This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," December 4, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: I’m Chris Wallace.
President-elect Trump takes a victory lap and previews what's in store when he takes the oath of office next month.
DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESIDENT-ELECT: I’m going to discuss our action plan to make America great again.
WALLACE: And Trump is already acting, intervening to keep jobs in the U.S. and naming a retired marine general to lead the Pentagon.
TRUMP: We are going to appoint "Mad Dog" Mattis as our secretary of defense.
WALLACE: Then, insults fly when top officials from the Clinton and Trump campaigns meet at a Harvard forum.
JENNIFER PALMIERI, CLINTON COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: I would rather lose than win the way you guys did.
KELLYANNE CONWAY, DONALD TRUMP CAMPAIGN MANAGER: No, you wouldn't.
PALMIERI: Yes. Yes. Yes.
WALLACE: We'll get the latest on that and the Trump transition live from top adviser Kellyanne Conway.
Then, Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, who's pushing for recounts in three states Donald Trump won narrowly.
It's a "Fox News Sunday" exclusive.
Plus, we'll ask our Sunday panel what Democrats should do now after their members in the House re-elect Nancy Pelosi as their leader.
And our power play of the week. Veterans training service dogs and healing themselves.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A human/animal bond has worked better than any other intervention that I’m aware of.
WALLACE: All, right now, on "Fox News Sunday."
WALLACE: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.
This week, Donald Trump demonstrated for any doubters still out there just how unconventional a president he will be. Intervening directly to keep a thousand jobs from going to Mexico, holding a campaign-style rally, where he continued to bash the media, and holding conversations with foreign leaders that break with decades of U.S. diplomacy.
Joining me now from Trump transition headquarters in New York, Kellyanne Conway, one of Mr. Trump's top advisers.
And, Kellyanne, welcome back to "Fox News Sunday."
CONWAY: Thanks for having me, Chris.
WALLACE: Let's start with the controversy over the call that Mr. Trump took this week from Taiwan's president, President Tsai. The first time leaders of our two countries have, to the best of our knowledge, spoken since the U.S. broke off relations in 1979. Now, you say that Mr. Trump was fully briefed, knew what he was doing before this call, which raises the question, does he intend to change a One China Policy, which recognizes only Beijing?
CONWAY: Well, President-elect Trump is well aware of our One China Policy. He accepted a congratulatory call from the president of Taiwan. That marks probably the 40th or 50th world leader that has reached out to the president-elect or the Vice President-elect Mike Pence since they won the election last month, Chris. They've talked to the prime ministers or presidents of Israel, Singapore, of Japan, of China. Obviously --
WALLACE: But this one's different. The question, I guess, is, does this signal a change in policy, or was it just a phone call?
CONWAY: It was just a phone call at this point. It signals the fact that he accepted a congratulatory call. I know that China has a perspective on it. The White House and State Department probably have a perspective on it. Certainly, Taiwan has a perspective on it.
But the president-elect's perspective is that he accepted a congratulatory call. When he's sworn in as president and commander-in-chief in a little over a month, Chris, he'll make clear the fullness of his plans. But people shouldn't read too much into it. And I -- some of the press coverage, not here necessarily, is really astonishing when you think about how it was covered when Barack Obama was going to try to reach out to Iran and come up with an Iran nuclear deal.
This man received -- the president-elect received a phone call from a world leader in another country. We know about one-China. He knows about one-China. He's routinely briefed on these matters. That just is what it is.
WALLACE: So, let me ask you about this, and I think one of the reasons such a big deal was made of it is because of the fact that the president-elect has had a number of controversial phone calls with foreign leaders. He reportedly told Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif he would, quote, play any role you want me to play to address and find solutions to the country's problems, despite Pakistan’s relationship with terrorists. He also spoke with Philippine President Duterte, who's been accused of ordering the murder of thousands of suspected drug dealers -- which raises the question, Kellyanne, why is Mr. Trump refusing the State Department's offer to brief him before these calls, and why is he skipping the daily briefings, intelligence briefings, that President Obama gets every day?
CONWAY: He's not always skipping those briefings. He's briefed by any number of credible sources on these issues. I think people, Chris, frankly, are cherry picking about these world leaders. They're accusing the president-elect of somehow countenancing some of these behaviors in these other places.
But, look, that's really unfair when you think about we just had an election and the opponent, Hillary Clinton, who was the secretary of state, was using the State Department to get money from foreign governments like Saudi Arabia, which doesn't even respect girls and women.
So, it’s -- I think people just have their hair on fire, particularly those who are still entrenched in the campaign, are trying to reverse the election results from last week. Let's give this man time to form his cabinet. He's also showing respect to the current president, President Obama, who's still the president for about 6 1/2 more weeks and the commander in chief, certainly.
He's not out there -- President-elect Trump is not out there making policy or announcing new policy prescriptions worldwide. He's merely taking phone calls. He will, I’m sure, reengage with many of these world leaders once he takes the oath of office.
WALLACE: Kellyanne, speaking of people with hair on fire, last week, you went on several of the other Sunday talk shows to express the concern of Trump supporters about the consideration of Mitt Romney as secretary of state.
Here's a clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CONWAY: I’m hearing from people saying, hey, my parents died penniless, but I gave $216 to Donald Trump's campaign, and I would feel betrayed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: I know that you say Mr. Trump gave you permission, but there's a bigger question, which is, is that a proper way to treat somebody who is talking about accepting a role in public service?
