's going to be a lot to cover. i'm struck by the fact that mcconnell was on there and he was talking about the smear campaign. that's the exact word damage that judge kavanaugh used in his letter this morning. very impassioned letter that he wrote saying, look, this is nothing more than a smear campaign. he ended up by saying the last-minute character assassination will not succeed. but, man, the guns are blaring and they are trying to get this thing derailed. >> bret: yeah. and the similarities to anita hill and the clarence thomas hearings are very clear. a lot of people draw those lines. we are at a different place where thee allegations surface in social media and online and they go around the world twice before they end up being responded to and the kavanaughs feel, i think, that they have been thrown under the bus here.
but republicans are standing up saying this is going forward. so, how this falls politically, we're going to have to wait and see, how voters read all of this chaos in washington, whether it's getting through and makes a difference coming mid terms. >> >> trace: i want to go full circle ascii, bret. we brought you on originally to talk about rod rosenstein the drama going on right now in washington and in new york because the president is up there at the united nations, the question you said earlier is you and john roberts both think that rod rosenstein stays put. he is the deputy attorney general going forward for at least the time being. what happens if you're wrong? what happens if he is out? what's the next step? how much backlash is there? >> bret: there's a lot of backlash. i think that's one of the reasons that i think john and i think the same thing that he stays on. the going sound from department of justice is that he is not going to resign. so, if he is leaving, is he going to be fired. and there is a distinction
there as far as whether someone is fired or they resign on their own. you know, the process would go forward. the mueller investigation would likely go forward. this next in line, the line of succession would find someone to fill that spot. but, right now, just talking to folks around washington, that's a dangerous prospect when you have bob mueller looking at obstruction of justice potentially as one of the items he is looking at. >> trace: and at the very least you have some republicans lastly, bret, saying you know, at least wait until this kavanaugh thing is ironed out. at least wait until there is a vote. do not do something while we have got all these eggs in the air. >> bret: yeah. senate judiciary has a few things they are working on right now. having to fill that slot with another seat likely is not high on their agenda. >> trace: it is, bret. they just gave us some more time because we killed a break. we have another minute or so
with you. i find it interesting, this hearing back to kavanaugh now, on thursday, it goes christine blasey ford and then brett kavanaugh, and do we have an idea of how this will go? is there going to be kind of a set minute schedule for this or is this going to be freewheeling and we see where it ends up? brett bret so we will hear more as we get closer. senator grassley said it's going to start at 10:00 a.m. and the first witness will be dr. christine blasey ford. now, the questioning, we don't know. there has been a lot of the talk up on capitol hill that the majority would want maybe even former senator kelly ayotte to do the questioning, which would be interesting. there has been a lot of push back from blasey ford's attorneys that they want senators themselves to ask those questions democrats have asked for that as well one would assume equal time
and both witnesses as they stand now dr. blasey ford and brett kavanaugh. >> trace: we shall see. bret baier we will see you tonight on "special report" 6:00 p.m. eastern. thank you, sir. >> thanks, trace. >> trace: more now on deputy attorney general's rod rosenstein's planned meeting with president trump on thursday. peter doocy live with us on capitol hill with more. hey, peter. >> trace, democrats are preparing emergency hearings just in case rod rosenstein winds up not being in his job number two at the justice department. number one overseeing the russia probe. the top democrat on the oversight committee elijah cummings says this mr. rosenstein's removal would plunge our nation into unchartered territory and pose a serious and profound threat to the continued work of the special counsel. and i had would expect the american people to be outraged if president trump's extended campaign to interfere with this investigation results in mr. rosenstein's ouster.
