Mukasey on impact of email scandal on Clinton's campaign; Huckabee talks Iran nuclear deal

This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," August 23, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SHANNON BREAM, GUEST ANCHOR: I'm Shannon Bream, in for Chris Wallace.

The controversy over Hillary Clinton's emails grows. Can her presidential campaign recover?


HILLARY CLINTON, DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In retrospect, this didn't turn out to be convenient at all.

BREAM: We'll talk to one of Clinton's biggest critic, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey about the investigation.

Plus --

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS: Did you wipe the server?

CLINTON: What, with a cloth or something?

I recently launched a Snapchat account.


I love it. Those messages disappear all by themselves.


BREAM: Is the former secretary of state taking the investigation seriously?

We'll sit down with former Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, a Clinton supporter and friend.

Then, new poll numbers suggest an opening for Vice President Joe Biden. What it would mean to Hillary? We'll talk to Josh Alcorn, a senior adviser with Draft Biden 2016 and a close family friend.

Plus, where does the Iran nuclear deal stand? We'll sit with Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee who just met with the deal's biggest critic, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

And --

DONALD TRUMP, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I'd like to have the election tomorrow. I don't want to wait.

BREAM: Donald Trump attracts 30,000 to a football stadium in Alabama. Is he now the man to beat? We'll ask our Sunday panel.

And a fight over government funding for Planned Parenthood after a new video draws outraged.

All, right now, on "Fox News Sunday."


BREAM: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.

We begin with exciting news here in D.C., something everyone in this divided town can actually agree on.

The National Zoo's giant panda Mei Xiang had two panda cubs yesterday. She delivered the first cub in the afternoon, but the surprise second cub came just after 10:00 last night.


LAURIE THOMPSON, NATIONAL ZOO: We've developed a bunch of strategies to be able to swap the cubs, but it's ultimately up Mei Xiang and how cooperative she is with us and the whole swapping process, because obviously, these are her cubs and she's not keen on us taking them from her.


BREAM: The cub's big sister Bao Bao who was our power player last year celebrates her second birthday today.

And now to new information about Hillary Clinton's use of a private server while serving as secretary of state. More than 300 of her e-mails have been flagged for potential classified content. We've also learned Ms. Clinton's BlackBerry was not government issued and, therefore, not government encrypted.

What does the controversy mean for her presidential campaign?

We'll get to my interview with former Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, a close friend and supporter of Hillary Clinton, and Josh Alcorn a senior adviser to Draft Biden 2016, in just a minute.

But, first, joining me is one of the Clinton's toughest critics, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W. Bush and is an advisor on national security matters on the Jeb Bush campaign.

Welcome today, sir. Good to see you.


BREAM: OK. Let's start -- the Clinton camp says that this is all sort of mischaracterization of the facts. We heard from her press secretary Brian Fallon this week. Here's what he said.


BRIAN FALLON, CLINTON CAMPAIGN SPOKESMAN: What's going on here is something that happens all the time. You have a bureaucratic tangle over what counts as classified and what doesn't.


BREAM: And he says that everyone agrees that the definition of classified is flexible. So, is this nothing more than a political witch hunt?

MUKASEY: No, it is not a political witch hunt. And so far as definitions of what's classified and what's not, obviously, at the margins, there are some things that may or may not be classified, but we're talking about information that went to the secretary of state, who is the highest foreign relations officer of the United States. It's inconceivable to me that a great deal of that was not classified. And that's something we're going to have to find out when we find out what was on the server.

BREAM: You have speculated that there are a number of potential legal charges she could be facing, including felony charges under the same federal statute that swept up General David Petraeus. That one would require some knowingness, that she knowingly removed such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.

Here is what she said about this in Las Vegas on Tuesday.


CLINTON: Whether it was a personal account or a government account, I did not send classified material and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified, which is the way you know whether something is.


BREAM: OK. So, she says it was never marked classified. If not, could she be -- meet the requirements that a prosecutor would have to fulfill for knowingly violating some of these laws?

MUKASEY: Sure, because the statute protects information. It doesn't protect documents simply that are stamped or not stamped. That's not the determining factor.

The determining factor is the information and the question, as you point out, is what she knew about what was on those e-mails that she sent and that she received and what she did with respect to them.

BREAM: OK. Her camp points out that the FBI is investigating the security of the devices that contained information and who may have transferred classified information on or off her private server. They say the investigation is not about her.

For some, that sounds like splitting legal hairs, but is it accurate to say that this investigation of the FBI is not about her and may not impact her personally?

MUKASEY: It may not impact her personally eventually, if it comes -- if it comes to show that she didn't know what was on the server. But to say that the investigation is not of someone personally is ridiculous. The FBI does not investigate machines. It investigates people. And she's certainly one of the people who's being investigated.

BREAM: OK. Her attorney says that she followed the preservation ideas, the letter of the law, the spirit of the law also by couching her e-mail queries with the email of other State Department employees, knowing that they would be secured and preserved in the process of their government email server. Does that solve her problem?

MUKASEY: No. It doesn't end the fact that information was removed and put in an unauthorized place. The fact that you happen to have put it also in an authorized place does not change that. That's number one.

But number two, what about her communications with people who were not on, her communications with foreign leaders, with people in foreign governments, with people in the United States government who may have been communicating outside the system?

