Kasich talks endorsements in NH; Issa questions Clinton's judgment; Paul skeptical of polls in Iowa

This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," January 31, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.


The rush is onto make the last pitch to caucus-goers in Iowa.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Maria Bartiromo. Welcome to "Sunday Morning Futures."

Ohio Governor John Kasich and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul joining me life from the campaign trail moments away on the most important issues of the first in the nation caucuses.

Plus, where do we stand in the GOP race for president? Will tomorrow's results narrow down the field? And will they be a tale tell sign for the rest of race? We'll start there with our panel.

Plus, coming up, what will come of these top secret e-mails from Hillary Clinton's private server? Former House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa on the investigation, as we look ahead this morning on "Sunday Morning Futures."


BARTIROMO: When Iowans begin caucusing Monday, Governor John Kasich will be in New Hampshire instead. The presidential hopeful's eyes remaining on the prize in the Granite State, which has been the major focus this past few weeks.

Meanwhile, his campaign picking up a big endorsement this weekend from The New York Times editorial board. They write, quote, "Governor John Kasich of Ohio, though a distinct underdog, is the only plausible choice for Republicans tired of the extremism and inexperience on display in this race." Mr. Kasich is no moderate.

Joining me right now is Ohio Governor John Kasich from Manchester, New Hampshire.

Governor, good to see you. Thanks so much for joining us.


And, by the way, we had good news last night. The Quad City papers in Iowa also endorsed me. It's the third largest newspaper in that state. That was just a wonderful endorsement to receive.

And, of course, here in New Hampshire, there have been eight newspaper endorsements. And I've been able to receive seven of them, Maria. I don't know what the heck is going on, because you know me, you know, I ain't that great. But, you know, it's pretty nice to be getting all of this -- it's pretty nice to be getting all this support out there.

BARTIROMO: You really are. These newspapers are looking at your experience reiterating what you've done on budget issues among others and talking about that as the reasons why.

I wanted to start with "The New York Times" --

KASICH: I think it's a bigger issue.

BARTIROMO: Go ahead.

KASICH: I think it's a bigger issue than just experience. If you read them carefully, it's been the ability to get people to work together and with some of them, it's the ability to come up with creative ideas. So, it's not just experience. You know, experience, if you don't do anything with it, what's the point?

But it's the ability to solve problems. That's kind of -- that's a big part of it by bringing people together. And that's -- that's really -- it feels terrific to have them say that.

BARTIROMO: Absolutely. And you've made this point, the truth is that voters are tired of the back and forth of pointing fingers.


BARTIROMO: And want to figure out who it is that has that leadership that can bring the two sides together to actually get things done. How important is an endorsement from the New York Times? I mean, you know, obviously, it's a real positive to get those newspapers in New Hampshire and Iowa, to get behind you. But, of course, the first few states that we're talking about in terms of caucuses aren't exactly New York Times readers necessarily.

So, how important is the New York Times editorial endorsement?

KASICH: Well, just think about you, Maria. What if the New York Times came out and said you were a tremendous commentator? You would love it.

BARTIROMO: I would love it.

KASICH: I can tell you really love it. I'll tell you who else would love it? Your mama, your mother would love it, I know that.


KASICH: Hey, look, they made it clear. They don't agree with me on a number of issues, but they certainly know that I'm a conservative.

But I welcome the Gray Lady. I think getting New York Times is fantastic, along with the Boston Globe. And what it really says this is a guy that doesn't travel, you know, in some narrow lane. He has an ability to appeal to many people who may not even agree with him philosophically, and I'm thrilled to hear that.

I mean, the idea that I can take my positions but express them in such a way that people who may not even agree with the fundamental, you know, they give you credit. They say, you know, good guy, smart guy, can get things done.

So, I'm absolutely thrilled with the "New York Times" because that's -- that with the Boston Globe and these newspapers in Iowa, that's something you never forget. It's a wonderful, wonderful tribute.

And I'll tell you this -- my wife said she heard one of my daughters scream yesterday. And she ran out and said what is it, Reese? And Reese said, "Daddy just gotten endorsed by the New York Times."

Now, when your 16-year-old daughter gets excited, you better be excited.

BARTIROMO: That's cool. That is really cool there. I'll give you that.

How do you differentiate how to campaign in Iowa versus New Hampshire? So much conversation these days about how you have really focused and doubled down on New Hampshire.


BARTIROMO: Even you're going to be there tomorrow while they're caucuses in Iowa. How do you differentiate what to do in these different states?

KASICH: Well, Maria, the problem with -- I got in in July. And the problem with Iowa, it's so big. I mean, there's five media markets. It's impossible to put the time in there and the time in New Hampshire.