here on the senate side, another democrat, senator patrick leahy, democrat from vermont says this: saturday night massacres don't need to happen on a saturday. if president trump fires deputy attorney general rod rosenstein or forces his resignation, he will come one giant leap closer to directly meddling with the special counsel's russia investigation. amend that is the big concern among lawmakers about rosenstein leaving. just out impact that it would have on the mullen probe. trace? >> trace: and republicans, peter, what do they say? >> not a whole lot yet we did here in mark meadows, part of his statement says this: under rod rosenstein and jeff sessions the department of justice has had just as much transparency problem as it did under eric holder and loretta lynch the bar for which is extremely low. this is disastrous and it needs to end now. meadows is one of the only
republicans to have commented on this so far in addition to mitch mcconnell who you just heard from. however, others in the president's party have been making their position known for a long time. >> mr. president. >> go ahead. >> you are watching, i think you are going to be fine unless you screw this up. let the process play out. i don't believe you colluded with the russians but mueller will soon tell us. >> and, again, most lawmakers that we talked to say they just need to know more about what exactly rosenstein might do what exactly the president might do or what's already happened before they make up their minds. trace? >> trace: a lot of jugs gling going on. peter doocy live for us in d.c. peter, thank you. lawmakers reacting to the drama surrounding supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. you will hear both sides of this issue and there are two dramatic stories on each side. that's next. ♪ ♪ oh!
oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes,
or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.
>> trace: continuing coverage. i mentioned the brett kavanaugh dates back to first year at yale university back in the early 1980, debra ramirez who was also a freshman at the time says that kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a party where they had both been drinking, kavanaugh says that never happened. he also denied the earlier claim from christine blasey ford. she says kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party when they were in high school. president trump says he is sticking by his supreme court pick. >> being one of the single unfair unjust things to happen for a candidate for anything. i am with judge kavanaugh. in my opinion it's totally political totally political. >> trace: some republicans also defending kavanaugh. they say these claims are a partisan attack from democrats and they are calling for the confirmation process to continue. but the top democrat on the senate judiciary committee
dianne feinstein of california says the committee should postpone action on kavanaugh's nomination and just minutes ago we got a look at a letter christine blasey ford wrote to the senate judiciary committee about her claims against kavanaugh chief congressional candidate is on capitol hill. >> senator a letter to over the weekend. in it she wrote quote while i am frightened, please know my fear will not hold me back from testifying and you will be provided with answers to all of your questions. i ask for fair and respectful treatment. as you mentioned, the judiciary top democrat senator dianne feinstein is calling for a delay saying, quote: i am writing to request an immediate postponement to any further proceedings of the nomination of brett kavanaugh. i also ask that the newest allegations of sexual misconducted be referred to the fbi for investigation and that you join our request for the white house
to direct the fbi to investigate the allegations of christine blasey ford as well as these new claims. now, another judiciary democrat fired back at republicans who are saying this is a lot of politics. >> this is parted of their narrative this is all politically motivated. they cannot get to the idea that this investigation needs to occur. they cannot get their arms around the fact that women do not make these things up and they just want to obfuscate that by calling it politically motivated. >> trace: seems more likely at this stage we are heading for a hearing on thursday and not a new fbi probe. trace? >> trace: mike, what about brett kavanaugh? what is he saying to leaders of the senate judiciary committee? >> well, judge kavanaugh is calling this a smear. he says this is an effort to stop his consideration from receiving a confirmation vote. he wrote earlier today, quote: these are smears, pure and simple and they debase our public discourse but they are also a threat
to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country. such grotesque and character assassination if allowed to proceed will dissuade competent people from service. nature lindsey graham says he is willing to listen to professor ford on thursday. >> i feel sorry for her. i think she is being used here. people in my view are using her. if she truly wanted to be noms, the person who brought this accusation to the public owes her an apology i will do the following listen to her and make a decision. >> graham and other republicans say they want a vote soon after the hearing. trace? >> mike emanuel live for us on capitol hill. mike, thank you. let's bring in david hocking former senior editor for role call. david, i'm not sure if you heard mike there but mitch mcconnell, mike emanuel and brett kavanaugh when they both talked about this look, the phrase smear campaign is being thrown around a lot. that seems to be the