CONWAY: Well, first, the president-elect has said he gave me permission. He's quoted in "The New York Times" and elsewhere saying that, and that's actually true. I would not say something publicly that I hadn't expressed privately. And I would never purposely embarrass him. He has my respect and my duty, frankly, my service. So --
WALLACE: I’m not talking about Mr. Trump. I’m talking about Mr. Romney. Is that an appropriate way to treat a guy who is just discussing public service, to say people are going to feel betrayed?
CONWAY: Well, first of all, I’m reflecting the news, not trying to make the news. I was astonished, Chris, that in a week when President-elect Trump told "The New York Times" on the record he would relook at waterboarding, he would relook at the Paris accords on climate change, he was not particularly interested in focusing on prosecuting Hillary Clinton any further because he was focused on health care and immigration. He understands that other agencies and individuals are charged with that responsibility.
But in a week when he said that, the breathtaking backlash was really about this particular prospective cabinet member. I would turn the question around and ask, was it appropriate for Governor Romney to stick his neck out so far in attacking Donald Trump? And never walking it back, never encouraging people to support the nominee once Mr. Trump had won the nomination squarely and fairly.
So, I’ve spoken my piece on that. And, certainly, the president-elect knows and I said publicly and will say here again, whatever he chooses and whomever he chooses has my full support and backing.
WALLACE: But let me just --
CONWAY: He knows that.
WALLACE: Let me just quickly follow up on that. Clearly, Romney is under consideration. We just showed a picture of them having dinner on Tuesday night. If Mr. Trump picks Romney, what are you going to say to those Trump supporters who are going to feel betrayed?
CONWAY: I’m going to say to those Trump supporters what I say to those who did not vote for the new president-elect, Chris, some of whom seem to have a hard time accepting the fact he's their president. I’m going to say you have to work together. You have to accept his judgment. And the man is brilliant.
The man is the best negotiator. He's the best connector and communicator. Obviously, he just pulled off the upset of the century, perhaps.
And the fact is, you have to trust his instincts and his judgment because it’s what brought so many people along to his movement in the first place. And it's certainly what inspires me daily to work with him.
So, we -- everyone, I think I hope, will accept that. And the president-elect and the president-elect alone will make the decision as to whom he should have serving him at the highest levels of government.
WALLACE: Let’s talk about Mr. Trump's instincts because he went to Indiana this week to celebrate after his intervention the fact that Carrier is going to keep a thousand jobs in the state. Here he is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Listen, companies are not going to leave the United States anymore without consequences. Not going to happen. It's not going to happen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: But in an editorial Friday with the headline "Trump's carrier shakedown," The Wall Street Journal said America won't become more prosperous by forcing companies to make noneconomic investments. A nation gets rich when individuals and businesses are allowed to take risks as they see fit in a competitive economy.
Kellyanne, I don't have to tell you, that's the conservative view of how a free market works and that politicians shouldn't be picking winners and losers. Sarah Palin calls this an example of crony capitalism.
CONWAY: Well, the president-elect just simply disagrees. If you look at what happened, this is what leaders do. Certainly what people who have been wildly successful in building businesses across the globe as the president-elect has been.
You produce. You deliver. You achieve results. Everybody looks at the result here, which is about 1,100 workers are going to stay in Indiana. His running mate, the vice president-elect, is the governor of Indiana. And I think together, they worked with Carrier.
Everybody is looking at it as a stick, there are carrots. There are incentives here. They worked with Carrier to find a way together, to keep these jobs here and not to go to Mexico.
It's astonishing to see this happen. The current president could have done it. He never did it. The president-elect did it before he's sworn in.
And let me just say this, $7 million in incentives, they carry over ten years. So, about $700,000 per year in incentives is part of this deal. That's about $785, maybe $800 per worker. So, people have to put this in perspective before they act like it's some type of big-footed intervention.
This guy ran from day one on bringing back jobs from China, Mexico, and elsewhere. And he's already delivered.
WALLACE: I want to get into two more subjects with you. One, Harvard's Institute of Politics holds a forum every four years where representatives of the winning and losing campaigns get together and try to have a kind of academic review of what happened, on why one side won, one side.
Well, it wasn’t that way this year. It got pretty ugly. And here are some of the exchanges between you and Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri. Here they are.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CONWAY: Do you think I ran a campaign where white supremacists had a platform? Are you going to look me in the face and tell me that?
JENNIFER PALMIERI, CLINTON COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: It did. It really did. It's providing a platform for white supremacists. If it makes me a brilliant tactician, I’m glad to have lost.
I would rather lose than win the way you did.
CONWAY: No, you wouldn't.
CONWAY: No, you wouldn’t.
PALMIERI: Yes, yes.
CONWAY: That's very clear today. No, you wouldn't, respectfully.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
WALLACE: What did you take away from that?
CONWAY: Well, the rest of the exchange was me telling her and her team as politely as I could that you missed America. You all you needed to do is recognized that a lot of voters had a hard time accepting Hillary Clinton as this outsider disrupter who was ethically clean and would treat all Americans fairly, had run an aspirational, uplifting campaign that had an economic message for a lot of working America.
The idea that -- you know what, they can say what they want about me and my team. We've got very broad shoulders over here, as you can imagine.
