Newt Gingrich on US parallels to Brexit vote; Clinton campaign manager talks strategy to beat Trump

This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," June 26, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: I'm Chris Wallace.

A populist uprising in Britain sends shockwaves around the globe. If it happens there, can it happen in America?


DAVID CAMERON, FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: The British people have made a decision to take a different path.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: One thing that will not change is the special relationship that exists between our two nations.

DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I think people really see a big parallel. People want to take their country back. They want to have independence.

WALLACE: Today, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, a top Trump adviser and possible running mate, on whether Britain's vote to leave the European Union could have parallels here at home.

Then, an exclusive interview with Hillary Clinton's campaign manager on how she will deal with a growing populist rebellion as she takes on Trump.

HILLARY CLINTON, D-PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Every day, we see how reckless and careless Trump is. He's proud of it.

Campaign manager Robby Mook only on "Fox News Sunday".

Plus, Democrats stage a dramatic sit-in on the House floor over gun control.

We'll ask our Sunday panel how big an issue guns will be in the presidential race.

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


WALLACE: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.

We are still feeling the aftershock from Britain's startling decision to leave the European Union. Brexit sent financial markets into a worldwide sell-off. And many are wondering if the anti-establishment brave in Britain will sweep over the U.S. presidential campaign.

In a moment, we will talk with Hillary Clinton's campaign manager Robby Mook, top Trump adviser Newt Gingrich about what it means for their candidates.

But we begin in London with Fox senior foreign affairs correspondent Amy Kellogg, reporting from a country still coming to terms with what it's done -- Amy.

AMY KELLOGG, FOX NEWS SENIOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Chris, in the debate here, it has really shifted to who will next lead Great Britain and take it through these uncharted waters. There is a lot of turmoil at Westminster as politicians from both the leading parties jockey for position in this vacuum.

Now, the campaign, Chris, was divisive and at times even really nasty. And that tone continues both among the public and politicians here as the dust settles over Thursday's decision.

European leaders met yesterday. They had an emergency summit in Berlin. They are saying Britain can't drag its seat and needs to begin the process of negotiating its out agreement as soon as possible, so Europe can go forward.

The E.C. president says the divorce will not be amicable.

Meanwhile, Scotland which voted to remain is talking about holding a second referendum on secession. It wants to protect its European privileges and residents.


NICOLA STURGEON, SCOTTISH FIRST MINISTER: I said yesterday that people from other E.U. countries who have chosen, done as the honor of choosing to make Scotland their home, are welcome here. I repeat that again today.


KELLOGG: The themes that led to Brexit are similar to those being discussed in the U.S. presidential campaign, people feeling alienated from the power centers that determine their fate and worry that their standard of living is eroding. The vote was also to an extent a protest against immigration.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because we're British. We don't want all the other people. We just want us.


KELLOGG: Now, Chris, over two million non-British European citizens living in the United Kingdom are very worried about what the future holds for them and their legal status.

And, finally, there is an online petition going around. It has collected so far more than three million signatures. It is asking for a second referendum here. It's not clear at all whether or not that will change anything -- Chris.

WALLACE: Amy Kellogg reporting from London. Amy, thank you for that.

Joining me now to discuss the fallout in the U.S. presidential campaign is former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible Trump running mate.

Mr. Speaker, welcome back to "Fox News Sunday".


WALLACE: Donald Trump is drawing parallels between Brexit and his campaign here in the U.S. but that was a vote about a bureaucracy in Brussels. Not a choice between two candidates. Also, the number of minority voters is twice as high, about 25 percent versus 13 percent in this country as opposed to Great Britain.

Aren't there big differences?

GINGRICH: Well, there are some significant differences. I would point out, by the way, that the week before in both Turin and Rome, reform candidates from a new party founded by a comedian won -- the first woman elected in the history of Rome in 2,800 years won with 65 percent against all of the traditional parties.

So, the sense that there's this wave building against the establishment is real. Now, I wouldn't overstate it.

And, frankly, you indicated one of Trump's great challenges. He's got to find a way to be as effective in reaching out to all Americans as he is in reaching out to white Americans.

If he becomes that effective, there's no reason to believe that mothers in South Side Chicago are happy with the murder rate. It's just they have never had a Republican come in and talk to them about it. Show they cared. There's no reason to believe that people in Baltimore are happy about the murder rate.

And I think a Trump who decides to be genuinely concerned about all Americans might get some very surprising responses.

WALLACE: Now, Secretary Clinton tied Brexit to her argument that Donald Trump is unqualified to be president. In a statement she issued, she said this, "This time of uncertainty only underscores the need for calm, steady, experienced leadership in the White House."

Your response?

GINGRICH: I think it's hysterical.

She was wrong on Brexit. She wanted the remain vote to win. She was wrong on Libya. She thought somehow it would get better if we knock off Gadhafi. She was wrong on the reset with Russia.

I mean, what has she been right about? You need more of this kind of experience?

It's a little bit like Casey Stengel once asked if anybody at the Mets could play the game. I mean, there's no reason to believe that Hillary Clinton's experiences qualify her for anything except retirement.