operative phrase here for republicans. now big a deal is this second accusation whether it's corroborated or not? how big is this when it comes down to this nomination and confirmation process. >> it doesn't seem to be a big enough deal yet because it has not been corroborated. i think what we're seeing this afternoon is a reflection of sort of one of the first rules in politics. if you have got the votes, you want to vote. and if you don't have the votes, you don't want to vote. what brett kavanaugh said in his letter this afternoon i'm not backing down. i'm not going to drop out of this. i'm in it to win it. and mitch mcconnell with very similar language about smear campaign pure and simple coming to the senate floor saying we are plowing ahead with this. they seem to think that all of the drama aside, all of these very important allegations and all of their commitment to listen to dr. blasey ford and take her seriously, all that aside, they think they have the votes to get this through, at least for now and they
want to signal to any wavering republicans you better stick with us because, really, just to remember, the republicans have just one vote to spare, they can lose one of their own republican senators and only one and still get brett kavanaugh confirmed to the supreme court without the help of democrats. >> trace: you could lecture us on journalism for a long time going back to the clarence thomas and anita hill hearings and there is no -- you were a senior statesman of this. what i want to say is what do you think journal liz journalistically the "new york times" wouldn't go with this story because they couldn't corroborate it. the new yorker said there were grumblings and people said they heard it happened in the days following. what do you think of that journalistically? >> well, i think it's fascinating the new yorker and "new york times" shared a pulitzer prize of the me too movement of harvey
weinstein of incredible reporting that has elevated the whole discussion about sexual assault, abuse and harassment. the fact they went down these two different roads i find fascinating. with a little bit of irony have you got to note that the "new york times" is a favorite whipping boy of president trump sometimes mitch mcconnell. they like to talk down about the "new york times." now, interestingly, they sort of raising the "new york times" as journalistic judgment as something to support them. interesting moment. >> trace: it is interesting. we have drawn parallels. as thursday comes about, what do you expect to see? i only have about 30 seconds. what do you expect to see on thursday? what's your take away. >> my take away it is going to be similar in some ways to the clarence thomas and
anita hill. learn 27 years ago. i do think in the end they will turn over most of their questioning on the republican side to a woman lawyer. maybe kelly ayotte as one of your reporters said before. strange they have six female republican senators none of them on the judiciary committee. the democrats have four of their female senators on this committee. you know, it's going to be incredibly tense. every word will be parsed with incredible precision. and then in the end, the country is really going to have just a few days, it looks like, to make up their mind who they believe. and unless, jeff flake, one of the four senators who really could stray from this who is on the committee, he would be the most important person to watch because he is -- he is the wavering senator who is on the committee. >> trace: david hockings former senior editor of "roll call."
thank you. >> thank you. >> trace: more ahead on row rod rosenstein including comments from the former fbi deputy director andrew mccabe who lost his job for lying to investigators next. you're headed down the highway when the guy in front slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them.
for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ >> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. with pro-skin technology. for two times faster absorption. so you can have worry free nights, and wake up feeling fresh and free. for a free sample visit tena.us and free. if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting.
tracy trace back now to fox top story deputy attorney general rod rosenstein's job appears to be safe, at least for now. after conflicting reports that rosenstein was on his way out the door and had even possibly already resigned. president trump says he will meet with rosenstein on thursday when the president is back in washington. the white house says the two men have talked about recent news stories, the "new york times" reported last week that rosenstein discussed secretly recording the president and then using the 25th amendment to remove him from office. rosenstein called that report factually incorrect. he oversees the special counsel's russia investigation and some lawmakers say they are concerned about what could happen if rosenstein leaves. let's bring in the chief
intelligence correspondent catherine herridge. she is live for us in washington. catherine, you are hearing the white house has reservations beyond that "new york times" article. >> well, trace, a source familiar with white house discussions over the weekend tells fox news that they focus on whether rosenstein was, quote: compromised based on what they describe as multiple conflicts of interest. rosenstein is a likely witness in any obstruction of justice case against the president over the firing of fbi director james comey because rosenstein drafted the memo upon which the firing was based. rosenstein also sign you had the final surveillance warrant for trump campaign aide carter page and is a witness in the inspector general's review. rosenstein also figures in the so-called mccabe memos drafted by comey's deputy where he allegedly discussed wearing the wire. and we're told there is a renewed focus by the president's advisors on rosenstein's decision to appoint robert mueller as special counsel in mid may 2017, shortly after mueller interviewed with the president to be comey's replacement as fbi director.