So, I still do the same thing in Iowa with town halls. I did a couple. I just did a teletown hall, I guess, last night, if I remember. It's been like a blur.

But here, there's 1.3 million people in New Hampshire and they're all sort of condensed. You can stand in the middle of New Hampshire and hit most of the state with a stone. In Iowa, you have to fly all over the place.

So, we'd decided to put a lot of emphasis here. But, look, we're prepared to move on. We have a ground game in South Carolina. We've got things going in Nevada. We're very strong in Mississippi with Congressman Greg Harper and former Senator Trent Lott.

We are prepared to move all over the country and we've got people who are highly skilled. But we've got to come out of here. I think we will come out of here well. We're running second in almost all the polls. We'll see.

BARTIROMO: Yes, just terrific.

How important is this election to the economy, Governor? I mean, last week, we got some dreadful numbers. GDP showed growth of 0.7 percent.

KASICH: Unbelievable.

BARTIROMO: Really not good.

KASICH: Well, Maria, look, you know, you've been the money expert for a long time.

And here's the three things. You can't have -- you can't over-regulate.  You've got to have common sense. You have to cut taxes for businesses and individuals, and then you have to have a fiscal plan that makes sense and then start working on the issue of workforce.

Those -- that's the formula. So, if we elect somebody and they don't know how to do it or they're not tough enough to carry out these issues and get thing things accomplished, because within the first hundred days, I told Paul Ryan, I'm going to have, you know, the balanced budget, the tax cuts, the regulatory reform on your desk, your head's going to spin. And he looked at me and chuckled because he used to be an aide when I was budget chairman.

We have to move quickly, Maria.


KASICH: I was there when we did it in Washington, and it's happened in Ohio. If we're not tough, we're not focused and we don't know what we're doing, we're going to keep drifting, as you know.


KASICH: And it just sends all the wrong signals.

BARTIROMO: And it's not good for the average guy and gal out there.

KASICH: Absolutely.

BARTIROMO: How can they move the needle in their own lives.

Governor, we'll be watching. Good to see you, sir. Thanks so much.

KASICH: Thank you, Maria. Thank you.

BARTIROMO: Talk to you soon. Governor John Kasich.

A voting booth is pretty straightforward, right? But how exactly does a caucus work? And how is it different from voting in a primary?

FOX News' senior correspondent Eric Shawn with that angle.

Eric, good morning to you.

ERIC SHAWN, FOX NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Maria, and good morning, everyone.

You know, it is an election and then again, it is not. The Iowa caucus considered many as our country's greatest demonstration of grassroots democracy at work. You know, they don't walk in on a voting booth.  Instead, starting tomorrow night at 7:00 p.m., caucusgoers will spend several hours at 1,681 caucus sites that can include public schools, fire houses or churches, listening to hours of speeches on behalf of candidates before they make their choice.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a big responsibility for Iowans. And we want to be a part of it and be educated about it as well. So, we're also political creatures, it's fun.


SHAWN: The Republicans process is fairly straightforward. They listen to the pitchers for the candidates and then they vote.

But the Democrats split up into groups. That's where Patrick Murray, head of the Monmouth University Polling Institute says the night's unique horse trading begins.


PATRICK MURRAY, MONMOUTH UNIVERSITY POLLING INSTITUTE: You walk into there, you hear the speeches. And then the party chair or the caucus chair will say, all right, if you're for Hillary Clinton, go into that corner, if you're for Bernie Sanders go into that corner, O'Malley back here. They'll look around the room and say, O'Malley people, you have not met the 15 percent threshold, you've got to go somewhere else. And then they get swarmed by the Sanders people and the Clinton people saying, come over here, come over here.


SHAWN: The winner does not always go onto be the nominee. Witness Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, Tom Harkin.

Despite all the anticipation, turns out that most people in Iowa do not even take part.


MURRAY: Iowa gets all this attention and they're this engaged electorate, but 85 percent of Iowa voters will be watching "American Idol" reruns on Monday night. They're not going out to participate in this caucus.


SHAWN: Well, besides Iowa, about a dozen states also use the caucus system, but we really only pay special attention to just one. The state's motto says, "Our liberties we prize, our rights we will maintain." And that yet again, we put to the test as it is every four years tomorrow night -- Maria.

BARTIROMO: Exciting times. Eric, thank you.

Coming up next, nearly two dozen documents on Hillary Clinton's e-mail server now said to contain information too, quote, "top secret" to release in any form. Could this latest revelation lead to an indictment? I'll be talking with California Congressman Darrell Issa coming up.

Hope you'll follow us on Twitter @MariaBartiromo, @SundayFutures.

Stay with us as we look ahead to Sunday morning on "Sunday Morning Futures."


BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

Twenty-two documents on Hillary Clinton's private server containing information that the State Department calls top secret and actually, too damaging to release.