WALLACE: But isn't there an argument it's better to be experienced than inexperienced?

GINGRICH: Experienced failure? She's experienced going to Goldman Sachs to make secret speeches for lots of money. They're experienced to having secret meetings as a secretary of state I think 170 have been unearthed by "The Associated Press", that were secret meetings with donors.

She's experienced of being part of the most of the corrupt system we've ever seen. But I don't know that's the experience that this fall is going to work very well.

WALLACE: Now, Clinton tore into Trump this week on the economy, the same way that she tore into him on foreign policy last week. Here is a clip.


CLINTON: So let's take a look at what he did for his business. He's written a lot of books about business. They all seem to end at Chapter 11.


WALLACE: Given Trump's business record, given the fact that his tax plan by independent analysis would add $10 trillion to the national debt over ten years, doesn't Clinton have plenty to attack when it comes to Trump?

GINGRICH: She will make a lot of allegations. But let me just give you one fact from the director of national intelligence.

Last year, the estimate by the director of national intelligence staff is that the Chinese stole $360 billion in intellect intellectual property. That's twice the total U.S. exports to China, last year alone.

Now, a Trump who's saying this is the end result of an establishment which basically serves Wall Street and cuts really bad deals for the rest of us.

She's got to come back on the big issues and make the case that their trade policies, their weak economy and -- we will probably be in a recession by late summer. She's going to make the case, this is fine.

And I agree with Sean Spicer at the RNC, just the phrase enough with the Hillary H pointing downward may be all you need to win the campaign.

WALLACE: Why do you think there's going to be a recession by summer?

GINGRICH: Well, I think if you watch what's happening with the manufacturing, with the various purchasing things, with consumer credit -- I mean, consumer confidence. There's been a whole range of things that this is getting slower. I think they just reduced again the estimated growth rate. We are now down to like 1.5 percent growth rate.

And even the head of the Federal Reserve, Yellen said the other day, the only reason the unemployment looks like it does is because we have such a radical drop in the number of people looking for work because they've just dropped out of the economy.

Very few normal Americans think this is an acceptable economy. Hillary Clinton thinks this economy is just fine.

WALLACE: Now, Trump also went after Clinton this week. While she has plenty to hit him on, he has plenty to hit her on. But he also made a number of statements that were just false. And I want to put some of them on the screen.

He said she wants totally open borders. She doesn't. He said she wants to spend hundreds of billions to resettle Middle Eastern refugees. The total refugee budget for the U.S. is $1 billion and then he said this.


TRUMP: Among the victims of our late ambassador Chris Stevens, I mean she -- what she did with him was absolutely horrible. He was left helpless to die as Hillary Clinton soundly slept in her bed.


WALLACE: Now, Mr. Speaker, you can certainly argue about how Hillary Clinton handled Benghazi. But the fact is, the attack happened at 3:00 or 4:00 here in the afternoon in Washington. And she was working late into the night.

As I say, there's plenty to attack her on. But why not stick to the facts?

GINGRICH: Well, first of all, I've had different people say different things about what she did that night and what her instructions were. Second --

WALLACE: She wasn't asleep is the point.

GINGRICH: OK. She certainly --

WALLACE: Maybe she should have been, but she wasn't.


GINGRICH: OK. I think that on a lot of things people can argue about that Trump says and that Hillary says, but the objective fact is there were over 600 requests for security from Libya. Now, that number came from the chairman of the intelligence committee, not from Donald Trump. They were ignored.

The fact is that in the end, there was no effective effort to respond. The fact is, she clearly lied about why it occurred. And again, you had families of the people who were killed who say she lied to them.

So, I think this is a debate -- they can get into details of picking a fight with Donald Trump. This is a debate I think they're not going to win, because on the larger framing of the debate, the country is overwhelming going to be with Trump. And, frankly, the degree to which the news media has bent over backwards, Hillary Clinton is certainly for the equivalent of open borders. She wants to legalize 11 million people who are already here.

WALLACE: But that doesn't mean she wants open borders for everybody else to come in.

GINGRICH: But she's opposed to a wall. She's opposed to a fence. She opposed to being effective at controlling it. She wants at least 85,000 Syrian refugees now and who knows how many more after the election.

So, to suggest somehow that she's really for a controlled immigration policy, I think defies everything we know about her and her appointees.

WALLACE: All right. On a trip to -- this trip this weekend to Scotland, Trump seemed to flip on two of his major policies. I'm going to talk about both of those. He now says he wants to ban Muslims only from what he calls terror states, not all Muslims as he said before. And he said he doesn't consider mass deportations part of his immigration plan.

Mr. Speaker, question: what does Trump stand for?

GINGRICH: I think he stands for an evolving to come to grips with really big problems. But --

WALLACE: Does evolving mean that what he said last week doesn't stand this week?

GINGRICH: If may evolve as the facts evolve and as he learns more. I mean, this is a guy who was never in public policy until June of last year. And over the last year, he has learned a great deal. Sometimes he has been flat wrong. You know I've been very tough on your show when I thought he was flat wrong.

