Brit Hume on Trump's efforts to sell tax reform plan

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," October 11, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, "THE STORY" HOST: Breaking tonight, moments ago, President Trump in front of a fired-up audience of truckers in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, saying truckers are the lifeblood of this country and promising that his tax cuts will mean an extra $4,000 in the pocket of every family in this country. That is where our story begins on this Wednesday night. I'm Martha MacCallum. So, as we said, just wrapped a little while ago, let's show you some of the highlights from the speech in Harrisburg. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We want lower taxes, bigger paychecks, and more jobs for American truckers and for American workers. And already, we are seeing the incredible results. Results of that, in many cases, the media hates to report. Our economy cannot take off like they should unless we transform America's outdated, complex, and extremely burdensome tax code. You'll do your tax on a single piece of paper. H&R block will not like Donald Trump very much. Our plan goes from eight tax brackets down to four, expands the child tax credit, repeals the estate tax, and a special interest tax spreads, cuts the corporate tax rate, and cuts tax rates for small businesses to the lowest level in more than 80 years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Here now, Brit Hume, Fox News senior political analyst. Brit, good evening, good to see you.

BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Hi, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So, your reaction to the speech tonight. What do you think?

HUME: Well, what may be most important about the speech, Martha, is that he is doing now on this measure what he never really did on ObamaCare repeal. That is to say, he is getting out, he's talking about specifics within it, he's making an earnest effort to sell it to people. And it's not that easy with tax cuts to do that, but he made a stab at it today, and he -- you know, you heard him talking about, you know, the various tax measures that would benefit middle-class people and he talked about the reduction of the number of brackets and so on.

All of those things have appealed to middle-class voters. The problem, politically always, Martha, with when you're cutting tax rates is that it's a mathematical fact that the more you pay, the more you gain from a tax cut-- that's just the way it works. We live in a country where what, some 70 percent of the taxes are paid by 10 percent of the people. So, you begin to cut the rates to 10 percent are bound to benefit. This opens the avenue for the perennial Democratic criticism that it's a tax cut for the rich. He's going to have to fight that the whole way. He made a start on it tonight.

MACCALLUM: Yes. You know, and there are things like removing the state and local tax deductions from your federal income taxes that would work against that and would work in favor of the argument that the rich will not benefit from this, and we're going to see what happens with all of that. But he's got a battle to won within his own party, Brit. They spurned him on health care and they're already making rumblings that they could do it again on tax reform.

HUME: Well, that's why try to go out in the country and build up a kind of a head of steam about this from the people. It's not easily done, but Reagan, certainly, was able to do and other presidents have as well. The president certainly has a chance to do that here. And it makes it, you know, it puts pressure on wavering Republicans in a situation like this, not to oppose this. The last big tax reform was passed in 1986 -- I remember, I covered it. It ended up with bipartisan support. That's not impossible here, although the atmosphere is much more poisonous and divided than it was then. But the point being here that this is a measure that can be solved. It's going to take some work, but it can be done.

MACCALLUM: You know, to this idea that Republicans find themselves in this position having won the White House, the Senate, and the House, that they're having difficulty getting things passed. And this sort of underlying distaste for this president among so many in the establishment. And you know, Steve Bannon would argue even in the White House -- and we're going to talk about him in just a moment. But Victor Davis Hanson wrote about this phenomenon today, and he talked about the fact that the Republican establishment lamented that the Reagan Democrats and the Tea Party folks didn't stick with the party when John McCain ran and Mitt Romney ran.

And he ends by saying this, "Now, they're either worried or ashamed that the same swing voters came out in droves," and we saw it in Pennsylvania tonight. "Unless the Republican Party is in a dominant position at local, state, and federal levels not seen since the 1920s." Speak to that, Brit. Did we lose, Brit? We lost, Britt. We're going to try to get him. But we want to bring in another friend of ours who joins us tonight. I just mentioned Steve Bannon. Steve Bannon said that's he's taking aim at these-- did we get Brit back? Brit, can you hear me?