Still, Clinton's campaign says it wants the seven e-mail chains to be made public, even though they're top secret. Well, the FBI has been investigating Clinton's e-mails.

My next guest says this could lead to the indictment, or should lead to the indictment of the former secretary of state herself.

California Congressman Darrell Issa joining us right now.

Congressman, good to see you. Thanks so much for joining us.

REP. DARRELL ISSA, R-CALIF.: Well, thanks for having me on, Maria, and thanks for covering this important issue at such a time in our nation's history.

BARTIROMO: Yes, it is important and I know that voters want to hear the details of it. So, I want to ask you about your support for Marco Rubio, but let's start with Hillary Clinton and these 22 e-mails that apparently now, the public will not get to see because the State Department says and the Justice Department says they are too damaging.

What do you know about them?

ISSA: Well, as you said, they're not 22 independent e-mails. There's some back and forth. What we know is that this is information that when you look at it, you should recognize it goes towards sources and methods and classified operations.

And that's where the judgment of Secretary Clinton comes in. She would have you believe that over 1,300 documents that needed to be redacted for sensitive classified information, that as they were going back and forth between Huma and other people, including apparently 18 e-mails that went back and forth to the president, that she never recognized not one of these as material that should be classified, that should not be on her personal server, that should not be removed from the government when she left office.

BARTIROMO: Yes. And you know what we see what David Petraeus has gone through over the last two years in terms of a similar situation, releasing information that was not to be released. And yet, you know, I don't know if you saw Hillary Clinton's statement about this, she was doing an interview with NBC and she basically said, look, it's like Benghazi, it's not going to be important.

I mean, you are the former oversight committee chairman of that investigation into Benghazi. How do you feel about that response?

ISSA: Well, this is where her judgment is in question, where her honesty is in question. Maria, let's understand people are looking at sort of the shiny object of classified, did it say classified, exactly what did it say.

Let's go back. What was Secretary Clinton's judgment in setting up this site? What was her judgment in exchanging and having, if you will, e-mail conversations about sensitive information? What was her judgment in not giving a copy of this required by law to the State Department when she left. And what was her judgment quite candidly in this delay process that she went through where she essentially delivered none of it and now says, oh, I want it all made public.

The fact is, I don't want it all made public. The information that is sensitive, I'd like the select intelligence committee to see it, but I want to make sure it's not made public because that's exactly what she's got to be held accounted for.

When you fill an elected official or an appointed official's head full of highly classified and sensitive information, they're not required to live up to when it says secret or top secret on a document. They're required to keep those secrets for life, not say them on the air, not put them in a book, and candidly, not take them with them when they leave government.

BARTIROMO: You think that the FBI Director Jim Comey would like to indict both Hillary and Huma Abedini, her aide?

ISSA: Yes. For more than 15 years during my service in government, I've watched the basis on which U.S. attorneys and the attorney general and, of course, the FBI look for cases in which people's judgment, where they've knowingly done things wrong, make for good prosecutions.

This, if it were anyone other than Hillary Clinton, would be that case.  You have somebody whose basic wrongdoing led down a road to the communication back and forth and then effectively removed it from government hands, kept it, and even today, you know, a sort of lying in plain sight.

You know, there's no one left to lie to in this case about, no, there were no classified documents. Yes, there was classified material. Even the president who said he learned about it on the news seems to not have an answer for why 18 of these communications were back and forth with him.

BARTIRONO: Let me switch gears to Senator Rubio, because I think that most people know at this point that that is the sensitive spot when you're talking about borders and Senator Rubio. That took place in our debate, on the FOX Business Network, took place again on the FOX News debate. Because of the bills that he's backed, gang of eight, the immigration innovation, where basically it enabled tens of millions of foreigners to come into this country and be part of our democracy with all the services that go with it.

Is this an issue that is not important to you in terms of his past or do you think Marco Rubio has changed his position on this?

ISSA: One, he said on television what we all know, which is just wishing the 12 million people would be swept away isn't going to do it.

His position has always been any agreement has to secure the borders, stop the flow, remove criminal aliens and then deal with those already here in an appropriate and humane way. Some will leave. Some probably will stay.  The American people know that.

And he's not changed a position. What he's done is he's reached out both on our side of the aisle and the other side of the aisle and tried to find a principled solution that would stop illegal immigration, secure our borders and then begin dealing with those who here in violation of our law but in plain sight.

You know, I'm strong on immigration reform. I've backed every single one of the attempts to secure our borders, so has Marco Rubio. It's the reason he has so much support is that people want a president who will try to find a solution, but at the same time, they want somebody with the principles that he has which are sometimes misstated by political opponents.