And he has changed things as he has learned more. He will keep changing. But the core direction difference is enormous.

He does -- by the way, I would apply a test for Sharia and a test for loyalty to ISIS rather than geographic test, because we're fighting people all over the world who are dangerous to us. So, it's hard to say which countries really are the Islamic terrorist countries.

But I do think you will find most Americans -- we released a poll on this Friday. Most Americans would like to see a much tougher and tighter view of how you deal with terrorism. And, Trump, while details may be evolving, details are evolving in the same direction of how do we get a grip on this thing.

WALLACE: The Supreme Court on a tie vote this week blocked President Obama's executive action that would have deferred deportation for millions of people into this country -- in this country illegally. Won't that mobilize Hispanic voters who are already against Trump to turn out in even greater numbers to register and vote?

GINGRICH: It might. But I think it's also a fair thing to say that the whole issue of the next Supreme Court justice massively mobilizes everybody who cares about the Second Amendment and historically in America, that's been a very decisive factor in winning a lot of elections. So, I think the court on balance will turn out to be for Trump.

I also think Trump has in the next 60 days, has to develop a very aggressive program reaching out to Hispanics who are here legally and reaching out to them on economic issues and education issues. And he is frankly not dramatically worse off than Mitt Romney was at this stage. So, there's no --

WALLACE: Governor Mitt Romney lost by 44 points.

GINGRICH: Right. But my point is, there's a base there to grow from. That's about a quarter of the Hispanic community. If he can grow from that, he may be much more competitive than people think.

WALLACE: But when you continue to talk about a wall. When you hit the Mexican American judge in Trump University, when you talk -- well, we'll see what he says now about deportations, pretty hard to get in the door with Hispanic voters, isn't it?

GINGRICH: Well, I think, first of all, the wall is about national security. I think legal American citizens whether Hispanic or otherwise, when they look at things like Orlando, are very concerned about national security.

WALLACE: Two more questions I want to get in. Both campaigns filed reports this week on where they stand and the contrast was shocking. As of June 1st, Trump had $1.3 million cash on hand and 69 on the payroll. Clinton had $42.5 million and 685 staffers.

Mr. Speaker, you can't run a national campaign with that kind of staff and money that Trump has.

GINGRICH: And they know that and they are staffing up. And Paul Manafort is right now adding more and more people.

But the thing that's funny about all this, we could have had that exact chart on January 1st about Jeb Bush and Donald Trump. Jeb had a bigger operation. He had a heck of a lot more money. He was going to buy a whole lot more TV ads, and he disappeared.

You just watched Turnberry, Scotland, and once again, Trump got, what, 40 minutes of free television time. So, you have to add in earned media value plus the campaign. He just paid off $50 million in campaign debt by writing a check. I mean, Hillary could probably afford to do that. But I don't have any hunch Hillary will give up any of her personal money when Wall Street is willing to fund her.

WALLACE: Oh, boy. Finally --


WALLACE: You liked that, didn't you?

GINGRICH: I liked that.


WALLACE: All right. Anyway, finally, every time you are here we play the running mate game. You always say, "I'm better than that, and no, I'm not." Here is my question this time.

GINGRICH: You even preempted my comment.

WALLACE: Here is my question this time. Are you being vetted? Have --


WALLACE: You have not submitted any information --

GINGRICH: No. Nobody has called me. Nobody said, would you like to be? Nobody said, would you be willing to be considered? Nobody said anything.

WALLACE: Well, given the fact we're three weeks away, what does that say to you?

GINGRICH: He's probably going to start thinking about it two days before Cleveland.

WALLACE: Are you serious?

GINGRICH: Yes. I think Donald Trump does not want to make a decision until the convention. I think that he is a very decisive person. In case of a few of us -- I'm an example -- there's not much vetting to do. I mean, you guys have been all over me for a decade.


WALLACE: The good, the bad and the ugly, right?

GINGRICH: Exactly right. It's all out. All you're going to do is Google.

WALLACE: Mr. Speaker, thank you. Thanks for your time. It's always a pleasure to talk to you, sir.

GINGRICH: Great to be here.

WALLACE: Are the forces behind the Brexit vote a warning sign for Hillary Clinton? We'll talk with her campaign manager Robby Mook when we come right back.


WALLACE: Hillary Clinton supported the campaign for Britain to stay in the European Union. She says the turmoil after the vote to leave reinforces the need for steady leadership in Washington.

Joining me now from New Hampshire is Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook.

And, Robby, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."


WALLACE: The British vote to leave the E.U. was a populist movement, anti-establishment, fear of immigration, fear of global trading that is leaving millions of people behind. Isn't that kind of working class anger what's driving Donald Trump's campaign here in the U.S.?

MOOK: Well, Chris, I -- you obviously don't want to create too many false equivalencies between a referendum overseas about an economic union and a vote here in the United States for president.