HUME: Can you hear me? Martha, you think Washington and New York would be able to communicate.

MACCALLUM: It's wonderful that you came to us from Budapest tonight. No, you're only in Washington, and we did work it out. I don't know how much you heard of the Victor Davis Hanson quote, but he's talking about --

HUME: I did. I heard the whole thing.

MACCALLUM: Oh, good.

HUME: I heard and saw the whole thing.

MACCALLUM: OK.

HUME: I'll just say this about it. The idea that it is a Republican establishment that is the problem with the fact that these measures that the president is proposing have not passed. It seems to me to be sort of ignoring the facts. It was a -- you have this razor-thin majority in the Senate, where one or two Senators can completely unscramble your majority and can send bills down to defeat. And you've got people like Rand Paul whose positions on these matters have been -- at least particularly on ObamaCare here -- utterly incoherent.

And what are you going to do in a situation like that? The idea that Ryan and McConnell didn't work as hard as they possibly could to pass the undoing of ObamaCare is just nuts, that's what happens. What the Republican Party badly needs now is the unity, and the fact is, they have no reason not to stand with Mr. Trump on these measures because basically he's adopted their agenda.

MACCALLUM: Couldn't have said it better myself. Brit, thank you very much. Glad we got you back.

HUME: You bet.

MACCALLUM: Good to see you tonight.

HUME: Thank you, Martha. Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Well, Steve Bannon, who just spoke about a moment ago said that he's taking aim at these establishment Republicans, a move that Trump confidante and former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, says is a fool's errand. Do you agree?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEWT GINGRICH, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR AND FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: Creating a civil war inside the Republican Party may feel good, but I think as a strategy it is stunningly stupid. I'm just being really honest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Here now, David Bossie, who served as a Trump 2016 deputy campaign manager and is a Fox News contributor. David, good evening, good to have you here. He says that what your friend and colleague, Steve Bannon, is suggesting is stunningly stupid. What do you say?

DAVID BOSSIE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR AND FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR TRUMP: Well, I've had the pleasure, the distinct honor of working with both of them -- Speaker Gingrich and Steve Bannon. So, I understand where they both are coming from, and I understand what they are saying and thinking. Steve Bannon, having worked inside the White House, understands better than anyone what the Republican leadership in the House and Senate have done, and really, haven't done, what has failed to do for this president.

They got elected into the majorities in 2010 and 2016 in order to bring change to Washington. And after both of those instances, the Republicans were told, the base was told, hey, just wait until we win the White House and then we'll get things done. Well, now, almost one year into the president's term, we have seen very little legislatively. If the president wasn't taking initiative on his own --

MACCALLUM: But David, as you just heard -- I hear you. As you just heard, Brit, say though, it came down to two or three people in each one of these cases. When you talk about Graham-Cassidy and talk about the original skinny bill on health care. So, why go after? And let's put up the list of people running in 2018, and this is on the GOP side, which Steve Bannon has said they're coming after every one of these people except for Ted Cruz-- who actually did not vote in favor of Graham-Cassidy. So, go figure on that. I mean, do all of these people deserve to be gone after when they voted along with the president?

BOSSIE: Well, first of all, you know, my organization, Citizens United, we've been involved in Republican primaries for a lot of years, and we want to make sure that change agents -- those that are in Washington. The broken status quo has been in charge of this town and in charge of American policy for a lot of years. So, my position is there are so inside the Republican Party that needs to be primary. It is a healthy thing. I am for term limits.

This is one of the ways; primaries are a way to term limit people. You let the voters decide. So, finding candidates, good conservatives like Marsha Blackburn in Tennessee, like Josh Harley in Missouri. It goes state after state around the country and there's going to be great people, as well as some of those incumbents like Ted Cruz and others that I think we're going to find support for.