But Marco Rubio has always been for securing our borders, stopping the flow of illegals, getting rid of criminal aliens and then dealing with those already here. And you can have a discussion about that last part, but Marco's made it clear. Without the first parts, there will be no deal.

BARTIROMO: Yes, really great analysis. Congressman, good to have you on the program. Thanks so much.

ISSA: Thanks, Maria.

BARTIROMO: We'll see you soon, Congressman Darrell Issa.

ISSA: Thank you.

BARTIROMO: And we will see him tomorrow for more coverage of the Clinton e-mails investigation. Tune in to "Mornings with Maria" tomorrow morning on the Fox Business Network. Congressman Issa will join me once again at 7:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow morning on Fox Business Network.

New poll numbers out of Iowa possibly clueing us in on which way caucus- goers are leaning now. We'll break it all down for you as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures."

Stay with us.


BARTIROMO: Welcome back. It is game on in the final run-up to the Iowa caucuses, a new poll from The Des Moines Register, it shows Donald Trump leading the GOP field at 28 percent, suggesting his debate no-show could be a nonfactor.

I want to bring in our panel right now.

Ed Rollins is former principal White House adviser to President Reagan.  He's been a long time strategist to business and political leaders and a FOX News political analyst.

Mary Kissel with us this morning, a member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board. And Hank Sheinkopf is a former Democratic consultant for the Clinton-Gore campaign.

Good to see, everybody.


BARTIROMO: I say game time, because here we are at the beginning.

What do you think the field looks like going into the important Iowa caucuses, Ed?

ROLLINS: On our side, obviously, it's Trump and Cruz. And my sense is, I've been wrong on everything on wrong so far, but I'm going to bet that Cruz is going to take this thing.

BARTIROMO: You think Cruz takes Iowa?

ROLLINS: I think it's going to be very, very close. But the last poll here, and just left a little bit out, part of the poll was done before the debate. Part of it was done after the debate. Really doesn't have the impact of what occurred.

Cruz has 10,000 people working in the field. He has his voters identified.  It's very, very close.

The Iowa poll underestimated evangelical vote. Evangelical votes about 59 percent. They had 47 percent. When you put that in, it's a dead even race. I think by strength of an organization, Cruz is going to win this thing.

BARTIROMO: So, how important -- do you agree with that, Mary?

MARY KISSEL, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: I do agree with that. I think we're going to find out just how strong Trump's organization really is on the Republican side. And on the Democratic side, can Bernie Sanders get the college kids out to caucus.

I also am looking at Marco Rubio just to see how much momentum he builds.  He's playing a long game here. His bet is not just on Iowa or like the other three other candidates, Christie and Bush, and Kasich. He's not betting on New Hampshire. He's playing a very long here.

So, he's betting that Cruz is going to be wounded, he's going to build momentum in Iowa and that will give him push him into New Hampshire and give him some momentum when he gets to the southern states.

BARTIROMO: And why is Iowa so important? Well, it's because the first --


ROLLINS: No offense to those in Iowa. I spend many, many winters in Iowa.  It basically is a barometer. People pay a lot of attention. That's first and that's the key thing.

BARTIROMO: Hank, what do you think?

HANK SHEINKOPF, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, it's simple. Donald Trump's brilliant strategy of trying to become the evangelical candidate may in fact backfire. Why? He's got to become the evangelical candidate. Now, the question is, because he's been ahead in the polls, people say, well, Trump should have done, if he doesn't do, then he didn't do, and he has a really different set of problems.

Very smart strategy that may in fact back-fire. Give it to Trump by an edge. On the Democrat side, it's probably Hillary by a hair as well.

KISSEL: I think it's important to see how this field narrows after Iowa.  Will you see Ben Carson drop out? Could you see Carly Fiorina drop out?  Those other unnamed candidates in the undercard debate? Because that's going to help guys like Rubio who will do better I think on a smaller stage.

ROLLINS: The most telling in this poll is first and second place, Trump has 28 percent, first, 7 percent second, gives him 35 percent of the base.  That's about what it is anywhere. 50 percent are against him, and somehow you got to break that up to get more people in the game.

SHEINKOPF: It's a wise analysis. But Trump again created his own problem.  The expectation game is what makes Iowa so important. What reporters cover in this day determines where your money comes from and where your positioning is.

BARTIROMO: And he set expectations.

SHEINKOPF: The expectation he set was, look, I'm going to win, he needs to vanquish Cruz, he made himself, tried to make himself the evangelical candidate, he's playing the South Carolina long-term game. It may backfire.

If he doesn't best Cruz or if he gets within close shot, people still say, by the way, Donald, we thought you had it. If he doesn't have it, he's got a problem.

ROLLINS: To your point, who's going to drop out? The second biggest loser next to Bush who started as the frontrunner here is Mike Huckabee. Mike Huckabee already is planning to endorse Trump on Tuesday in Arkansas which doesn't help anybody anywhere.