But if your question is about the feeling of the electorate, you know, I think there is a similarity. Voters here in the United States are incredibly frustrated. There aren't enough new jobs getting created, wages aren't rising. So, people are very, very frustrated. And the next president is going to have to address that issue.

And I think this -- the Brexit event is actually very instructive. And I think voters were taking stock of how both candidates responded to the situation.

Hillary Clinton came out very quickly, obviously said that the voters had spoken. But said that we need to make sure that middle class family savings -- hard-earned savings aren't affected by what happened.

In complete contrast, Donald Trump went out, talked about his golf course, all the fancy plumbing at his resort, and said that he was actually glad that the British pound was plummeting because it would help his bottom line.

You know, there's a real contrast here. Hillary Clinton looks at this through the lens of how it's going to affect middle class families, Donald Trump through the lens of how it will help his bottom line.

WALLACE: But, Robby --

MOOK: And underscores how he is fundamentally unfit to be our next president.

WALLACE: Robby, let me pick up on that, though, because Trump says that he's the change agent, that he's the outsider. Take a look.


TRUMP: She believes she's entitled to the office. Her campaign slogan is "I'm with her." You know what my response is to that? I'm with you, the American people.


WALLACE: Trump is making much the same argument that Bernie Sanders used so effectively against Clinton.

MOOK: Well, let's step back and look at Donald Trump's record. You know, he has a lot of slogans. But at every juncture, he has always done what's best for his own bottom line.

And his ideas are a fundamental threat to our economy. He has talked about defaulting on the national debt, called himself the king of debt. You know, independent economists say that he would plunge us into an economic ice age.

So, I don't think Donald Trump is on the side of any family in the United States, certainly not on their economic side.

And if we look at how he has conducted his business, the way that he hasn't paid small business contractors, the way he has cheated hourly wage workers, you know, Donald Trump has made a lot of money, but he has hurt a lot of people in his wake.

And I think families need to be very skeptical. He's certainly on the side of his bottom line and his bank account.

WALLACE: Robby, one of the points that Clinton made was she said this shows the need for steady leadership, but Trump has an answer to the leadership question. He says that Clinton was part of the failed Russian "reset," the decision to pull all U.S. troops out of Iraq, Benghazi, the failed intervention.

Take a look to what he had to say.


TRUMP: The Hillary Clinton foreign policy has cost America thousands of lives and trillions and trillions of dollars, and unleashed ISIS across the world. No secretary of state has been more wrong more often and in more places than Hillary Clinton.


WALLACE: Robby, on the question of leadership, how will Clinton explain a number of failures on her watch?

MOOK: Well, let's be very clear about something. Donald Trump can, you know, throw a bunch of platitudes out there and try to obscure, you know, what's really going on here.

Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit to be our commander, to have access to the nuclear code, and to have the lives of our men and women in uniform in his hands.

The fact of the matter is that Secretary Clinton served -- as secretary of state, she was in the room during the decision to take out bin Laden. Nobody in our history has been more prepared to be our commander-in-chief than Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump simply doesn't have the temperament. And he will actually make us less secure if no other way than just in the words he uses, the way he praises dictators, and in his utter lack of experience in foreign affairs.

WALLACE: Let's talk about some issues. I asked Newt Gingrich in the previous segment about the Supreme Court's non-decision that will, in effect, block Obama's executive action to defer deportations of millions of people in this country illegally.

Do you see any signs in the aftermath of that decision by the court that Hispanic voters will turn out to register and to vote in even greater numbers?

MOOK: Well, I think there's a lot at stake for all Americans with the Supreme Court. I think that this situation highlights the importance of electing a president who will appoint common-sense justices, who will be on the side of everyday people, who will reform our campaign finance system.

But we're talking about real families and real lives. There are thousands of people -- thousands of families across this country that are being left in limbo right now. Hillary came out and very clearly said we have to get this matter resolved. We have to keep these families together.

We look at Donald Trump. He talks about deporting people en masse. And he's put out a list of judges that he would appoint to the Supreme Court, and they're all right-wing extremists who will only make these problems worse.

So, I think this really highlights the importance of the choice of president and the kind of justices that they will appoint.

WALLACE: House Democrats staged a sit-in on the House floor this week for some 26 hours to push for new gun laws. Since Al Gore in 2000, Democratic presidential candidates have tended to soft-pedal gun control because it tends, if anything, just to mobilize the pro-gun forces.

Question: Will Hillary Clinton campaign aggressively on tougher gun control this fall?

MOOK: Well, she has spoken out very clearly on this issue during the entire campaign. And she will obviously continue to do so.

Look, this is very simple. We need to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals, out of the hands of terrorists, and Republicans, including Donald Trump, are trying to block this at every step.

This is something that the American people support overwhelmingly. And for the sake of the safety of families across this country, we just need to get something. And that's what Hillary is proposing that we do.

WALLACE: Then, there is ethics. And Trump hit Clinton hard on that this week.


TRUMP: She ran the State Department like her own personal hedge fund, doing favors for oppressive regimes, and many others, and really, many, many others in exchange for cash.