MACCALLUM: All right. There's a word today in a report that was in Axios this morning, I believe, that says that Steve Bannon's a litmus test -- and I know you're working on recruiting some of these candidates and organizing them for some of these races as well, as you say -- is that they will promise that they will vote to oust Mitch McConnell. Is that true? Is that a litmus test for these candidates?

BOSSIE: Well, I think it is for Steve. And I think he's made that abundantly clear that he believes the greatest impediment to President Trump's agenda is Mitch McConnell. And so, I think that there's a debate about that, but I think Steve has a very strong position coming out of the White House, seeing it firsthand. And I understand that not every incumbent needs a challenger. And I think some of them have done a fine job. But what Steve's saying is, there's a message to be sent. And I think that there's one thing that we're going to --

MACCALLUM: I understand that, but --

BOSSIE: Martha, we're going to find in tax reform here that if people are listening to that call of primary opponents potentially coming forward against them, maybe there'll be, you know, more supportive of the president. That's kind of the message being sent.

MACCALLUM: Understood. But some might look at Steve Bannon situation and say, well, it's -- you know, he obviously didn't get along with some people in the White House. He felt that they were openly against the president's agenda and that's his opinion. He's, of course -- he's completely entitled to it.

BOSSIE: Sure.

MACCALLUM: That was his experience. But now that he's on the outside, that he wants to sort of tear down the house regardless of the fact that, you know, with a couple of people brought over, it's possible to pass some of this legislation. And as Brit just said, you know, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell appear to have worked extremely hard to get these things through. Do you think they wanted to show up at that microphone with a long face and say we blew again?

BOSSIE: Let's go back -- let's go back to -- and by the way, I'm not here, as a spokesman for Steve but I will just, since you're asking me these questions, I will say that the president's response to Mitch McConnell's comment about six or eight weeks ago that the president had high expectations coming in, OK? That is a really -- that's the nub of it. That for seven years, Republicans have been saying we need to repeal and replace ObamaCare. And about seven months into the administration --

MACCALLUM: I get it. At a gut level, people very much relate to that and they don't want to hear that they want to be patient anymore. They don't want to hear that. But you know, just from a practical sense, I think, that's why there's a lot of -- I got to go.

BOSSIE: I think a practical sense is that in seven years, you could've accomplished it.

MACCALLUM: I hear you. OK. Thank you, David. Always good to see you.

BOSSIE: Thanks. Good to see you.

MACCALLUM: So, still ahead tonight, President Trump takes on NBC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: That was just fake news by NBC, which gives a lot of fake news lately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Big story out of there today that the president takes issue with big time, and it follows on the heels of Secretary Tillerson's comments about him being a moron and all of what's being stirred up over that. Laura Ingraham joins us right here with the president's latest broadside against a fake news.

Plus, new details emerging in the case of Harvey Weinstein's alleged sexual harassment. Who knew what, when, and what network passed up a huge exclusive that could've changed the game on this year ago? We'll explain. And as we get further away from the Las Vegas massacre, it turns out that the mystery deepens dramatically. Brand-new information about what happened that night and when right after this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Call the police. Someone's fired a gun up here, someone's fired a gun up here, someone's firing a rifle on the 32nd floor down the hallway.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you want to increase the nuclear arsenal?

TRUMP: No, I never discussed increasing it. I want it in perfect shape. That was just fake news by NBC, which gives a lot of fake news lately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: So, President Trump taking another shot at NBC today, denying their so-called bombshell report that claims that the president suggested dramatically increasing the nation's supply of nuclear weapons during a July meeting with the top national security leaders. The headline this morning was: "Trump wanted ten-fold increase in nuclear arsenal surprising military." Chief National correspondent, Ed Henry, joins us now from the White House with the backstory. Hi, Ed.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Martha, good to see you. Not a surprise to see the president lashing out at what he calls fake news. But what's new about this episode is the extraordinary assist he's getting from Defense Secretary James Mattis in shooting down NBS reporting. The president is so incensed today about that report; he's bruising over the first amendment to threaten to use the federal government's power to strip NBC of its broadcast license. After NBC's news division claimed its earlier report that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had called the president a moron, came because the president allegedly used a big meeting the summer at the Pentagon to push a massive increase, as you noted, in America's nuclear weapons stockpile.