He's forcing -- in a typical fashion, he's forcing people to come to Arkansas as opposed to New Hampshire, a state he no longer lives in. He lives in Florida. So, I think to a certain extent, we'll see Mike out of the game --

BARTIROMO: Wow. OK. So that's why Iowa is also important, because it's actually a narrowing of the field.

ROLLINS: Yes, it is.

BARTIROMO: Which is quite important.

What did you think about this strategy of not showing up to the debate?  Did it help Trump? Did it hurt Trump? Was it a non-factor?

KISSEL: We're going to know when people actually go to vote. A lot of people in Iowa don't make up their minds until caucus night. And so, we're really not going to have an answer to that question until we actually see people caucus.

BARTIROMO: And real quick on the birth issue, does it matter for Cruz?

ROLLINS: It doesn't because Trump keeps hammering, hammering, hammering it and a lot of people are uncertain. But I think at the end of the day, only about 22 percent say it matters at all. What matters equally important, the Goldman Sachs loans that he didn't report properly.

I think at the end of the day, he was still front and center whether he was on the debate stage or not. So, I don't -- he's still dominated media which is what he's been from start to finish.

BARTIMORO: We got to get into Hillary and Bernie coming up next.

But first, despite being pretty far back in the poll, Senator Rand Paul says he will win Iowa. The presidential candidate will join me live in moments to explain why as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures." Our panel returns after that.


SHAWN: From America's News Headquarters, I'm Eric Shawn.

Here are some of the stories making headlines at this hour.

The Syrian government says at least 45 people have been killed in three explosions in the suburb in a capital city of Damascus. An ISIS-linked website claiming credit for the attack, which reportedly started with a car bombing at a bus station followed by two suicide bombings. The carnage comes as the United Nations attempts to jump-start the Syrian peace talks in Geneva.

Officials in Denver cancelling day two of the Colorado Motorcycle Expo after that fight broke out there yesterday. One person was shot dead, seven others were injured. It is still not clear this morning exactly what prompted that violence. Authorities say they are interviewing a person of interest and they're keeping tight security on the victims who remain at the hospital.

For now, I'm Eric Shawn. Back to "Sunday Morning Futures" and Maria.

BARTIROMO: Thank you, Eric.

Donald Trump along with Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have dominated the headlines heading into tomorrow's Iowa caucuses. But another GOP candidate believes he is the dark horse to win this race, despite polls showing him in the single digit territory.

Senator Rand Paul says he's confident about his chances tomorrow. He says the polls are discounting the young voters of Iowa and he believes they hold the key to his victory.

Presidential candidate and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is joining me now live.

Good to see you, Senator. Thanks so much for joining us.

SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Good morning. Thanks for having me.

BARTIROMO: So, what is the strategy to get those young people out and voting for you?

PAUL: Well, you know, our goal is 10,000 college students. We've worked very hard on the college campuses. We have Rand Paul chapters at all 20 college campuses here. We have about 100 students in the headquarters for the last several weeks making phone calls. We've made over 1 million phone calls.

So, we think we're going to surprise a lot of people. The polls really don't have very many young people in them because they're all on cell phones. We also think we're doing very well with independents.

And we think after the last debate, see all these polls are before the last debate. We think we did well to point out differences and really hopefully to stoke our numbers.

BARTIROMO: And do you think that your message of small government, libertarian, is resonating with this group? Because I know, Senator, as you know, the criticism about the small government and most GOP voters agree they want small government, not when it comes to the military. Not at this moment in time when we've got terrorists wanting to kill America.

PAUL: Well, I think the real question is do we think regime change in the Middle East has made us safer or made us less safe. I would argue that toppling Gadhafi in Libya, which was supported by Rubio and Hillary Clinton didn't make us safer. That it led to chaos. It led to the rise of radical Islam.

And this is still a big debate now in Syria. You've got the neo- conservatives that want to bomb both sides. They want bomb ISIS and they want to bomb Assad. My fear is that if you topple Assad, ISIS will become stronger.

So, I think there really is a great debate going on in our party on what is the best strategy for moving forward.

BARTIROMO: And what does that translate when it comes to money spent on defense? Pentagon, $600 billion budget. What should it be?

PAUL: You know, if you look at balancing the budget, we borrow $1 million a minute. Really part of the problem is the right does want more military spending and the left wants more domestic spending. They get together and they raise both, but the taxpayer gets stuck with the bill.

And so, really, if you are fiscally conservative, and I think I'm the only one, you do have to look at military spending. We spend $600 billion.  That's equal to Russia, plus China, plus eight more countries.