WALLACE: And according to a recent poll, 33 percent say she's honest and trustworthy, 62 percent say no.

Robby, given all the questions that keep coming up, how is she going to handle the question of ethics?

MOOK: Well, first of all, Trump's speech earlier this week was just riddled with outright lies, inaccuracies, it has been fact-checked probably more than any other speech.

WALLACE: Let me just say, I pointed that out to Gingrich. But go ahead.

MOOK: I mean, it's riddled with inaccuracies. And this is just another one.

You know, I find it very ironic that Donald Trump, you know, bought his Turnberry golf course, you know, from an Arab country and has made tremendous profit by making deals with countries with all sorts of human rights abuse records.

And so, you know, I think Donald Trump has more to answer on this question than Hillary Clinton.

WALLACE: But, I mean, just briefly, and we're running out of time, how about Clinton's ethics? How is she going to answer about that?

MOOK: Well, Hillary Clinton has actually been the most transparent secretary of state in our history. She has released all of her emails. She has released her schedules. You know, I think the record speaks for itself here.


MOOK: Donald Trump has yet to release his taxes.

WALLACE: Without litigating all of it, you know, there is a lot of pushback on that.

MOOK: Well, again, if we're talking about transparency and ethics, it has been a given for decades that presidential candidates release their taxes. Donald Trump refuses to do that. He refuses to release the documents related to Trump University.

I think this is a deflection technique. You know, Paul Manafort is trying to get, you know, a teleprompter in front of him and change the subject. It's just not working.

WALLACE: And just real quickly on that subject, you know, what about Hillary Clinton's transcripts for the Goldman Sachs speeches?

MOOK: Well, look, we -- Donald Trump has given dozens of paid speeches himself. Nobody is asking him to release them. Again, Hillary Clinton has released her taxes for decades. Donald Trump hasn't released a single one.

We have to assume he's hiding something. I think Donald Trump has a lot of work to do before he starts asking questions about other candidates.

WALLACE: Finally, as I discussed with Gingrich, your campaign has a huge advantage over Trump when it comes to money and staff and infrastructure, but that didn't stop Trump in the primaries.

And that's really the issue. He is a different kind of candidate. You're running a traditional campaign. He isn't.

Isn't this kind of asymmetric warfare when you're trying to deal with Donald Trump?

MOOK: Well, I think they are asymmetric candidates. I mean, Donald Trump is probably one of the most reckless, unfit candidates to ever seek the presidency. Hillary Clinton is probably one of the most prepared.

Look, we're obviously doing everything we can to mobilize voters and turn them out on the ground, on the airwaves. There is so much at stake in this election. We don't want to leave anything to chance.

But I think what's really going to drive this election is the tremendous difference between these candidates -- how unfit, how dangerous Donald Trump is, how prepared and steady Hillary Clinton is going to be. And that's what we're going to keep talking about, on the ground, on the airwaves throughout this campaign.

WALLACE: Robby, thank you. Thanks for joining us. Please come back.

MOOK: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.

WALLACE: Up next, we'll bring in our Sunday group to discuss what Brexit means for Britain and Europe and the global economy.  



NIGEL FARAGE, U.K. INDEPENDENCE PARTY LEADER: This will be a victory for real people, a victory for ordinary people, a victory for decent people.


WALLACE: U.K. Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, a key figure in the movement to leave the E.U. after this week's dramatic vote.

And it's time now for our Sunday group. Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume, Julie Pace, who covers the White House and the campaign for the Associated Press, syndicated columnist George Will, and USA today columnist Kirsten Powers.

Well, before we get to Britain leaving the E.U., George, I want to talk about you. You announced this week that you have left the Republican Party. Why?

GEORGE WILL, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: I left it for the same reason I joined it in 1964 when I voted for Barry Goldwater. I joined it because I was a conservative. But I leave for the same reason, that I'm a conservative. To give you a time line, shortly after Trump became the presumptive nominee, he had a summit meeting with Paul Ryan where they stressed their common principles and their vast shared ground, which is much more important than their differences. I thought that was puzzling doubly so because Paul Ryan still didn't endorse him.

After Trump went after the Mexican judge from northern Indiana, then Paul Ryan endorsed him. And I decided that, in fact, this is not my party anymore. I changed my registration to unaffiliated 23 days ago. I hardly made an announcement. I just mentioned this in a meeting with the Federalist Society. So the long and the short of it is, as Ronald Reagan said when he changed his registration, I did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.

WALLACE: Now, not surprisingly, Donald Trump has tweeted his reaction to this news today. Let's put it up on the screen. He says that you are "overrated" and that you lost your way a long time ago. Would you like to respond to Mr. Trump?

WILL: Only, he has an advantage on me because he can say everything he knows about any subject in 140 characters and I can't.

WALLACE: All right.

On to Brexit.

Julie, President Obama famously sided with Britain staying in the E.U., saying that if they left they would go to the back of the cue when it came to trade deals. How worried are they at the White House about the impact of Brexit on Britain, on Europe and on the U.S. economy?