But to besmirch over 60 million hardworking men and women in this country who became part of the Trump movement, to pretend that Donald Trump was not out there every single day, Chris, sometimes four, five, seven stops in a single day, bringing his case directly to the American people and saying what to them, that we're going to reform the Veterans Administration, which leaves veterans to die. That we're going to stand by law enforcement and the thin blue line. That he's going to create 25 million jobs over five years, have an infrastructure program, repeal and replace Obamacare, which has really reduced the quality, and the choice, and the access and increase the price of healthcare for many Americans, left others behind. That he's going to defeat radical Islamic terrorism in the face of Hillary Clinton referring to them as our determined enemies and President Obama saying they're the jayvee team that's been brushed back. Nobody believes that.
And so, to besmirch those voters is really beyond the pale to me. And I had already -- that was a 2 1/2 hour forum and you’re playing a couple of clips. I had already credited them as brilliant strategists, as people I respected professionals. That was all done.
But there was no grace, there was no congratulations for them. And, frankly, there's no self-awareness that they lost the election because they missed America. They blamed Bernie Sanders. They blamed Jim Comey.
It's typical of Hillary Clinton. In Hillary Clinton's world, it's always somebody else's fault.
WALLACE: All right. One last thing -- I’m glad to see this was such an academic discussion.
Finally, we're going to, in a couple moments, have Jill Stein on the program, the Green Party presidential nominee who is pushing recounts in Wisconsin, in Michigan, and Pennsylvania. What do you say to her about those efforts?
CONWAY: I say to her, give it up, as it seems like you’re doing in Pennsylvania for a very simple reason. Even your friends in the Clinton campaign have admitted that these recounts will not change any results. Hillary Clinton gained a whopping one vote, Chris, one. And so, I read one article at "The Daily Caller" I believe that said at this pace, Hillary Clinton could change the election results in Wisconsin in 74 1/2 years.
I don't think America is going to sit around and wait for that to happen. The people have spoken. I was asked on this program and many others that will you accept the election results. The question for Jill Stein and Hillary Clinton and those still in the grief, anger, and denial stages, will you start moving over to acceptance and let this president-elect and vice president-elect get on with the business of government, have a peaceful transfer of power?
The other thing is, I’m just astonished how Jill Stein is now the favorite flavor of the left. They ignored her and ridiculed her. And a lot of their friends in the media made sure she had no coverage and no oxygen.
WALLACE: Well, I’ve got to cut you off so we can get her on the show.
CONWAY: Go ahead.
CONWAY: Wish her well for me. But, yes, I mean, gracious -- it's good to be gracious and to admit what you see in front of you. In this case, Donald Trump won 306 electoral votes, 30 of 50 states, 2,600 counties.
CONWAY: It wasn't even close.
WALLACE: Kellyanne, thank you. Thanks for your time today.
CONWAY: Thanks, Chris.
WALLACE: Up next, we'll bring in our Sunday group to discuss Donald Trump not waiting until he's sworn in to start acting like the president.
Plus, what would you like it ask the panel about Trump's deal with Carrier to keep a thousand jobs here? Just go to Facebook or Twitter @FoxNewsSunday. We may use your question on the air.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They say it’s not presidential to call up these massive leaders of business. But I think it's very presidential. And if it's not presidential, that's OK. That's OK, because I actually like doing it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Donald Trump speaking at Carrier plant in Indianapolis this week after working out a deal to keep a thousand jobs there from moving to Mexico. And it's time now for our Sunday group.
Monica Crowley, editor and columnist for "The Washington Times", Fox News political analyst, Juan Williams, Lisa Lerer, who covers politics for "The Associated Press, and from The Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel.
Well, Kim, you're a member of that Wall Street Journal editorial board that wrote that editorial that we just talked to Kellyanne Conway about, the Carrier shakedown. What about the argument that, look, this was a powerful, symbolic message that President Trump is going to have American workers' backs, and when he gets into office in a month, that then he can begin macroeconomic changes like cutting tax and rolling back regulations?
KIMBERLEY STRASSEL, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: I agree with all of that. Politically, this was very, very smart. It was a campaign promise he made, and he fulfilled it.
I’m just saying economically, this is not really the way you want to run an economy. We just had a president who for eight years decided they were going to politically allocate capital in the country, pick winners and losers. We were very critical of him for doing that, Solyndra et al.
This is a similar version of this. These companies are not leaving the United States because they're anti-American or want to stick it to Indiana. They're following the laws of economics. It's too expensive to do business here.
So, Mr. Trump has a choice. He can go from company to company, thousands of them, and sort of beat all of them into submission and threaten them with tariffs, or focus -- and I think this is what he's going to do -- on macroeconomic policy, like cutting tax and cutting back regulation.
WALLACE: But he's also talking about tariffs and punitive tax. I mean, that’s part of -- in fact, we should say he's on a Twitter storm this morning. He's talking about that.
STRASSEL: If you're going to talk about the long-term economy and how you keep businesses here, I think there's a real risk that if you start doing that and saying that people aren't going to build their businesses in the United States in the first place because they'll be too worried what about they have to do if they want to leave. And so, this is just -- this is something governors do. The president of the United States has got more resources to do bigger policies.
WALLACE: I want to play another clip from Mr. Trump's speech at that Cincinnati rally on Thursday night. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The era of economic surrender is over. We're going to fight for every last American job. It's time to remove the rust from the Rust Belt and usher in a new Industrial Revolution. We're going to do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: We ask you for questions for the panel. We got this on Twitter from someone named Steelers Slob. "For taxpayers, is it better for the government to assist businesses, or is it better for the free market to weed out the weak?"