Marco Rubio wants -- and Cruz frankly want $1 trillion more in military spending. That won't make us stronger. I think we can spend what we have and what we're spending currently and just spend it more wisely.

BARTIROMO: Let me switch gears and I ask you a little more about economics here. Last week, we got more dreadful news. Durable goods orders for one indicating businesses are not investing in their plants and equipment and business. Durable goods down 5.1 percent. GDP anemic, up 0.7 percent.  What's the motion towards lever you could pull as President Paul in terms of getting growth moving in this country?

PAUL: I think the biggest thing that's impeding growth is the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates below the market, so you get boom and then bust. We have the real estate boom caused by the Federal Reserve. Now, we have a stock market boom that I think we're on the edge of it collapsing or changing dramatically.

If you want to have a strong country, you have to have strong currency.  But you have to get rid of price controls. Price controls don't work for bread. They don't work for food. They don't work for cars or oil.

But price controls on the money don't work as well. They lead to misallocation of resources and ultimately to recession and a bust in the economic cycle.

BARTIROMO: So, do away with the Federal Reserve?

PAUL: Well, what I would do is I would audit the Fed to begin with. And then I would try to free up interest rates where they're not so directed and not so much under the thumb of the Federal Reserve. Then we can see what happens over time.

But I think the Federal Reserve has too much power and a lot of their power has led to income inequality in our country and has led to the boom and bust cycle.

BARTIROMO: Senator, real quick, we're going to talk with the panel in a moment about Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. What's your take on this latest e-mail news that 22 e-mail exchanges are deemed top secret, so much so that the public will not actually see that -- those e-mails along with the other e-mails that have been released.

PAUL: I don't know how Hillary Clinton escapes indictment. I mean, if you treat her with the same sort of exactitude that they had for General Petraeus, I don't see how she's not indicted and how she doesn't end up with a conviction.

I think this is worry some for Democrats in particular because if Hillary Clinton is indicted and becomes a criminal and ineligible for office, they're stuck with a socialist who I think whose ideas are actually indictable because socialism is such a failed economic system, I don't know how you're going to run in America, a country that's been made great by capitalism and say, oh, we want to become Cuba, or we want to become Russia. I just don't know how that message is going to resonate in our country.

BARTIROMO: Senator, we'll be watching you trying to convince the younger voters of that very point, who many of whom believe Bernie Sanders is their guy.

Good to see you, sir. We'll be watching all the activity tomorrow.

PAUL: Thank you.

BARTIROMO: Senator Rand Paul joining us.

Let's get a look at what's coming up top of the hour, "MediaBuzz". Here's Howie Kurtz in Iowa.

Good morning, Howie.

HOWARD KURTZ, "MEDIABUZZ" HOST: Good morning from Des Moines, Maria.

Well, we're going to look at the extraordinary amount of coverage over the war of words between Donald Trump and FOX News over him skipping the debate here the other night. We'll talk to Bret Baier and Chris Wallace for get behind-the-scenes look at the surreal situation without knowing until the final minutes whether the frontrunner was going to show up.

Also, Ed Henry stops by to talk about this tight Hillary Clinton/Bernie Sanders race, the impact of the e-mail revelations that you just mentioned.  And as well as the press finally starting to scrutinize Senator Sanders who before didn't really think the guy was going to win, and wasn't getting as much media scrutiny -- all coming up here in Iowa.

BARTIROMO: We're going to talk about that as well. See you in 20 minutes, Howie. Thanks so much.

Remember when Hillary Clinton seemed like the inevitable Democratic nominee? Well, now, it is crutch time in Des Moines. She's in a virtual dead heat with Bernie Sanders. They both are scrambling to nail down voters before they turn out to caucus. The state of the race with one day to go with our panel, as we look ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures," next.


BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders barnstorming across the Hawkeye State, scrambling to pick up last-minute supporters and those crucial undecided voters. Check out this latest Des Moines Register poll. The two are virtually neck and neck, 45 percent of voters say Clinton is their pick for the Democratic presidential nomination, 42 percent say it's Sanders.

Back with our panel now, Ed Rollins, Mary Kissel, Hank Sheinkopf.

Mary, what do you think?


KISSEL: I think that Hillary's e-mail whoa woes are hurting her. I think Bernie Sanders comes off as an honest candidate. I think his attacks on her taking Wall Street money have hurt her. And frankly speaking, I think those on the left side of politics, they may be cynical, but they don't like to be lied to.

I think the more we learn about this e-mail scandal, the more mendacious Hillary is. And, frankly speaking, Bernie profits from it.

BARTIROMO: Hank, I did not realize she was paid $600,000 from Goldman Sachs for a speech. That was wow. Bernie Sanders got all the numbers and he's just campaigning with it.

SHEINKOPF: Well, it's smart. He is the Barack Obama candidate of this cycle. He is talking about transformation. She is much more static.