BREAM: OK. What does it say to you, we have reports now that close confidants of the former secretary, Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills, will be speaking, will be interviewed by the Benghazi committee, we're told at least by one very reliable source, September 3rd and 4th.

What do you make of that?

MUKASEY: Well, they will obviously be disclosing what it is that they know about how documents were selected for production. They will talk about their own documents that I gather appear in this cache of documents that have so far been identified and presumably they can talk about what Secretary Clinton either knew or didn't know or directed.

BREAM: The State Department has said it has no record of her signing this form OF-109, saying it's an optional form and it would essentially certify that she had turned overall important classified information. If she didn't sign it, does that alleviate her of some of the potential liability?

MUKASEY: Well, perhaps one piece of potential liability that might arise from making a false statement on the document. Obviously, if she didn't sign it, she cannot have made a false statement on the document.

On the other hand, she did, I believe, sign a statement to the court within the last week or two, saying that she had turned overall the information. That was done, as I understand it, on penalty of perjury. So, that one is still very much alive.

BREAM: What's your confidence level on the Justice Department, the FBI's ability to investigate this thoroughly?

MUKASEY: My confidence level in both the Justice Department investigation and the FBI is very high. The unit within the Justice Department that's investigating this is the National Security Division. That has always been an outstanding division since it was stood up recently and I know the person who heads it, John Carlin, who's a superb civil servant. In fact they were the people who handled the Petraeus investigation. So, I have no doubt that they will handle it properly.

The FBI, of course, is the premiere investigative agency within the United States that handles civilian investigations. And they can certainly be relied on. They have a long tradition of independence and of integrity.

BREAM: Former attorney general and judge, Michael Mukasey, thank you, sir, for joining us today.

MUKASEY: Thanks for having me.

BREAM: All right. Joining us now from San Francisco, former Democratic Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, a close friend and supporter of Hillary Clinton, who also worked under her at the State Department, and was an early backer of Ready for Hillary.

Congresswoman, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."


BREAM: OK. Let's talk about some of what we discussed with the former attorney general, this idea of federal statutes that have swept up some very important people.

Former CIA Director John Deutsch was investigated under the same law as was General David Petraeus, for keeping classified material on a government-owned computer at his house. The CIA has said, the inspector general, that the computer was designated only for use with only unclassified material and referred this investigation to the DOJ. Reportedly, Mr. Deutsch was in talks for a plea deal when he was pardoned by then-President Clinton. Obviously, that was a good deal for him in the end. General Petraeus a different end. And he narrowly avoided jail, but two years probation, $100,000 fine.

How is -- how are those cases different than Mrs. Clinton's?

TAUSCHER: Well, they're completely different. You're talking about classified information.

I mean, I think part of the problem we have here -- and by the way, you know, I think that former Attorney General Mukasey did a very good job as an advisor to Jeb Bush just now, but I was embarrassed by his complete lack of understanding of the Federal Records Act, the low side and high side, classified/unclassified systems at the State Department and, you know, going way out there and talking about things like the Espionage Act and perjury when this is not a criminal investigation.

This is about the low side computer system at the State Department which is unsecure which only carries unclassified e-mails. That's what we're talking about. And to some extent, we're talking about whether some e-mails, some people in the intelligence community and some people in the State Department differ on whether they should be classified one way or the other.

But what is clear is that while she was secretary, Hillary Clinton did not receive on her unclassified, unsecure e-mail system, the same as the dot-gov system at the state department anything that said header/footer that it was classified.

So, you know, we can quibble about whether things should be reclassified as they go out to the public, but there is no question all of the classified e-mails that Hillary Clinton used, saw and supervised as secretary are on the classified server. There's no question about that.

So, this idea that we're spinning everybody up about perjury and talking about previous cases between John Deutsche and Dave Petraeus, it's just dancing on the head of a pin, and frankly, partisan politics.

BREAM: What do you make of the "Reuters" report that came out? A nonpartisan, mainstream news organization, people would agree on that. They say that by their estimation, at least 30 e-mail streams involved information that was foreign government information. By its nature, it would be classified, presumed as such.

Former director of the U.S. government's information security oversight office, J. William Leonard, called that kind of information, quote, "born classified."

As secretary of state, shouldn't Mrs. Clinton have known that?

TAUSCHER: Look, Secretary Clinton has former foreign service officers, civil servants. I did as undersecretary too, that make sure all of this information is protected. It is physically impossible to move things from the classified system to the unclassified system.

We are only talking about the classified system, unclassified system. Everything on the classified system is where it belongs and there is no question about that. The Federal Records Act makes very clear that the person that transmits the information is responsible for the classified -- classification of the information.

And is it possible that Secretary Clinton was passed something by somebody and somebody and somebody? Yes. That would have been true if it had been on the state dot-gov e-mail system. But I mean, I think that we all understand that Hillary Clinton is held to a different standard. But let's get it straight. Let's be lawful and let's be smart about this.

We're talking about unclassified e-mails. We're not talking about classified e-mails, we're talking about unclassified e-mails and they are clearly subject to what people interpret.


TAUSCHER: And there are differences between the State Department and the intelligence community right now.

BREAM: There are, because there are at least two nonpartisan, again, neutral inspectors general who have pointed out that they believe there was classified information, enough that they referred it to the DOJ for investigation.