Lisa, we should point out all this happened on the same week that the unemployment rate hit a nine-year low of 4.6 percent. But how do you answer Steelers Slob?
LISA LERER, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Well, I think a lot of people --
WALLACE: And I want you to use his name in answering.
LERER: Well, Steelers Slob, I think a lot of people in Washington would pick the latter, would say the free market. You see that in the reaction to this Carrier deal. It wasn't just The Wall Street Journal editorial board that took issue with it. So did Bernie Sanders. So did Larry Summers. So did Sarah Palin.
So, I think what we are seeing, you know, what Washington can take away from this decision by Mr. Trump is that this is a new brand of politics. This is going to be Trumpism, not Republicanism, not Democraticism, but Trumpism. And so, I think that's certainly sending a little bit of a chill and a little bit of a sense of foreboding up to Capitol Hill. These people don't quite know what they can expect other than something fairly unpredictable.
WALLACE: Monica, I want to turn to another subject I talked about with Kellyanne. That was President-elect Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders, especially with the president of Taiwan.
You heard the question I asked her. Should he be better briefed? Should he be accepting State Department briefings? Should he be taking the presidential daily brief that most president-elects usually get every day and Mike Pence is apparently getting every day? Should he be getting all the briefings he can before he steps into this world of diplomatic nuance?
MONICA CROWLEY, THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Well, the president-elect is getting regular briefings from people he trusts, experts like General Flynn, who will be the income national security adviser. He's incredibly well briefed before he takes these phone calls. The phone call at the time when he’s president was a congratulatory phone call. My understanding, it was only about ten minutes. They discussed a range of issues.
But I think Donald Trump was elected not reinforce the status quo but to shake up the status quo, to challenge the conventional ways of doing things.
This conversation -- look, Donald Trump understands One China Policy very well. There will be plenty of time to discuss the whole range of issues regarding China and the Pacific Rim once he's sworn in. But he also understands it's important for the president-elect and then the president of the United States to stand for freedom and to stands with those who challenge those who would oppress them. And that includes the Chinese government.
So, I don't know what his policy will be with regard to China once he's president of the United States. What I do know is he felt he was incredibly important to send a signal that, yes, he will take a whole new look at the range of issues.
WALLACE: So, Juan, are you persuaded by Monica, or -- I mean, is the media making too big a deal of these phone calls?
JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: No. But let me just say, I think to his supporters, there's not much Donald Trump can do at this point that would cause them some offense. I mean, the idea is that we shouldn't take him literally, that he's acting on a symbolic level, whether it's with Carrier or with the phone calls.
The problem is that in terms of the journalism, the national security community, the diplomatic community here in Washington is alarmed by this. We have a One China Policy that’s been in place since Richard Nixon, to suddenly go outside of that.
You mentioned not taking the daily briefings, but it's also not been consulting with the State, for example, the State Department about how do I prepare to talk if I’m deciding I want to do this and I want to change the policy. How do I talk to this person in an effective way?
We've already seen China file a formal complaint about the call. So, clearly, it's had an impact there even if I was to sit here and say to you, no big deal. It’s having an impact in terms of global relationships.
And going forward, there are questions about, well, what about his business dealings? As you know, it came up this week. So, you have ethics people here in Washington, well, he should make sure that he is totally divested. Trump has not agreed to that. When he's meeting with Prime Minister Abe of Japan and brings in his daughter, when he's talking to the British about windmills near his golf courses, people are like, what is going on here?
STRASSEL: Well, I think this uproar is totally overwrought. I mean, a lot of this is being driven by State Department functionaries who are very unhappy that Donald Trump is not coming to them. And they are not being allowed to formulate all American policies. By the way, that was what he was elected to do, to a certain extent.
And I think the other point is that you got to look at what Donald Trump says and also what he does. To me, the far more important message that got sent this week to the world was the appointment and the naming of Mad Dog Mattis as secretary of defense. Now, if I was Pyongyang or Tehran, that's what I’d be paying attention to, because this is a very clear-eyed general who understands world politics very well and is going to be a lot tougher than this current administration.
WALLACE: All right. Before we end this segment, Lisa, I want to get to you. You were at this forum at Harvard about rehashing the campaign. How ugly did it get?
LERER: It got pretty ugly. I think it's important to talk about what this normally is. This is normally a very state affair where they sip coffee and eat canapes as they discuss their strategy --
WALLACE: Canapes, that’s good right there.
LERER: As they discuss their strategy for the historical record.
That's not what this was. This felt almost like a collective nervous breakdown. It wasn't just ugliness between the two campaigns, who really were reduced to shouting on numerous occasions on each other. Republican campaign managers heckled CNN president Jeff Zucker. Pollster Nate Silver came in for some heckling.
So, there was a lot of tension there. I think it really shows how raw these divides still are and it certainly sends a little bit of a foreboding sign for our politics going forward. It doesn't feel like there’s going to be an awful lot of kumbaya moments in our future. But maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised.
WALLACE: Thirty seconds, Monica. Are you surprised that the Clinton camp is still so bitter?
CROWLEY: They are extremely bitter. I was talking to some people on the Trump transition, people who served on the campaign. I think they're surprised it remains so raw. The challenge for a President-elect Donald Trump -- and this was one of his core messages during the campaign -- is that he was going to try to unify the country, bring everybody together.
I think the one way -- the most effective way for him to do that is create a booming economy. If the economy is roaring, that will likely silence a lot of his critics.
WALLACE: All right, panel. We have to take a break here.