And the truth is, this is -- this whole political system is in such turmoil right now that Donald Trump is an insurgent on the right and Bernie Sanders looks fresh.


SHEINKOPF: This is very -- something wrong here.

BARTIROMO: Do you think this latest e-mail dump is going to hurt Hillary Clinton? I mean, 22 e-mails are top secret, according to the FBI.

SHEINKOPF: Somebody started yesterday, there won't be an indictment.  Listen, you don't have to Clarence Darrow to understand that Deutsche, and others, Petraeus and certainly significant government officials and people have been indicted under conditions like this that may not have been as bad. The question here is when, and when does the Justice Department move and under what conditions? Not, is it possible?

BARTIROMO: So you think it's when not if that gets indicted?

SHEINKOPF: If this continues, if there's more leakage of it -- more of these things leak out. They don't leak out by accident, OK? This kind of discussion is not by accident. If this continues, how does she not receive the same treatment as others received?

ROLLINS: There's 150 FBI agents investigating. And the head of the FBI is a very honorable man.


ROLLINS: And he was appointed to that because of his honesty.

SHEINKOPF: Absolutely.

ROLLINS: And he's going to get a recommendation I'm sure to indict her. I don't know whether the Justice Department will do it, and I certainly don't think the White House will do it.

So, you're going to have the FBI who investigated thoroughly. This has all been publicly disclose or somewhat public disclose. I think whether she gets indicted or not is going to be not as relevant as the fact that she's been very dishonest in the course of her 30-year career. This will just totally reinforce it and the stories will be out there by 150 sources with these guys investigating it.

BARTIROMO: Darrell Issa earlier on the show, Mary, said that the FBI wants to indict Hillary and Huma, her number two.

KISSEL: Well, again, there's been a series of lies here. The server was just for personal use. She was only carrying one device. There was no classified information on it.

We have four inspector generals reports coming out and saying, actually, no, that's not the case. Look, Jim Comey is an honorable guy. The integrity of the FBI is at stake. It's not a partisan institution.

But likewise, the integrity of the Justice Department is going to be at stake if Comey comes out with a very comprehensive report and a recommendation to indict.

ROLLINS: Just go back to the beginning. She couldn't find her Whitewater documents that had been subpoenaed. They were hidden in a closet in the White House and they find them three years later.

That was a total violation of law and nothing ever happened to her. She's done this her whole life. There's been a pattern. The more that gets pushed in the forefront, the more relevant --

SHEINKOPF: Whitewater is not going to be relevant. I don't agree with that. I do agree with Mary and that why --

ROLLINS: No, I'm talking about the integrity issue.

SHEINKOPF: This is not -- this is much more serious than anything that's come before it. This is about national security. And, by the way, people are going to pay attention to the words national security because we live in a period where people are feeling -- Americans are feeling obviously financially insecure and personally insecure. The terrorist threat is on that screen every day. That's why this has much more intensity.

BARTIROMO: Is the party making plan B's or are they all in on Bernie Sanders, if, in fact, we were to see in an indictment? Does Biden, you know --

SHEINKOPF: I don't think they know what to do any day. These parties -- let's remember they're really disorganized institutions much more so than in recent history besides.

KISSEL: And let's say she doesn't get indicted, they still have a problem because Hillary is trying to run for the third term of Obama. So, her pitch to voters is a tough pitch. Hey, I'm going to do everything the last guy did who gave you 2 percent growth and complete global disorder.  There's nothing joyful by the way about Hillary's campaign. You know, they're sort of gutting it out like the Bataan death march.

BARTIROMO: You would think that's the same argument for Biden. I mean, I know Biden is well-liked on both sides, but is that another continuation of Obama's presidency.

ROLLINS: There's no youth in the Democratic Party. No one is going to baton ands move it forward. And I think the problem is both Clintons are very tired. She obviously is not moving anything forward other than this crisis that she's facing day in and day out. It's another terrible campaign and another terrible campaign will not be tolerated by a lot of Democrats who want to win again.

SHEINKOPF: They're running the '92 campaign. The hope is that, by the way, it won't be so bad, but if she comes in behind Bernie and then she does well in New Hampshire, they can say, look, I'm the comeback candidate.


SHEINKOPF: This is a repetition.

BARTIROMO: Her answer in the NBC interview about the email scandal was just amazing. She said, "Oh, it's like Benghazi."

We'll take a short break.

The president will be welcoming a pair of top Republican leaders to the White House this week. What's on the agenda? We're looking ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures." Back with those important meetings the president will have with Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, next.


BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

President Obama will be meeting with the top two Republican leaders of Congress this week. House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will be at the White House this Tuesday. The three set to hash out legislative priorities for the election year, the president hoping to build upon the bipartisan budget agreement reached last year.