One of the e-mails that's come to light involves Huma Abedin, obviously, a very close associate and adviser to the former first lady, forwarding a note from an aide to former British foreign minister, David Milliband, saying, didn't want to go through the system, didn't want to go by the channels, wanted it to be seen by the secretary only. It talks about information in Afghanistan. It is five pages, all five pages of redacted. That is classified information at least per some concerns.

We also have a judge who was appointed by then-President Clinton, Judge Emmet Sullivan, and he said this about Mrs. Clinton during a heated hearing on Thursday. He said, quote, "We wouldn't be here today if this employee had followed government policy."

So, does she have herself to blame for being in this position?

TAUSCHER: Look, Secretary Clinton has made it very clear that what was done for convenience has become anything but convenient, and in hindsight, some mistakes were made. But let's face it, Secretary Clinton is not someone who takes her national security responsibilities lightly and has done a fabulous job as secretary and as a senator, making sure that she's done everything she can to keep America safe.

So I think what's really important here is that if we're going to cherry pick, let's stay with the cherry tree. You talked about what Judge Sullivan said. Judge Sullivan's extraneous remark was about something completely different and it was about something going on with somebody else, an employee. And so, it has really nothing to do with what is going on right now.

BREAM: At the end of the day, it does have to do with the former secretary's use of a personal e-mail server, not just a personal e-mail address, unprecedented and now under investigation.

TAUSCHER: It is not unprecedented. Shannon --

BREAM: The use of a former --

TAUSCHER: -- Shannon, you know that every previous secretary --


BREAM: They may have used private e-mails, they did not have private servers that were housed in their home --

TAUSCHER: No, no, no!

BREAM: -- and out of the control of the government, containing potentially classified information. That is unprecedented.

TAUSCHER: Everybody knows that four previous secretaries had private e-mail addresses, including one current cabinet secretary.

BREAM: Right. And addresses are different that private servers. That we can agree on.

TAUSCHER: I don't know why you are splitting that hair, because unsecured is unsecured. The current unclassified low site system at the State Department is unsecured. And lots of people, including people from the archivists office have said there is no difference between the way Secretary Clinton handled these e-mails and if they had been on the system.

BREAM: Well --

TAUSCHER: So, let's keep this about what it should be about. Where are the classified e-mails? On the classified server. That's the treasure of the American national security system.

BREAM: All right. Well --

TAUSCHER: All of this is really a distraction.

BREAM: The FBI now has possession of the personal server and we will allow their investigation to go where it does.

TAUSCHER: Exactly.

BREAM: And we'll see.

All right. Former Congressman, thank you.

TAUSCHER: Exactly.

BREAM: Thank you for joining us. We appreciate it.

TAUSCHER: No, thank you so much.

BREAM: All right. As the Clinton controversy grows, is there an opening now for Vice President Joe Biden to launch a campaign?

A new Quinnipiac University survey shows Biden is performing as well or better than Hillary Clinton in hypothetical head-to-head matchups in key swing states. Biden has spent the summer in seclusion following the death of his son, Beau. He's reportedly been deciding whether he has enough money and support to launch a campaign. Yesterday, he met with Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and he is expected to make a decision very soon.

Joining us now, Josh Alcorn, a close friend of the Bidens and senior adviser for Draft Biden 2016, a super PAC hoping to get the vice president into the race.

Josh, good to see you.

JOSH ALCORN, DRAFT BIDEN 2016 ADVISER: Great to be here. Thank you, Shannon.

BREAM: All right. You have said, quote, "This isn't about Hillary Clinton." But given why we just talked about, why not? Would the vice president be considering this if there wasn't this opening, potentially a lot of trouble for her campaign?

ALCORN: Well, I'll say it again, this isn't about anybody currently in the Democratic primary race. This is really about Joe Biden.

Look, he's run for president before. He knows the process he has to go through. He knows that the American people I think are looking for authenticity in their presidential candidates this year. And that's Joe Biden. He's the original authentic candidate.

BREAM: OK. You know you're starting at a disadvantage with some key things you need to succeed here, money. When you put together Hillary Clinton's campaign and outside groups are supporting her, she's got about $70 million reportedly backing her. Bernie Sanders has done a lot of various surprising fund-raising as well.

So, you start from zero and at first debate is only a few weeks away. How do you get up to speed?

ALCORN: Well, that's the great thing about Draft Biden is we've been around since March and we have a grassroots list of 200,000 people that's growing every day. So, we may not have the financial resources, but we certainly have a groundswell of support. I've traveled the country over the last three weeks talking to potential supporters, to donors, to activists, and they're enthusiastic to see Joe Biden in this race.

BREAM: OK. What's your timeline? First debate on the DNC side is October 13th.

ALCORN: Yes, I mean, I think the vice president, having him on that debate stage is an important -- is an important part of the campaign. And so, his decision will be what his decision is, and his timeline will be what his timeline is. It's not my job to speculate on that.

But having him on that debate stage will be important.

BREAM: OK. So, yesterday, on a train from New York to D.C., we picked up a very important passenger in Wilmington.


BREAM: So, I see the vice president -- we thought he was going to be in Wilmington for the weekend -- I see with my own eyes he's going to be on D.C. Our White House producer was on a plane with Elizabeth Warren, the senator, from Boston to D.C. They both arrive and we find out they're meeting.

ALCORN: That's true. Yes.

BREAM: What was that all about?