JULIE PACE, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS: I think in descending order, they are less worried about the impact on the U.S. economy, quite worried about the impact on the European economy, but broadly worried about this idea that what we saw happen in Britain could take hold not just here but also throughout Europe and really change the economic climate, the push toward broad trade agreements the U.S. and Europe have been in negotiations over a trade agreement for some time now. I think that is the overarching concern that you could see a move away from the global economic order as (INAUDIBLE).

WALLACE: But wouldn't that have an impact on our economy?

PACE: Certainly it would if that -- if we got to that point, but it's unclear whether what we saw in Britain is going to be an isolated event or whether you are going to see other countries in Europe move to leave the E.U. as well.

WALLACE: Now, George, you have a column today in which you're almost as happy about Britain leaving the E.U. as Nigel Farage was. Why?

WILL: Well, even the supporters remaining in the E.U. approached it with a kind of weary, gloomy resignation, saying we really have no choice. And voters hate being told they have no choice. They said, we're so entangled with the E.U. and there will be such calamities if we leave that we just have to grin and bear it and hope that the E.U. gets better over time.

For all the attempts to say that everyone in favor of leaving the E.U. did it for racist reasons, which is a standard progressive response, the fact is 60 percent to 70 percent of all that the Britain government does is either compelled or mandated or in some way controlled by Brussels and counts and -- on the continent. Ask yourself, how many Americans would put up with 60 percent to 70 percent of America's public decisions being made by a commission in Canada and a court located in Honduras? I don't think very many.

The New York Times headline yesterday said, "Britain Enters Uncharted Territory." For what, 17 centuries they were outside the -- they were an independent nation. They spent 23 years in the E.U., think better of it and decided to leave. And this is considered a calamity.

One other point. They remain in the really important European institution, NATO. When the Balkans were engulfed in violence and genocide, really, the E.U. was utterly hopeless, utterly irrelevant. NATO came to the rescue and Britain remains a part of NATO.

WALLACE: In the wake of Brexit, one of the questions is, how many parallels there are between what drove that decision and the presidential campaign in this country. Donald Trump, on his trip to Scotland, said there are plenty.


TRUMP: People want to take their country back. They want to have independence in a sense. And you see it with Europe -- all over Europe.

I think you're going to have this happen more and more. I really believe that. And I think it's happening in the United States.


WALLACE: Brit, sometimes we do see global trends. I remember in the '70s, the victory of Margaret Thatcher, which seemed to somehow lead the way or pave the way for Ronald Reagan's victory in 1980 and a kind of worldwide, conservative trend around -- around the globe. How much should we read into Brexit and Trump?

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, it springs from some of the same sources, a sense of -- a rise of populism, the rise of disappoint with and anger at the established order. And I think that is -- is true in Britain and much of Europe, and it's true here.

However, Margaret Thatcher, years ago, after she was out of office, said about the idea of a United States of Europe that there were great differences. That American was the product of an idea, the idea of liberty, and Europe was the product rather of centuries of history -- bloody history, that there were despaired (ph) cultures. And any attempt to knit them together into something like a United States would never work. It appears now that she was correct. It looks as if, you know, more of this may happen.

I mention that simply to emphasize that -- that although there are certain similarities in the political atmosphere, that the countries are very different and no -- and as George pointed out earlier, no outside influence exercises the kind of control over life in the United States that the -- that Brussels exerts over -- over Britain and the rest of the member countries of the E.U. There's simply no parallel to it.

Now, people may say that about the federal government, but that's a different matter altogether.

WALLACE: But trying to draw the parallels, the vote in Britain to leave the E.U., it was a populist movement. It was anti-immigration, fear of trade, fear of globalization and the fact that that leaves millions of people behind. That sounds a lot like Donald Trump's platform, doesn't it?

KIRSTEN POWERS, USA TODAY COLUMNIST: Yes, it does sound like his platform. But you have to remember, this was a referendum that was very specific on -- very specific issues versus a presidential election, which is looking at two different people and a lot of different issues. So, you know, you're looking at Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump first, and then you're looking at what the top issues are. And for most people that's the economy, jobs and terrorism. Our people -- and does -- immigration, is that something that gets people upset? Absolutely. Is it something they're definitely going to be voting on in choosing their candidate? Less clear. The people who are upset about immigration are already voting for Donald Trump.

So, in terms of how does this impact people who are kind of in the middle? I don't think it's a perfect parallel. I think that this is a -- this was a very narrow issue in terms of borders and trade and immigration. It wasn't looking at -- at choosing a leader to have, you know, two different personalities and two different leadership styles.

WALLACE: But -- but, Julie, I mean, the -- the one point -- and I thought Newt Gingrich made it pretty well is, it's a question of change versus -- versus the status quo when he talked about the -- the new mayor of -- of Rome. I mean that there's a sense that things aren't working and that we need to shake things up and maybe we need to shake them up a lot. And that fear of -- of change isn't -- isn't as -- as frightening as off-putting as it generally is.