Back with our panel.

Ed Rollins, what do you think about this meeting? Anything to come out of it?

ROLLINS: I don't think anything is going to come out. Ryan basically is a guy that has a plan. He wants to basically move us forward. McConnell has had a long history with the president, has been particular good. John Boehner thought the president was a liar and broken every deal they've ever dealt with.

So, Ryan is coming in with good faith. We'll see whether he can make -- make anything on his agenda. If he can't, then you're going to go back to chaos. I don't think much is going to happen other than a photo-op.

KISSEL: I don't think the president has done anything to build a relationship with either one of these gentlemen. Remember when he denounced Paul Ryan in public? He invited him to come in and talk about health care reform and then he publicly embarrassed him? Just as he embarrassed the Supreme Court justices, our conservative Supreme Court justices?

So, there's not a lot of trust here and it's not for lack of trying on the Republican side.

BARTIROMO: Hank, what do you think?

SHEINKOPF: I think Ryan and McConnell have something smart. If the Republicans want to hold on to the Senate, the best way to do that, one of the ways to show they're not combatively stupid. That they're smart.

Ryan gets the chance to show he's the youth, the face of the Republican Party, against all the old chaos going on in both party. And Obama gets to do what he really wants to do, which is play with the Republicans and hope that Hillary doesn't get here, but he has no interest of seeing Hillary Clinton being president.

BARTIROMO: Well, this is an important meeting, particularly after this budget agreement, right, at the end of last year. Because the fact is, Republicans got mad at Paul Ryan for giving in too much.

ROLLINS: They felt that it was Boehner's deal, they gave him a buy on it.  Because it was not something he had negotiated himself. If he negotiates something like this in the foreseeable future, he'll play a very heavy price.

KISSEL: Well, look, you have to practice politics and the thing with the Ted Cruzes of the world, they don't want that, they just want to stand up and scream and yell and do nothing.

And so, you know, kudos to Paul Ryan, he did get some reform in that budget deal. It wasn't all a bad deal.


KISSEL: I think the sad thing about this president is that he came in with a lot of political capital. There were a lot of bipartisan reforms he could have done. Take corporate taxes, both sides of politics agree, it's very destructive that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.  Criminal justice reform, free trade, the Tran Pacific Partnership -- there's a lot on the table they could agree on. You just need the president to come to the table and deal.

BARTIROMO: We just heard last week another company is moving to Ireland.  Right? Merging Johnson Controls and Tyco moving to Ireland because it's a better tax rate. So, you're right.

KISSEL: Yes, yes.

SHEINKOPF: That may all be true. But you know what politics and getting re-electing governs all. This is about what it looks, not what it may produce.

ROLLINS: I don't think that's going to be much produced. I think tax reform is critical, AS I said in the show before. If Ryan had stayed as chairman, I think we would have it.

SHEINKOPF: It's true.

ROLLINS: I think today, it's going to be very, very difficult to get in this political year.

BARTIROMO: But they all have plans for it. They're all talking about doing tax reform beginning in 2017. So --

ROLLINS: We need it now.

KISSEL: It's legacy making time for the president. What is his legacy?  Doing deals with Iran, Russia in Syria, Cuba and the Castros. So, he's probably looking at his last year in office and saying, well, how am I going to be remembered? It's a good question.

ROLLINS: He wants to travel the world and be the Mandela, be more of an international --  

BARTIROMO: Or he wants Hillary to name him to the Supreme Court.

SHEINKOPF: Or control the Democratic Party the way the Clintons have done for the last 30 years.

ROLLINS: He'll never control the Democratic --

SHEINKOPF: I'm just telling you, maybe in his mind.


KISSEL: I don't think he'll ever go away. I think we're going to have President Obama pontificating about American politics for many, many decades to come.

ROLLINS: In a very negative way.


KISSEL: In a negative way.

BARTIROMO: Quick break. One thing to watch next. Stay with us on "Sunday Morning Futures."


BARTIROMO: Back with our panel with what's important next week.

Ed, what do you think?

ROLLINS: I think the market reaction to the bad quarter. I think that's going to be the important story than the Iowa elections.

BARTIROMO: Iowa elections and, of course, we have earnings as well next week, Mary.

KISSEL: Yes, that's right, Iowa as well. Not number one or number two but who's coming in number third, who's gaining momentum. And more importantly, who's dropping out of the race and who those votes are going to?

BARTIROMO: Hank, real quick?

SHEINKOPF: I'm looking at Mike Bloomberg, you know why? Because he may be the answer to independents and others alienated by both parties.

BARTIROMO: Wow. Good to see you all. Thanks so much.

We'll see you tomorrow on Fox Business.

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 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.