ALCORN: I mean, I don't know what they talked about. What I do know is that the vice president has his core inner circle of people. And over the last couple of weeks we've seen reported on this channel and other outlets that he's expanding outside of that small circle of advisers and family. He's sounding out people in early states, activists, potential supporters. He's talking to someone like Elizabeth Warren who's got I think important, incredible ideas on how to make the economy work for everyone.

And I think it's no surprise that he would want to talk to somebody like that. I mean, Joe Biden has been fighting for the middle class for his entire elective career. And talking with her I think is just another way to get more ideas.

BREAM: Well, of course, it raises speculation on whether they would join forces on a ticket, Biden-Warren 2016?

ALCORN: You'll have to let the vice president talk about that. I'm not here to speculate on his actual campaign.

BREAM: OK. So let's talk about a few things that are potential critiques for him not getting in the race. I'm going to get your response.

His age, he would be the oldest incoming president in history at 74 on Inauguration Day.

ALCORN: I don't think that's an issue at all. I mean, just look at Joe Biden. He's the kind of guy who -- I mean, when I was on his campaign in 2008, we had to block time out every morning for the gym. I mean, he's there every day. What you have with Joe Biden is a guy that feeds off of the energy of the people around him. So, I don't think age is an issue at all.

BREAM: OK. Over in the GOP side, the people who are doing the best are these outsiders, non-politicians, Washington outsiders. He's been here for decades.

So, how does he address that concern?

ALCORN: Well, I don't think that the people on the Republican side are doing well because they're outsiders. I think there's the sense in the American electorate now that they want a candidate who can look them in the eye, tell them what he thinks or she thinks the issues of the day are and what they would do to move our country forward. That's Joe Biden. He's been doing that for years.

BREAM: OK, he lost in 1988 and 2008 in his presidential runs. What would be different this time around?

ALCORN: Again, I mean, I think it's what people are looking for. President Obama in 2008 won because he was kind of the -- he embodied what the American electorate wanted, which was change, which was moving forward. I think Biden has that -- the vice president has that now.

BREAM: OK. Let's talk about some polling that has been very good for him. He's not even in the race and showing double digits in some important states like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania.

Let's talk about Ohio. Obviously, usually a bellwether for presidential elections. There when you look at trustworthiness, the numbers show people, 59 percent, think he's trustworthy and that's in contrast to 60 percent who do not think Secretary Clinton is trustworthy. He also does well there when you go on head to head matchups. He beats Donald Trump there by ten points and other top contenders more narrowly but he does come in over Jeb Bush by 3 points and Marco Rubio as well, he leads him by a couple of points in that very important state as well.

So, is that added incentive, these poll numbers, for him to get in?

ALCORN: Yes, I mean, I don't want to go, you know, down this polling number line here. Early polls this early out are incredibly unreliable.

I think what's important here is that the folks that have gone to and signed our petition to want to see Joe Biden in the race, they want to see Joe Biden in the race. They're in Florida. They're in Ohio. They're in South Carolina. They're all over the country.

And that's really what matters is the folks who want to see him in this race.

BREAM: Speaking of which, we've heard stories that his late son, Beau, wanted to see him run, was encouraged. You are a close friend of the family and worked very closely with Beau as well.


BREAM: Do you feel that the vice president has had sufficient time to grieve? Because you know a presidential campaign is so grueling. And do you think that he would be pressed into service, as it were, by anything that he heard from Beau before his death?

ALCORN: I know Beau wanted his dad to be president. I know that he wanted that in 1988 and he wanted that in 2008. I think that the vice president, the Biden family generally has seen, has had a firsthand -- had a firsthand view of what it takes to be president and the strains that puts on your family.

I think the vice president is, you know, weighing that as part of his deliberative process.

BREAM: Well, we hope you'll keep us up to date.

ALCORN: Sure will.

BREAM: The time is closing on us fast.

Josh Alcorn, great to see you today. Thanks for coming in.

ALCORN: Thanks for having me.

BREAM: All right. Up next, our Sunday group joins the conversation on Hillary's e-mail scandal and what a Joe Biden run could mean for her presidential hopes.

Plus, Donald Trump is drawing record crowds. Does he have staying power after all?



TRUMP: Here's a simple question: Who would you rather have negotiating with China, Japan, Mexico, any of them -- Trump or Bush?


BREAM: Hmm, Donald Trump speaking to tens of thousands of supporters in Mobile, Alabama, this week, the largest gathering we think so far of the presidential campaign.

It's time now for our summer group: Kimberley Strassel from The Wall Street Journal, Peter Baker, who covers the White House for The New York Times, Robert Costa of The Washington Post, and Fox News political analyst Juan Williams.

All right. Donald Trump, Juan, it looks like he's sticking around.

JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: I think he's going to be around. I was impressed. I think Bob was at the event in Alabama, so we'll hear more in a moment.

But it seems to me that Trump is the surprise that keeps on giving in this summer of Trump. I thought he'd be gone by now, but he has resisted this time and again. And at this moment, you have Jeb Bush having to react to Donald Trump in a way that to me is very surprising, you know, saying Trump is not a conservative, trying to appeal to conservatives, but clearly, Jeb Bush worried that the donor class is getting anxious at this point at his failure to engage Trump or slow Trump.