One big problem with this claim: it seems to be off the mark. President tweeting, "fake @NBC news made up a story that I wanted a ten-fold increase in our U.S. nuclear arsenal. Pure fiction made up to demean NBC equal CNN." Then, he added, "With all the fake news coming out of NBC and the networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their license? Bad for the country!" Well, remember how Republican Senator Bob Corker said, it was Secretary Mattis among others who could be trusted to pull the president back from chaos. Well, Mattis is now backing the president over NBC, declaring "recent reports that the president called for an increase in the U.S. nuclear arsenal are absolutely false. This kind of erroneous reporting is irresponsible." The president, following up with his own comments. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And it's frankly disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it. No, I want to have absolutely perfectly maintained, which we are in the process of doing, nuclear force, but when they said I want ten times what we have right now, it's totally unnecessary. Believe me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: And even CNN, another frequent target of the president, seems to be backing up, yes, the commander-in-chief, reporting today that according to three sources, this talk about increasing the nuclear arsenal never came up at that Pentagon meeting. Martha.

MACCALLUM: Ed, thank you very much. Here now with more, Laura Ingraham, Host of the "INGRAHAM ANGLE," which debuts here on Fox on October 30th at 10:00 p.m., and the author also of the new book "Billionaire at the Barricades: The Populist Revolution from Reagan to Trump." Laura, good evening. Good to see you tonight.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS CHANNEL ANCHOR: Hey, Martha, good to see you.

MACCALLUM: So, tell me about your reaction to this story. You know, you wonder about what's going on in that room, because obviously there someone in that room that reported this to someone at NBC. So, their interpretation of what was discussed and what the president said was quite different from what he says it was.

INGRAHAM: Yes, three and a half months later. Isn't that kind of funny? On the heels of the Bob Corker story where he goes to The New York Times and says, basically the Trump is bringing it up to the brink of World War III. Now, that's the puzzle. It fits as a perfect corollary to the old establishment GOP Senator calling into question the judgment and the poise and the knowledge of Donald Trump. And then, this comes -- and it's like clockwork. This is a hit job.

It was done to amplify Corker and again plant seeds in the mind of the American public that we have a president who's not really tethered to reality, that doesn't really know what's going on. And Martha, let me just say that I know for a fact that when Donald Trump goes into meetings on the issues, you know, that I care about, trade and immigration especially, he is brutal and questioning everyone in that meeting -- whether it's the trade rep or whether it's the commerce secretary or everybody in between.

He's engaged, he asked questions and sometimes there are questions that, you know, I certainly would know the answer too, and people who are new to politics would know the answer too. There's nothing wrong with that. He wants us to be the strongest, the best, the most powerful nation on the face of the earth on all levels. And so, he says he didn't say it. He says he wants us to be the strongest and the biggest. And I think a lot of journalists hear that, and I think they're horrified that how could Donald Trump ask any questions about that? And they're always going to paint it in the worst possible light. But this is more Washington intrigue and I really -- I don't think most Americans are paying much attention to it.

MACCALLUM: Well, on the cover of your book. When you talk about the barricades, MSNBC is on there, Washington Post is on there, so these are exactly the kind of barricades. And you and I know that this is not going to change, because there's always going to be someone in that room, whether it's, you know, the highest level national security meeting or elsewhere who's going to walk out of that room and say that he didn't get it. That he wasn't up to speed. You know, to instill that, that bit of fear in people's minds that says he's not up to the job. So, on top of doing the job, he's got it constantly battled that 92 percent negative story rate in the press. It's -- on top of the presidency, it's another heavy weight to bear.

INGRAHAM: You hit the nail on the head, Martha. The leaks that have plagued this administration from even before he was inaugurated continue to plague him now. They've done a better job at plugging them. But as president, you should feel like you can go into a meeting like this and be frank and ask questions.