PACE: I had a Democrat tell me on Friday -- a Democrat whose supportive of Hillary Clinton -- say that Hillary Clinton can't win an election if it becomes a change election. She can win an election if it's a referendum on Donald Trump. And I think that what we learn from the Brexit vote is that we often assume that voters in these -- when they have these moments where they could choose big change, at the last moment decide to stand back and take the safer, the more conventional option. And in this case they didn't. They chose to jump into the abyss, go with the perhaps riskier option, the -- the less known option. And I think that is the bigger concern for Clinton than any one issue on -- on immigration or any policy position that Trump is taking.

WALLACE: All right, panel, we have to take a break here, but when we come back, two weeks after the Orlando massacre, Congress is gridlocked on gun control. Will it be a big issue on the campaign trail?

Plus, what do you think of the Democrats' 26-hour sit-in on the House floor this week? Let me know on FaceBook on Twitter @foxnewssunday and use the #fns.



TRUMP: Hillary Clinton may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency of the United States.

CLINTON: Maybe we shouldn't expect better from someone whose most famous words are "you're fired."


WALLACE: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton sounding more like October than June as they bring out the rhetorical big guns.

And we're back now with the panel.

Well, there are a couple of new polls out from our colleagues in the networks and let's put them up. First is an ABC poll which shows that Clinton is now leading Trump 51 to 39. The last poll in May, Trump was up two. Now he's down 12. So that's a swing of 14 points.

Now let's turn to the NBC poll. Clinton leads there 46/41. The last poll she was leading by three. Now it's five. So not as much of a change there.

Brit, talk -- give us some instant analysis.

HUME: Well, I think what it affirms is what we have thought, is that despite the fact that he finished earlier than she did and therefore had the field to himself while she was still grappling with Bernie Sanders, that he has not succeeded in -- in gaining from that opportunity, nor it seems has he gained from the opportunity afforded by this terrorist -- his hideous terrorist -- terrorist attack in Orlando despite the fact that he got right on it and had a message about it. He may have muddled that to a considerable extent by suggesting, as he did, that somehow Barack Obama had some shady knowledge of it or even sympathy with it, which was a distraction from his -- his central message. So I think it -- it -- it suggests that -- that it was a squandered opportunity on his part. And instead of gaining ground, which I think he might well have been able to do, he has lost ground.

WALLACE: Julie, I'm going to ask you about one part of Trump's message and his big speech with a teleprompter that he delivered on Wednesday. We talked about it with -- with Robby Mook. He described it as a contest between powerful special interests and the people and taking off on Clinton's campaign slogan he said, her slogan is "I'm with her." My point is, I'm with you, the American people. If he could stick to that message, it -- I think it could be pretty effective.

PACE: I think there were a lot of Republicans who were very pleased to see him get back to that message. That essentially is the overarching theme of his campaign from the primaries, this idea that he's outside of the political class, that he wasn't beholden to donors, other special interests because he was funding his own campaign. But that message got completely lost after he essentially won the primary.

The biggest question, though, is, can he stay on that message? I always watch with Trump when he gets back to his rallies. When he is in front of the crowd, he really feeds off of their energy. That's when he tends to really go off the script, say things that his campaign later has to try to walk away from. So we haven't seen him do that since he gave this speech. That's when I think we'll be able to know how he's able to stick with this message.

WALLACE: I was kind of intrigued by Newt Gingrich's comment in the first segment where he suggested, you know, Trump go into inner city Chicago and say, are you happy with the dozens of people who get killed here all the time? I don't know how many African-American votes he would pick up, but it would be the way of again saying, I'm the change agent. If you like status quo, vote for the other guy.

PACE: Sure. That would be something that Trump could choose to do. We haven't seen him do that yet. And I do think though that making a couple of speeches, going and having a couple of conversations like that isn't enough if you don't have some kind of campaign infrastructure then to make that a consistent case and try to ensure that the people who may be willing to change their party affiliation, move over to a Republican candidate, are able to actually come out and vote in November.

WALLACE: Let's turn to another development this week, and that was the 26-hour sit-in by House Democrats on the House floor pushing for more gun control. Afterwards, Congressman John Lewis, a civil rights icon, and House Speaker Paul Ryan, continued the debate.


REP. JOHN LEWIS, D-GA.: We will continue to insist, to demand action, whether it's on the floor or around America.

REP. PAUL RYAN, R-WIS., HOUSE SPEAKER: If this is not a political stunt, then why are they trying to raise money off of this? Off of a tragedy.


WALLACE: In a poll after the Orlando massacre, 85 percent said they now favor preventing people on the terror watch list from owning guns.

George, is public opinion turning on guns? This has tended to be an issue that Democrats have shied away from. Could it be a potential winner for them in this climate?

WILL: I -- I think portions of the gun control agenda, this portion particularly could be. I believe there is a large majority in favor of using the watch list this way, or the terrorism watch list. I know --

WALLACE: Saying that people on that list --

WILL: Yes.

WALLACE: Can't get guns?