BREAM: Well, Bob, I'm interested, because you were there. Listen, I knew things were different when he threw NASCAR under the bus in Alabama, Mobile, Alabama, and got cheers for doing it. These people siding with Trump over NASCAR in Mobile?

ROBERT COSTA, THE WASHINGTON POST: It was quite a moment to be there on a hot, sweaty Friday night in Mobile, Alabama. Trump comes out to "Sweet Home Alabama," the crowd roars.

This was not just a political moment, it was a cultural moment. But there was a significant political thing that happened. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, a real favorite of the hard right, the immigration border hawks, he came out and put on a "Make America Great Again" hat. Didn't endorse Trump, but to have a sitting U.S. senator with the businessman says a lot.

BREAM: Yes, an extremely popular one, who helped him write his immigration plan, helped him draft it.

Peter, what do you make of what the rest of the GOP field needs to do? I mean, clearly, there's something being tapped into that's anti-Washington anti-establishment. We see with Trump, Dr. Carson, Carly Fiorina, outside politician people are moving up in the polls.

How do others like, you know, Juan mentioned, Jeb Bush, harness that?

PETER BAKER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Right. Well, you're left with two choices, right -- either you run with it, like Ted Cruz is trying to do, trying to tap into some of the same anger and disaffection with Washington, or you try to run against it as Jeb Bush is trying to do, saying this is not the solution, you can't turn over the government to a person just because you like his hat.

BREAM: Or hair.

BAKER: Right now, in fact, neither one is working for either of these camps, as Trump, you know, absorbs all the oxygen in the room. Whether it lasts or not, I don't know. We've seen multiple obituaries written so far and none of them have turned out to be right, but it's a long way between now and Iowa.

BREAM: It is.

And, Kimberley, he's polling well in Iowa, which is a place where we've all spent a lot of time and voters are very sophisticated there. They want to talk to you and shake your hand and grill you before they cast a caucus vote for you.

Do you think, months from now, they're going to show up in the cold of winter and cast their votes for him?

KIMBERLEY STRASSEL, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, what's interesting about Trump is he's now acting like a very serious candidate. He is out there on the ground and putting a lot of money into this. He's got a lot of paid people on his staff. And he does seem to be more in it to win.

Although, I would -- if we go back four years, who was leading all of the polls for the Republicans? Herman Cain. There is always, especially in Republican primaries, a big interest in people who are new on the scene, who promise to go in and bust things up. This is not specific to Trump but we have to be careful about where the electorate might be in its mind six months from now when they begin to focus. It's also summertime. So, people are going to back and be a little more thoughtful I think about some of these issues.

And that's why Bush is doing what he's doing. He's attempting very much to try to make the real contrast between his policy positions and Trump's, and sometimes that gets lost in the back-and-forth.

WILLIAMS: You know what's interesting to me is to hear Jeb Bush say about Trump, he's not a conservative, he's not electable, not a serious person, which I think is the -- when I listen to you, Kimberley, you're saying, come the end of summer, maybe we'll get over this summer fling in terms of the voters' affection for Trump. But then to hear Trump shoot back at Bush and say, you know, gosh, was this -- this was in New Hampshire this week. Oh, gosh, you know, he's got a couple people over there, it's very sleepily, it's not exciting like at my event, which is obvious. But to secondly say, you know what, Bush is a low energy guy. If you want a change in Washington, he's not the guy to go to. I find this -- this is so interesting.

BREAM: Well, I mean, that -- that message is resonating with obviously thousands of people, tens of thousands of people, polling and in person.

I want to make sure that we get to the other side of the ticket because we've got Hillary Clinton, and as we discussed, the mounting issues that she's constantly being pulled off message to now have to talk about this e-mail situation. She's a little frustrated with our own Ed Henry pushing her in Vegas this week. Here's what happened at the end of that press conference.


CLINTON: Thank you, all. Thank you all very much.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Secretary Clinton, is this an indication that this issue isn't going to go away for the remainder of your campaign?

CLINTON: Nobody talks to me about it other than you guys.


BREAM: Bob, nobody's talking to her about it but us.

COSTA: People are talking about it. When I was in Iowa and New Hampshire, people were bringing it up. It's a cloud over her campaign. But Vice President Biden is still not in the race. Senator Warren has declined to run. She's still by far the front runner. Bernie Sanders is coming up on the left, but that's more because of his progressive values, not so much because he's countering her on the e-mail controversy. And so when you really just look objectively at her strengths across the country, they remain.

BREAM: But, Peter, her numbers are definitely taking a hit. I mean we -- we showed her in contrast to Biden. When you talk about trustworthiness, 58 percent of people in our most recent poll think that she knowingly lied about this e-mail server. And when you break that down by party, 67 percent of independents think that she lied and that's obviously the group everybody wants in 2016.

BAKER: Yes, I think what's -- what it does is it reminds people of some of the parts of the '90s that they didn't particularly like about the Clinton era. And it -- you know, she had done a very good job, I think, as secretary of state of sort of moving past that, of redefining herself as a -- as a formidable figure on the world stage, as somebody who was credible to both parties in a lot of ways, and this kind of brings back some of the circus that always seemed to surround that last White House. And it does cut at -- cut at credibility. The details kind of, you know, you saw with your interviews, I mean it would get pretty arcane at times, right, and it may not matter in the end, but it does sort of kind of bring down the sort of lofty place that she had been at one point --

BREAM: If you're having to explain. And, I mean, Kimberly, how -- how worried do you think her camp is at this point about a potential Biden candidacy? Because, I mean, it sounds like there's an organization ready to go should he decide to do it and he's taking some very serious meetings.