When we come back, President-elect Trump's allies go to court to block recounts in three states. We'll talk to green party presidential nominee, Dr. Jill Stein, who's pushing the recount effort, next.
WALLACE: Coming up, Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein defends her effort to get recounts in three key states.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. JILL STEIN, FMR. GREEN PARTY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: We're not doing this to help one candidate or hurt another, but rather to help voters restore their confidence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Jill Stein in what she hopes to accomplish, next. Only on "Fox News Sunday".
WALLACE: A look outside the beltway at Des Moines, Iowa, where President-elect Trump is set to take his thank you tour next Thursday.
Well, the election cycle that seemed like it would never end technically still hasn't. A recount is currently underway in Wisconsin, with additional challenges in Michigan and Pennsylvania. Joining us now to discuss her push for the recounts is Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein.
Dr. Stein, you say that your goal here is not to change the results of the election, but to ensure the accuracy of the count. My question is, why then did you choose three states that Mr. Trump won narrowly but not a state that Secretary Clinton won much more narrowly, New Hampshire, which she won by only 3,000 votes?
STEIN: We didn't go into New Hampshire mainly because the deadline for filing a recount had passed. But, in fact, at the time that we launched the recount, two of the states had gone to Donald Trump. Michigan was still uncertain as to which direction it would go. And as far as I’m concerned, if we do find evidence that there's a systemic problem here with these machines, which are extremely unreliable, prone to error, and -- and human error and machine error, as well as to hacking and security breaches, if we find evidence that there is a systemic problem, we need to expand the recount, in my view. That's what the American voters are calling for, an election result and a voting system that we can have confidence in.
WALLACE: Let me ask -- let me ask you a question, Dr. Stein. Do you know the largest switch of votes in a recount in American political history?
STEIN: Well, I can tell you one, for example, in Toledo, in 2004, there were 90,000 votes that were marked blank, which were discovered actually not to be blank at all. And those -- when the -- when a hand recount was done. That would have been enough to have changed the outcome in Ohio. Unfortunately, that wasn't found until after the election was already called.
WALLACE: But -- but let me tell you the -- the -- the -- the biggest actual switch of votes in any election in U.S. history was back in 2000 when roughly 1,200 votes were switched from Bush to Gore. We're talking about three states, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, that Donald Trump won by more than 10,000 votes. So there's not a chance in the world here, Dr. Stein, that the -- that the vote change is going to -- that the vote is going to change in those three states.
STEIN: Actually -- actually, in Michigan -- Chris, actually, in Michigan, there are 75,000 votes which are blank, which are sky high compared to all other past elections. They are concentrated in Detroit. That's 75,000 votes which may very well be machine error or human error. That is about seven times the margin of difference in Michigan. So these results could, in fact, change the outcome, but we don't know that until we actually examine the evidence. That means a hand recount of the ballots. That is going forward in Wisconsin --
WALLACE: But it’s never -- it’s never happened. There's never been a 70,000-vote switch. The most there's ever been is 1,247.
Let me ask you --
STEIN: That -- that's actually not true. If the recounts were done in time, they could affect 90,000. And, in fact, in Detroit, there could very well be 75,000.
WALLACE: I’m -- I’m asking -- I’m talking about -- look, I’m talking, Dr. Stein, about recounts that actually happened, not ones that could have happened.
STEIN: That's because we don't -- that’s because we don’t do them. And, in fact, we should do them. That's how we ensure that we have a system we can trust. And right now, as you know, Chris --
WALLACE: Let -- let me ask you, Dr. Stein --
STEIN: Cynicism and distrust is running wild. We need to address the fundamental concerns that the American voters are expressing.
WALLACE: Dr. Stein, let's talk about what a lot of people think is the real point here, and that is, let’s take a look at how much money you raised in your presidential runs. In 2012 you raised $893,000 in your presidential campaign. In 2016, $3.5 million. But for this recount, you've raised more than $6.5 million from almost 140,000 donors. Isn't that what this is really about, Dr. Stein, using the recount it raise lots of money and build your list of supporters?
STEIN: Let me be very clear, this money is going strictly into a segregated account which can only be spent on the recount. So this -- this money is entirely -- will be completely used, and we'll be lucky if we can cover the cost at the rate that there is a bait and switch going on here. In Wisconsin, we just saw this cost triple. So, to my mind, it’s -- it really underscores why we need a fundamentally secure voting system that has built-in safeguards that should have automatic audits, recounts. We need to get rid of these voting machines, these electronic touch screens which have been proven highly vulnerable to tampering, to hacking, to human and machine errors. This is an -- this is an abuse of the American vote.
WALLACE: So -- so the fact that you have 140,000 donors is purely coincidental, Dr. Stein?
STEIN: Well, put it this way, the American people have made it very clear what they want done here. Chris, coming out of this election, 80 percent of Americans --
WALLACE: I -- wait, wait, wait, I don’t think the American people --
STEIN: Eighty percent.
WALLACE: Wait, where do you -- where do you get off saying the American people --
STEIN: Eighty percent of Americans said they were disgusted.
WALLACE: Where do you get off saying that the American people are calling for this? I think the vast majority of the American people think we should accept the result of the election.
STEIN: Eighty percent of Americans said that they were disgusted with this election --
WALLACE: I don’t think that was -- I don’t -- it may have been the choice they had. I don’t think it was the system that the -- or a demand for a recount.