WILL: I know, however, that in the words of the Supreme Court, the very purpose of a Bill of Rights is to put certain things beyond the reach of majorities. Now, what these people want is for a baseless bureaucrat, unaccountable, to be able to put someone on a list by standards we don't know. We don't even know how many people are on the list. Some say a million are on the terror watch list. And by putting them on that list, which is very hard to get off, can take years, they would trigger the loss of Second Amendment rights, they would violate the Fifth Amendment, guarantee of due process, and Fourteenth Amendment which applies due process to the states as well. So you have a large majority -- and it could be a political factor, but it's a large majority standing against the Constitution.

WALLACE: On the other hand, that's a log -- I mean it's a very cogent argument. It's a complicated argument to make. And if somebody says, people on the terror watch list need to not get guns, that's easier -- that's a bumper sticker, isn't it?

WILL: It is. But then the fair question is, what else should be forfeited by people who are put on this event list by someone we cannot know?

HUME: Chris, let's remember, this isn't the first time we've seen large majorities in favor of some form or another of further gun control. And each time what seems to happen is, the majority sentiment is from people whose concerns are spread out across a whole range of issues. The pro-Second Amendment people will vote against you on that issue alone. Polls have difficulty measuring the intensity factor. And the intensity factor time and time again on this issue has always favored the gun rights advocates, which is why it is a dangerous -- it has proved to be a very years, a very dangerous issue for Democrats who will look at a poll and say, wow, a majority's on my side and when the -- when the voting happens, it doesn't work out that way. And I think that that's a risk that Democrats run with this issue now.

WALLACE: Which is why, Kirsten, I asked Robby Mook exactly that question, because really since Al Gore in 2000, Democratic candidates for president have shied away from the issue. The single interest -- single issue voters that are pro-gun tend to be more mobilized. Should Hillary Clinton make this an issue in this campaign or not?

POWERS: Well, yes, I think Democrats think that that has shifted. And so that it's -- that that is not necessarily the way it used to be. And I think seeing this sit-in is also evidence of that, that they think it has shifted and that the people are now getting to the point, because of these mass shootings, that they want to see something done.

You know, you look at the CBS poll, you had 57 percent of people also supporting a nationwide ban on assault weapons. That's up 44 percent since December. So these are somewhat driven by events. But as these events continue to happen, I think people are starting to get fed up. And that -- that's what Democrats are looking at.

And in terms of the constitutionality issue, look, we have constitutional rights, but there are limits on them. And we recognize that with free speech, for example, that we do place some reasonable limits on that.

HUME: You can't buy a machine gun. (INAUDIBLE) some.

POWERS: And I think -- and so I think that a lot of people see these as reasonable limitations on -- on gun rights.

WILL: But the reasonable limitations have to be imposed under the Fifth Amendment with due process, not by an anonymous bureaucrat putting you on a list no one sees and no one quite knows how to get off.

WALLACE: Here's what I don't understand in that. I -- I agree with you that, you know, we know Steve Hayes, our colleague from --

WILL: Right.

WALLACE: "The Weekly Standard" was on the terror watch list. Isn't there a reasonable due process that -- because I know Democrats say that what the Republicans are asking for is impossible. Isn't there a compromise there somewhere?

WILL: Sure.

WALLACE: That, yes, you do say, if you're on the terror watch list and you want to contest it, you've got to figure, people that are really on the terror watch list rightly aren't going to contest it anyway.

WILL: The compromise is to establish due process, due procedures. But that's complicated and time consuming. And people, as you said, have little patience for constitutionality.

HUME: And remember this, Chris, this focus in the aftermath of Orlando works very well for the Democrats, particularly for the administration, which does not want to talk about the obvious failures that allowed Orlando to happen and the -- and the -- and the apparently unsuccessful efforts against terrorism. So they've turned it, I think somewhat skillfully, into an issue of gun control, whether that will prevail with the public at large remains to be seen, but for the moment they have certainly seized the spotlight.

WALLACE: All right, thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.

Up next, a look back at the stunning events in Britain as Europe faces a new future.


WALLACE: The idea of a unified Europe started back in the 1950s in the wake of two world wars and the desire to end the nationalist divisions that had torn the continent apart. Britain's decision to leave the E.U. marks a dramatic turn away from that path. Here are some of the sights and sounds from this week's historic vote.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The U.K. has voted to leave the European Union.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've got our country back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The sun has risen on an independent United Kingdom. And just look at it, even the weather's improved.

CAMERON: The British people have made a choice. That not only needs to be respected, but those on the losing side of the argument, myself included, should help to make it work.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are not Italians. We are not France. We are not Spanish. We are British and we've always been different.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The fact you need to --

BORIS JOHNSON, FORMER LONDON MAYOR: This does not mean that the United Kingdom will be in any way less united, nor, indeed, does it mean that it will be any less European.


WALLACE: It may take two years for Britain to leave the E.U., and the terms of the divorce will be complicated. But whatever happens, there's no question, Britain and the world now face a different future.

And that's it for today. Have a great week. And we'll see you next "Fox News Sunday."

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.