STRASSEL: Based on the conversation you had with the congresswoman, I'd say they're very worried about this. But, you know, to what Bob said, I'm not sure she does have strength everywhere. And this is why they're concerned. What she has always had is inevitability. This is what they built up and it's why she is where she is at the moment because she told the party for the last four years, I'm your only ticket to the White House. But she's not necessarily a gifted politician.

COSTA: I just meant in terms of being an historic candidate. When you -- when you meet Democrat -- base Democratic voters, they see her as a fresh face because she would be an historic candidate, the first female candidate for president of the United States. But you're right, there are a lot of vulnerabilities out there, but that core appeal still remains.

STRASSEL: The question is, but someone -- if Biden gets in, and this was the thing that was interesting about your interview with the draft Biden thing is, does he get into win? Because right now Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley, they're dancing around Hillary Clinton's ethics problems and I'm waiting for someone to get in who actually goes after her on that. And I think that that would actually be a big problem.

BREAM: Will the --

WILLIAMS: You know, I think the problem is for -- for the vice president is, I think at this point he'd be an alternative to Sanders and the left, a more credible challenge. But really is he a challenge to Hillary Clinton? Democrats are not moving away in the polls from Hillary Clinton.

BREAM: Well, we'll see if Elizabeth Warren's endorsement or alignment with anybody makes a difference. A big meeting yesterday.

All right, stick around, panel. Up next, Governor Mike Huckabee is just back from a trip to the holy land and from a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. We'll get his thoughts on the trip and what he thinks should be done about Iran.

Plus, what do you think? Should Congress approve the Iran nuclear deal? Let us know on FaceBook or Twitter @foxsunday and please use the #fns.


BREAM: One of the Obama administration's toughest critics on Iran is Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee. He's just back from a trip to the holy land and from a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Governor Huckabee, welcome back to "Fox News Sunday."


BREAM: All right, the good news/bad news. Let's look at your poll numbers because unlike some candidates, you didn't slip after the first primary debate, but you're holding steady and it's just at 6 percent. So what's the plan for moving that number up?

HUCKABEE: The key for us is just stay in the race. I mean a lot of people think that the polls at this point matter. They only matter in getting you on the stage. But what really matters right now is building organization and structure in the early states. And I think it's one of the advantages of having done this before. Everybody gets panicked about who's leading, who's heading up the polls. But if you go back historically, whosever in first place, even with a 2-1 margin, the one thing you can be pretty certain of, that person is not going to be the nominee, if history holds to the way it's been.

BREAM: Do you think Donald Trump has staying power? I mean what does the rest of the GOP field do with the tsunami that is The Donald?

HUCKABEE: Well, you know, you -- you -- you don't worry about Donald Trump. He's a force to be reckoned with, but you don't reckon with him by dealing with it. You know, I just quit answering Donald Trump questions. He's get ten times the amount of coverage than any other candidate is getting. And the dumbest thing a candidate can do right now is to give him more coverage by answering all the Trump questions. So I think what I know I'm doing is I'm talking about my campaign, my issues, the things that I'm standing for. And in time, that's what's going to be more important than simply reacting to any other candidate.

There's 17 of us out there. There's plenty to react to. We need to focus on swimming in our own lane and helping to explain to the American people what it is we're going to do to make this country better, not what someone else is going to do to make it worse or whether we like their plans for making it better.

BREAM: You, along with all of your domestic campaigning, were internationally this week meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He's a long-time friend of yours. You both have been very vocal against the upcoming Iran nuke deal that Congress is going to vote on. In a letter this week, President Obama reached out, detailing his reassurances for Democratic Congressman Jerry Nadler, apparently enough to convince that congressman that -- to say he's going to vote yes on the Iran nuke deal. Here's a little bit of what the president wrote to win over Representative Nadler. He said, quote, "should Iran seek to dash toward a nuclear weapon, all of the options available to the United States, including the military option, will remain available through the life of the deal and beyond." He also said, quote, "no administration has done more for Israel's security than mine. I am prepared to further strengthen the relationship." Why is that not good enough for you?

HUCKABEE: Well, it's not true. First of all, for him to say that his administration has done more for the security of Israel, it's laughable on its face. And if you walk up and down the streets of Jerusalem or Tel Aviv or Haifa, or Herzliya, you're never going to hear someone say, boy, President Obama sure does care about Israel. I mean the -- the opposite is true. And, by the way, Israelis oppose this deal by a margin of 7-1, 69 to 10 percent. In America, it's 57 to 28 percent against it.

You know, I think members of Congress ought to ask themselves a simple question, who do I work for? Do I work for President Obama or do I work for the people who elected me? If they work for President Obama, if he's their boss, then, yes, vote for the deal. But if they're serious about making sure this deal gets derailed because it's dangerous, then they better listen to the people who hired them.

And let me tell you why this is dangerous. This notion that we can go in militarily, well, the way this deal is structured, it's going to be much more difficult because the Iranians are going to be able to build fortresses underground to make even our most capable weapons unable to do any bunker busting. The Iranians are right now, even before the deal is signed, negotiating with the Russians to get S-300 anti-aircraft weaponry, some of the most sophisticated, sophisticated enough that no American aircraft would be able to get through.