STEIN: And we know that about 90 percent of Americans do not have faith. This is a time that people do not have faith -- this is a time that people have an entire loss of faith in our political institutions. The way that the money is coming in from small donors makes it very clear. And, in fact, poll. A poll just last week showed the American people support the recount and that they feel that if Donald Trump was in the reverse position, he would be doing exactly the same thing. Remember, he said that it was a rigged system and that he was not going to accept the result.
WALLACE: You’ve -- I mean that --
STEIN: So he has articulated what many Americans feel. It's time to respect the views of the American voter and ensure that we have a voting system that we can trust.
WALLACE: Well, some would say that the views of the American voter were that Donald Trump was elected president. You've now decided to --
STEIN: Well, remember what the voters said by the Electoral College, not by the national popular vote.
WALLACE: If -- if I may ask my -- if I may ask my question -- if I may ask my question, Dr. Stein, you've now decided to go to the federal court to try to get a recount in Pennsylvania after the state court said that you would have to post, or your supporters would have to post a million-dollar bond and you said they can't afford that. You're going to hold a news conference tomorrow in front of Trump Tower. What's he got to do with it?
STEIN: We want to hold this conference where America will see that we are standing up for everyday Americans who do not have confidence in this election system, who have lost confidence actually in our political system. And we're standing up loud and strong to say that we will not be intimidated, we will not be frightened by having to jump through all these legal hoops. We say, what is Donald Trump frightened of because he is obstructing --
WALLACE: Well, wait -- wait --
STEIN: He is delaying these cases where the decisions have already --
WALLACE: He got -- he got -- how many votes did you get in -- Dr. Stein, how many votes did you get in this election?
STEIN: Excuse me -- excuse me, how many votes did Donald Trump get? He got about 2.5 million less votes --
WALLACE: He got -- he got 62.5 -- he got 62.5 million votes.
STEIN: He got about 2.5 million less votes than Hillary Clinton.
WALLACE: He got 62.5 million votes. How many votes did you get, Dr. Stein?
STEIN: So I think the American people are owed an actual explanation here --
WALLACE: Dr. --
STEIN: Of what is going on.
WALLACE: Dr. Stein, could you answer the question?
STEIN: And you do not know until you look at the evidence.
WALLACE: How many -- how many votes did you get?
STEIN: I am not the -- I am not going to be the beneficiary of this one way or the other. That's why I can do this because I’m a non-partisan in this fight.
WALLACE: But he got 62.5 million votes. How many did you get? I mean the question really is, who's speaking for American voters, him or you?
STEIN: It’s not about me. This is about -- this is not about -- this is not about Donald Trump. It's not about Hillary Clinton. It's not about my campaign. It's not about Gary Johnson. This is about the American voters who deserve to have a voting system we can trust. When something like 75,000 votes in Detroit may, in fact, be an error because they are -- why would people come out in Detroit, fill in all the other positions but not vote for president?
WALLACE: Let me -- Dr. -- Dr. Stein, let me ask you --
STEIN: This is a little bit suspicious. We deserve to know what's going on because that, could, in fact, change the outcome of the vote in Michigan.
WALLACE: In the third presidential debate, Dr. Stein, I asked Donald Trump whether he would accept the result of the election and the principle of the peaceful transfer of power. He’s what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Are you saying you’re not prepared now to commit to that principle?
TRUMP: What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense, OK.
HILLARY CLINTON, D-FORMER PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Well, Chris, let me respond to that, because that’s horrifying. You know, every time Donald thinks things are not going in his direction, he claims whatever it is, is rigged against him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Dr. Stein, at that time, a lot of liberals' heads exploded because Donald Trump wouldn't accept the results of the election. Aren't you doing precisely that right now? Aren't you doing exactly what Hillary Clinton called "horrifying"?
STEIN: I am not here to help Hillary Clinton or to express her point of view. In my view, the recount should have happened in the Democratic primary as well, where there were also very suspicious results, where voters appeared to be stripped from the rolls in Brooklyn, where hundreds of thousands of votes went uncounted in California. This is not about helping Democrats. It's not about helping Republicans. It’s not about helping Green. I -- you know, this is the question, though, that the Americans care about.
WALLACE: I didn't ask you that. I asked you what -- I -- that’s not the question asked you, Dr. Stein. I asked you, why not accept the results of the election because what you're going is exactly what Hillary Clinton said was horrifying?
STEIN: I'm not -- I don't care what Hillary Clinton thinks about this and I don't care -- I care what the voters think about this, not what the politicians or the pundits or the party operatives think about this. This is about responding to the American voters who are standing up and saying, we deserve an election system that we can trust and that is accurate, that is secure against hacking, against human error, against machine error, and that in which the votes are being counted, because right now it's not clear that all the votes are being counted. We deserve that so we can go forward with an election system that we can trust.
WALLACE: Dr. Stein -- Dr. Stein, thank you. Thanks for joining us today. And we'll stay on top of the recount.
STEIN: Thank you.
WALLACE: Up next, we'll bring back the panel. What's next for the Democrats after Nancy Pelosi was re-elected to lead her party in the House?
Plus, what do you think? Why are Democrats sticking with Pelosi despite their election losses? Let me know on Facebook or Twitter @foxnewssunday and use the #fns.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALI., HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: I have a special spring in my step today because this opportunity is a special one to lead the House Democrats, bring everyone together as we go forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi reacting to her re-election as House minority leader after beating back a challenge from Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan.
And we're back now with the panel.