mueller, as you know, was fbi director for 12 years under presidents bush and obama. special counsel investigation based on what our contacts are saying is really very well established and if rosenstein left, it would certainly create sort of a bump in the road, if you will, but, the solicitor general would be the next person in line or someone else that the president has seen appointed and confirmed by the senate, trace. >> trace: and, catherine, former fbi director andrew mccabe, deputy director i should say has now weighed. >> in the "new york times" report fry that i can rosenstein discussed wearing a wire and invoking the 25th amendment anonymous sources and memos drafted by former fbi director andrew mccabe. important to note for folks at home that mccabe was will fired from the fbi about leaks on the clinton foundation before the presidential election. today in a statement his spokeswoman said there is
nothing more important to the integrity to law enforcement and the rule of law than protecting the investigation of special counsel mueller. i sacrificed personally and professionally to help with the investigation on a proper course and subsequently made every effort to protect it. to be clear, i had no role in providing information of any kind to the media stories about events following director comey's firing. if the rumors of deputy ag or the attorney general rosenstein's departure are true, i'm deeply concerned that it puts that investigation at risk, that statement came out just before we had confirmation that rosenstein was staying in his job and that that meeting was confirmed for thursday, trace. >> trace: catherine herridge live for us in d.c. catherine, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> trace: we should note we have just gotten word that apparently martha maccallum will interview judge brett kavanaugh and his wife ashley. when will that take place do we know, ryan? today, on the story. we have more details on that
when we come in. i want to bring in troy slaten. he is here defense attorney to specializes in constitutional law. the idea that even if it was sarcasm, the "new york times" story some in the room say when he said he was going to secretly record the president sarcastic not a good thing to joke about if you are in the room regardless. >> not good thing to do especially if you are a potential witness in the mueller investigation using that as evidence, the president can, if he wants to, fire deputy attorney general rod rosen stein. he could do it for that reason, or can he do it for no reason at all. he has that plenary of authority. it wouldn't look good politically to be taking that action right now. >> we have had a couple of our senior people weigh, in bret baier and john roberts. they have covered this put. they know him. they both think rod rosenstein's job for enough to is safe and he will not be fired on thursday. does that make sense to you. >> it does there was reporting this morning that he was going to be fired on
his way to the white house. that didn't happen. he is going back tore another meeting on thursday. i think the president really wants to gets to the bottom of this. there is no love lost between the president and deputy attorney general rosenstein. and the president can, if he wants, to, if he fires rosenstein, put in whoever he wants into that second position toe justice department who has already been confirmed by the senate. >> trace: which is why i'm unclear, francisco would be the assistant attorney general. >> number three. >> trace: he would take over that position temporarily until mr. trump nominates somebody. >> that's what -- so there is the presidential vacancies act. >> trace: okay. >> which states that the next in line goes. each department puts in their order of succession at the justice department, that's the slitter general, but, the president doesn't have to follow that the president could place anyone that he wants, who has been confirmed by the senate,
into that position. >> trace: hard to argue obstruction when the president has power to fire rod rosenstein because he deserves at the pleasure of the president. >> that's what professor dershowitz says and i agree the president cannot by definition commit obstruction of justice by exercising the powers granted to him under the constitution. >> trace: troy slayton we have to go. thank you for being here. >> thanks for having me. >> trace: we'll be right back. va home loan benefit that lets you refinance up to 100 percent of your home's value. so, if you're a veteran and need cash, calling newday usa could be one of the best decisions you'll ever make. call 1-877-423-5758