So this is just -- I mean -- I mean it's balloon juice for the president to get out there and pretend that this deal is a good one, in part, Shannon, because this lets Iran do their own inspections, do their self-reporting. It's like letting a tenth grader grade his own algebra exams or letting Hillary Clinton take care of her own server. Both are nonsense and this deal is nonsense.

BREAM: Well, a lot of folks think that the U.S. shouldn't be at the able with Iran at all for a number of reasons. But I want to note something that you said in a speech back in 2007. You said this about talking with Iran. "We haven't had diplomatic relationships with Iran in almost 30 years, most of my entire adult life, and a lot of good it's done. Putting this in human terms, all of us know that when we stop talking to a parent or a sibling or even a friend, it's impossible to resolve the differences to move that relationship forward. Well, the same is true for countries." Should we be talking with Iran?

HUCKABEE: I stand by everything I said, but let's keep in mind the analogy I used was a parent talking to a teenager. But you don't let the teenager run the house. You don't let the teenager tell you when he's going to come and go. You don't let the teenager decide that at 15 he's going to have keys to the family car and the liquor cabinet at the same time. Negotiation and sitting down and having diplomatic talks is great if the talks result in some type of concession.

And the beginning of any talks with the Iranians should have been, you put those four Americans that you're holding hostage on the next airplane out of Tehran. Number two, you stop this crazy talk about wiping Israel off the face of the map. And you don't publish, by the way, this week 416-page book by the ayatollah comes out saying that the destruction of Israel is it's number one priority. You tell them that's got to stop and you must at least behave like a grownup. Now, then you can have diplomatic conversations. But you don't capitulate to the worst instincts of this terrorist state, Iran, whose weaponry and financing has killed Americans, kidnapped Americans and maimed a lot of Americans fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

BREAM: All right, governor, a bit of a lightning round because we're just about out of time and I want to make sure we get to a couple of hot topics, give you a chance to respond to some of your critics. Immigration, it is a hot topic out there on the campaign trail. Here's what you said in a 2006 "Washington Post" interview. You said, quote, "I tend to think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship." You also, as governor of Arkansas, advocated for some type of financial assistance or help for those who were attending in-state colleges but who were in the country illegally. Where are you on immigration?

HUCKABEE: Well, I've always been the same place, secure the border first, don't provide amnesty, but don't be irrational. People are not angry about immigration because they hate immigrants. They're angry about immigration because they see their way of life threatened. They see their jobs just disappearing, going to Mexico, to China, to Indonesia. And if we deal with the real acute problems, the immigration problem is not going to be as acute.

As far as some of the things like students, look, when you have a student who's valedictorian at one of the state's largest high schools, as we did in my state, the question is, if he's been in our school since kindergarten and he's the top student in his class, should he qualify for a scholarship that other top students qualify for or not? Would we rather have him one day become a neurosurgeon or a tomato picker. And those are the kind of tough questions governors face every day. I've never regretted for taking the stand that you don't punish children for something their parents did illegally. If you did, the next time the person get stopped in a car, give the kid in the back seat the ticket instead of the dad.

BREAM: OK, very quickly on Common Core. You wrote a letter to Oklahoma lawmakers back in 2013 calling it "near and dear to your heart." You also went on to say, "like many of you, I've heard the argument these standards threaten local control of what's being taught in Oklahoma classrooms. Speaking from one conservative to another, let me assure you this simply is not true." Do you now believe it is?

HUCKABEE: Yes, Common Core has changed dramatically. It's gotten federal fingers all over it and it's ruined it. And everybody, I think, now realizes that it was an idea about standards that would be the state level. Now it's gotten into federal control. It went beyond the basic things of language arts and math and it needs to be eradicated. It's become a cancer instead of a cause. So, unfortunately, a lot of people want to use this to get rid of all standards. I hope not. We need high standards, but we don't need Common Core and we do need to get rid of it.

BREAM: All right, Governor Huckabee, we'll see you out there on the campaign trail. Thanks for joining us today.

HUCKABEE: Thank you, Shannon. Great to be with you.

BREAM: All right, when we come back, major rallies across the country this weekend against Planned Parenthood. The organization continues to come under fire as the calls for defunding grow.


BREAM: That's just one of the hundreds of protests held across the country this weekend as outrage over Planned Parenthood's practices continues. We're back with our panel now to talk about this.

And, Kimberly, I'll start with you. Do you feel like the political conversation is any different this time around because of these undercover videos coming out with conversations and footage frankly that is very uncomfortable for people, even those who -- many of them identify as pro-choice?

STRASSEL: It's definitely different and that this has made a lot of people think about the limits of where they want to go with this. And you've been having this debate all -- in states already. If you look at places like Texas, people have been more focused on, where do we want to draw lines, where do we want to have limits, and having a more thoughtful conversation.

I think it's going to change even more because Congress is going to come back and then we're going to get some real information on this too. And what you've had so far are these videos come out and then you had Planned Parenthood say that they're false and -- or edited. And so what you're going to have is there are two committees in the House that are going to be talking to members of -- the doctors at Planned Parenthood. They've been getting in touch with some of these research groups that have been taking some of the -- been involved in all of this. And so then we're maybe going to get some more answers about what actually happened.