Well, House Democrats have had a bad run under Pelosi. Let's take a look. After the 2008 election when Barack Obama won, they held 257 seats in the House. But after this election on November 8th, they now hold 194. That's a loss of 63 seats.
Juan, how do you explain, given that record, House Democrats putting her back as their leader?
WILLIAMS: She's a tremendous fundraiser. There's just no question about it. And, secondly, in this environment where you just had, you know, potentially the first woman for the presidency defeated on the Democratic side, I think women on The Hill have rallied to her support. And, don't forget, so much of the base of the party in Congress comes from California, the West Coast, and the East Coast. So she's there for them. She gets -- she’ll do it.
Tim Ryan, who was running against her, as you pointed out, from Ohio, said he could each out, do better with blue collar voters. But in (INAUDIBLE) record (INAUDIBLE) I think the best augment here is if you look at Pelosi, Jim Clyburn, Steny Hoyer, these are all politicians who, as you say, have suffered defeat after defeat and the decimation of Democrats on Capitol Hill and also, by the way, state governments around the country.
Also, another point to be made is, the people who vote Democratic these days, disproportionately millennials, young people. They voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton and yet they don't see it represented in this leadership, all in their 70s, and who don't seem to be in touch with a new, more vibrant message that, more of that kind of energetic activism.
WALLACE: So you're saying they did it for old -- the old reasons, the old-fashioned, inside political reasons. But in terms of appealing to the country and the future, not so smart.
WILLIAMS: Not so smart. And the question is, how do you then get this older group that's ensconced and has the money, because you're going to have to rebuild the party. There's an argument now about who's going to run the Democratic National Committee.
WALLACE: We’ll get to that in a second.
WILLIAMS: So the question is, how do you rebuild and what is the mess going forward? Just sitting on the sidelines as a journalist, I don't see that these folks are the ones that you would want to entrust with that new message.
WALLACE: So, Kim, let me bring you into this conversation. It was clear from this election that House Democrats do not have a message that resonates with millions of American voters, millennials, working class, rural. Why do you think they kept Pelosi?
STRASSEL: I mean part of this is Nancy Pelosi's failure, and for all of those reasons, House solidified her role there. At this point, one-third of all House Democrats hail from just three states in the country, New York, Massachusetts, and California. Everyone that was in opposing voice in that caucus has been driven out of the party, lost elections because of the very liberal governance of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and Barack Obama. So there are no voices left. Of course they re-elected her because this is what's left of the party is -- believes that Nancy Pelosi is correct, even though she’s four for four out there.
It was amazing, when I listened to that Harvard forum, the most extraordinary thing that came out of this was, Democrats with their heads in the sand about why they lost this. They will not be honest with themselves. They believe it was Jim Comey, that the media was mean to them, they didn’t get their message out. That’s not why they lost. They lost because people disagree with their politics.
WALLACE: Well, let's talk about another potential face of the Democratic Party that Juan alluded to, and that’s the front runner to be the new chair of the Democratic National Committee, Congressman Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress.
Monica, the Anti-Defamation League says that a speech that Ellison made in 2010 in which he basically said U.S. foreign policy run out of Israel, they call that speech, quote, "disqualifying." So what does it say that he may be the front runner to be the face of the Democratic Party?
CROWLEY: And that's one problematic example with Representative Ellison. In addition, in the past, he's called for a separate black state in America and he also has very close ties to CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which some argue may be a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood. So, look, he is politically very far out there on the left. And the fact that the Democratic Party is now seriously considering him as its head tells you where the party is.
This is no longer Bill Clinton’s Democratic Party. This is Barack Obama’s Democratic Party. Obama, over the last eight years, has taken the party, moved it from centered left all the way to the far left. And it turns out that the coalition that elected him and re-elected him was unique to him. And that without him on the ticket, they suffered massive losses, 2010, 2014, and now 2016. And a big part of this, which gets to what we’ve been -- were talking about earlier with the Carrier deal and so on, is that Democrats have ignored, blown off, disrespected the works class. And it's not the first time they have done this. These people who came out for Donald Trump, a lot of them independents and Democrats disaffected from their own party because they can’t relate to them anymore, came out for Richard Nixon in 1968, in ‘72 came out for Ronald Reagan. The old Reagan Democrats. And unless and until this Democratic Party leaves behind Barack Obama and his doctrinaire of leftism, they're going to continue to suffer these kind of electoral defeats.
BLITZER: I -- I want to end this segment by talking about our previous guest, Jill Stein.
Lisa, what do you make of her recount effort? What’s this all about?
LERER: Well, look, Hillary Clinton's campaign did a very expensive assessment of voting irregularities and all -- you know, the vote in all the states. They investigated every theory that people presented to them. They brought in outside academics, technologists, all kinds of people and they found no evidence of any kind of systemic flaw in the system, whether it's hacking or failed machines or anything like that. So this is very, very, very unlikely to change the results of this election. So you have to wonder, why is Jill Stein pursuing this so hard.
Now, of course, the integrity of our elections is very important, but I think this is good business for Jill Stein, even though the money is in a separate account. She compiles a list of supporters that she can then take. That's what third parties need to build up their brand.
You know, on the flip side, Donald Trump is acting very aggressively to stop these recounts and you kind of have to wonder why he's doing that as well given that it's unlikely to change the outcome. You know, in the words of a Disney princess, you sort of wonder why he doesn't just let it go because it sort of feels like if he’s telling --
WALLACE: Wow, a "Frozen" reference there. That's a first.