BREAM: Well, and I -- I notice too that late in the week Congressman Elijah Cummings, the ranking democrat on House Oversight, has now reached out to the group, Center for Medical Progress, that exposed and taped these videos, now wanting to investigate them. I mean that's part of this equation too.

We want to play a little bit of the video they put out this week. A woman they identify as Holly O'Donnell. They say she worked for StemExpress, which is one of these procurement companies, but that she was stationed inside a Planned Parenthood clinic and described something she saw there.


HOLLY O'DONNELL, EX-PROCUREMENT TECHNICIAN, STEMEXPRESS, LLC: She is like, OK, I want to show you something. So she has one of her instruments and she just taps the heart and it starts beating. So I'm sitting here and I'm looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating. And I don't know what to think.


BREAM: Peter, she went on to describe the process of harvesting a brain from that fetus. It's tough material.

BAKER: It's very tough material and it's aimed at people in the middle, not people on the pro-choice, pro-life side because those guys have made up their minds and were trying to tell ordinary Americans that this isn't just about, you know, an antiseptic idea. And it's sort of like the partial birth abortion debate in the '90s in which basically, rather than attack abortion rights as a whole-on thing, it says, look at some of the aspects of it that are most objectionable and try to appeal to the conscience of people who might find it something that they can't live with. And it's an energized pro-life side of this debate. The pro-choice side of the debate, to use these terms that we -- that we use, you know, is trying to fight back by saying, in fact, it's a smear, it's energizing them to say our rights are under attack. But for the most, the momentum, obviously, is on the side of those who are, you know, trying to expose this.

BREAM: And late Friday, the group Center for Medical Progress, behind these videos, had a victory in California court. They've got multiple things pending, but at least, Bob, on this one dealing with StemExpress, the restraining order that was keeping them from releasing some of the material was dissolved and they're promising yet another release. This will be their eighth this week.

COSTA: The questions are only mounting and the politics are just simmering. Now, I checked with my sources on Capitol Hill and they say come fall this could become a boil, because Congress comes back, Senator Cruz, so many conservatives want to see perhaps a defunding fight. And that could lead to a government shutdown. And that could thrust itself into the 2016 race. Governor Huckabee, Carson, every conservative who's looking to win Iowa, they're going to rally to this as well. And for a party that wanted to gently avoid social issues for the most part, now they will be front and center because of Planned Parenthood.

BREAM: Well, and with the first three or four of these videos that came out, Hillary Clinton did say that she found some of the images disturbing, although many on the left have said they haven't actually watched the videos. We're told that the president hasn't watched them. That most in the administration are not watching them. But within just two days of her making those comments, she put out a video about two minutes long. Here's a portion of it.


CLINTON: We're not going back. We're going to fight back. I'm proud to stand with Planned Parenthood.


BREAM: So, Juan, she has made her decision that for this campaign she -- despite what she feels maybe about some of these videos -- says that she's fully behind the organization.

WILLIAMS: I don't think there's any choice for a Democrat, especially a leading Democrat at this moment. There's no moving away from Planned Parenthood or women. If you look at the polls, you know, just sort of directly, you see it's 54 percent, I think, of Americans support Planned Parenthood, want Planned Parenthood to continue in terms of contraception, disease prevention and the like. But when you get into it in terms of the politics, this is where it becomes more intriguing because I think that you can stir the Republican base, but what happens when you shut -- threaten to shut down the government? We've seen that story before. It doesn't work out well.

And I think you are, as Bob was suggesting, we are moving forward. There's such excitement in the Republican base about these videos. And it's not just one more to come. I think there's a series of additional videos to come.

BREAM: Yes, there are several more coming.

WILLIAMS: So this will continue to steam. And the question is, how far do they want to take it?

BREAM: Well, we did see a couple of Democrats on the first vote, the only vote we've seen in the wake of these videos in the Senate, they had to get past this procedural vote. They need 60 votes to get to the first pass at defunding.


BREAM: They couldn't do it but they did have two Democrats who went with them. Kimberly, do you think that number is potentially going to grow as these videos continue to release?

STRASSEL: The question for Democrats who are so eager to do this war on women theme is if they don't end up turning off a lot of people in the middle, as Peter said, who really do and are disturbed watching these videos. And I think the question for Republicans, meantime, is, do you want to do this again where you end up putting all the focus on shutting down the government, loss of services, and taking away from the actual question and substance of these videos, which is a big concern.

BREAM: Yes, and the messaging is going to be difficult for them because there are some of them who say, based on these videos they can't in good conscience vote for anything that would allow funding to move forward. So, again, it shuts -- a potential shutdown and who gets blamed for that on the horizon.

Thank you, panel. We'll see you all next week.

Up next, final notes and a preview of who Chris will have here next Sunday.


BREAM: There was a very special guest I wanted to introduce you to today, but we've simply run out of time. So, after the show, I hope you'll visit for my interview with Vernon Brewer. He is the president of World Health. I'm going to talk to him about his organization, what they're doing to help Christians in the Middle East as they face annihilation. Very real threat from ISIS. We want you to see that piece.

And before we go, a program note. Chris will be back next Sunday. He'll sit down live with presidential candidate and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. You do not want to miss that.

That is it for today. Have a great week and we will see you next "Fox News Sunday."

Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.