LERER: Yes, if he’s telling (ph) whether (ph) -- if he’s -- you know, he's creating a certain amount of smoke around it as well that I think could make some people wonder whether there's something real here. You know, they may find some kind of irregularities, but it's unlikely to have an impact on -- on who the president is going to be.
WILLIAMS: If I could --
WILLIAMS: If I could interject here. I think -- I think that the reality --
LERER: Yes, but he’s going to have to --
WILLIAMS: The real answer to your question would be, ballot access. Building a third party, a Green Party that's stronger. She said the money is segregated now in a separate account, but I think that what you're going to find is that once we go beyond this, she's going to say, you know what, the Green Party’s stronger. It is the voice of people who were Bernie Sanders supporters on the left and that we are building a structure that will allow us to be a successful -- and that would be the first time a successful third-party operation in 2020.
LERER: And it -- it does --
STRASSEL: Look --
LERER: You know, he -- he can send lawyers to monitor it, but sending lowers to monitor it is one thing. Suing to stop it completely is another, you know?
STRASSEL: No, I mean I think it would be criminal malpractice for Donald Trump not to take this incredibly seriously because of the thing (ph).
STRASSEL: Look, there's one reason Jill Stein’s doing there. She was just on your show for ten minutes. That's more time than she's ever had on any network. So, you know --
WALLACE: In fact, we had her during the campaign. In fairness, we had her before.
STRASSEL: In fairness. But like this -- this is Jill Stein's moment. She’s building for the next presidential launch, she says.
CROWLEY: And it would also be political malpractice not for Donald Trump to try to resist some of this because the whole point -- people say that the recount is pointless. The whole point is to try to delegitimize the election.
CROWLEY: I mean Donald Trump is the clear winner. It's trying to sow seeds of doubt and create a narrative that the left can dine out on for the next four years.
WILLIAMS: Oh, come on.
WALLACE: All right, well --
LERER: Of course he --
WALLACE: Wow, I'm glad we got this much discussion about Jill Stein.
STRASSEL (ph): At least there’s that.
WALLACE: And a reference -- the only time that my granddaughter will have ever understood anything that was said.
Thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.
Up next, our "Power Player of the Week." Puppy love. How veterans train therapy dogs are -- and in the process are healing themselves.
WALLACE: Treating and healing our wound warriors is one of this nation's top responsibilities. And we found someone who's come up with his own way to do that. Here is our "Power Play of the Week."
RICK YOUNT, FOUNDER, WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION: There's 30,000 years or so of proven history behind the man's best friend.
Hey, good boy.
WALLACE (voice-over): Rick Yount is the founder of the Warrior Canine Connection, a unique program that taps into the healing power of dogs. Disabled veterans have been getting service dogs for decades. Yount decided who better to train those dogs than other vets suffering from post-traumatic stress or brain injury.
YOUNT: The human-animal bond has worked better than any other intervention that I'm aware of.
WALLACE (on camera): But, wait, better than drugs? Better than talking?
YOUNT: Yes. I was asked, how soon does it take for you to see effect in the service members you’re working with? It's usually about five minutes.
WALLACE: (voice-over): Retired Army Specialist Christian Santos was injured in Afghanistan in 2013. His nurse said training dogs like Cody could help him.
SPC CHRISTIAN SANTOS, WARRIOR CANINE CONNECTION: Depression, anxiety, PTSD. I was really like -- didn't want to socialize with other people. So she said, try the service dogs program.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Push. Good job! Yes! Good boy!
WALLACE: Yount says in teaching the dogs, starting as puppies, the vets teach themselves that the world is a safe place.
YOUNT: These veterans have to challenge their intrusive thoughts. That that dumpster door slamming was an IED. No, it was just a dumpster door.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, you're so good. Oh, you’re so good.
WALLACE: And to show positive emotion. Yount recalls one story.
YOUNT: Learning how to praise this dog and the patience that I learned in training this dog has really taught me how to connect with my son on a three year old level and it -- it saved my marriage.
WALLACE: Rick Yount was a social worker 20 years ago when he brought his dog Gabe on a job, driving a sobbing child to foster care. The crying stopped.
YOUNT: What I saw was a four-month-old golden retriever puppy with his head in this little boy's leg and he was petting this dog.
WALLACE: Now, Yount uses Gabe's 12-year-old son Huff (ph) for therapy.
YOUNT: Really since he was about 12 weeks old, he started working with folks, and he's still doing it today.
WALLACE: At any one time, the Warrior Canine Connection has 30 vets training 65 dogs at four sites across the country. Yount says the dogs can tell their trainer's emotional state.
YOUNT: If the leg is bouncing, we train the dogs to come over and lay their head on the veteran's leg. And then we -- we train the veterans who receive the dogs to keep the training going and pet the dog. So it's kind of like a self-licking ice cream cone.
WALLACE: Over the last five years, almost 4,000 vets have helped train these dogs, and Yount says helped heal themselves.
YOUNT: I now this has been the difference between life and death by many of the veterans. There’s no question about it. One Marine had took ten different medications. He couldn't sleep.
WALLACE (on camera): And then they spend time with one of these dogs.
YOUNT: We had the dog stay overnight with him. The first night he had the dog, he had six hours straight through.
WALLACE: Yount wants to scale up his program to serve 4,800 vets over the next 10 years and open ten new sites. Seventy percent of the funding comes from private donations. If you want to learn more, please go to our website foxnewssunday.com.
And that's it for today. Have a get 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.