MACCALLUM: Yes, absolutely.

INGRAHAM: Apparently, he can't trust the people in the room.

MACCALLUM: Were you a girl scout?

INGRAHAM: I was a Bluebird, which I don't think exists anymore. It was like a campfire girl which I don't think exists.

MACCALLUM: It sounds very nice. They said there was very uniform that we along with that. I was a Brownie. I lasted for two years in the Brownie. But what do you think about the fact that the Boy Scouts, as Brit Hume said, you know, the Boy Scouts are not the Boy Scouts anymore, apparently?

INGRAHAM: Yes. Everybody is allowed into certain activities, I guess. I mean, it's the tyranny of political correctness. It's another reason why Trump won. I think people are tired at this. Boys should be able to have a boys' club. The girl should be able to have a girls' club. And if they want to have a club where boys and girls are doing activities together, that's fine too. But this is just more madness. And I think most parents are tired of it, most people are tired of it, and it's a very small, radical group of gender-benders is out there in the culture who want to say there's no difference between a boy and a girl -- they're all the same.

MACCALLUM: It's sort of the constant de-gentrification of the country that anything that doesn't need boys and girls or men and women is becoming taboo.

INGRAHAM: Hey, Martha, I have a question for you. When you go to a nail salon, if you do go to a nail salon, I don't -- do you like men being next to you getting a pedicure? I don't like that.

MACCALLUM: No, I don't really like men that care that much about their, you know, to that detail about their appearance personally. I'm like, really?

INGRAHAM: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: You're really here to get your fingernails done?

INGRAHAM: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: I don't like going there myself anyway but, you know.

INGRAHAM: Yes, but we want a zone of privacy for beautification. OK, we want -- go to your other places. We don't want to see your hairy feet. Sorry, it's a gross image, I know.

MACCALLUM: Thank you Bluebird. Good to see you, Laura.

INGRAHAM: Good to see you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Laura Ingraham in Washington. All right. So, a major news network reportedly squashing a bombshell on Harvey Weinstein.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RONAN FARROW, JOURNALIST AND FORMER U.S. GOVERNMENT ADVISOR: There were multiple determinations that were reported on NBC.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: This is it quite a story. Freelance NBC correspondent, Ronan Farrow, says his bosses at NBC who, by the way, had business interests involved with Harvey Weinstein, didn't want to run his month-long expose on Weinstein. Former White House press secretary and media communications expert who helps companies handle these sorts of crisis, Ari Fleischer, joins me in a moment. Plus, hundreds of missing still, hundreds of people are missing tonight in these fires. Terrified friends and family are searching for their loved ones. That's the headline out of Santa Rosa. We will tell you what's going on when we come back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This was my house, Sam's car, and our hallway, Sam's motor, and our bedroom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those of us in the family always would, you know, wonder what would happen if one of them died and the other one was still left because we knew that there's no way that they would be happy whoever was the last one. And so, they went together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: They were 99 and 100 years old. Now, this was one couple killed together in their home in these exploding wildfires across Northern California. The blaze has had taken the lives of 21 people and hundreds are still missing in these homes. Friends and relatives are desperately searching hospitals, shelters, trying to find their loved ones. And the big fear that the death toll could rise here. Claudia Cowan joins us once again tonight live on this story in Santa Rosa as she been throughout the course of this. Claudia, good evening.

CLAUDIA COWAN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL REPORTER: Good evening to you, Martha. We are reporting live tonight from Coffee Park, one of the hardest hit areas in Santa Rosa. Hundreds of homes here are destroyed. And we are reminded again how capricious these fires can be, taking out some homes and leaving those next door, untouched. This is where firefighters made a stand when the flames roared through Sunday night. And the owner of this particular house, struggling with mixed emotions tonight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I kind of have a little bit of a guilt that I'm coming back to a home, and for the main part, other than smoke damage inside the house, the integrity of the house is somewhat sound and I've got a home still, which is a little guilty.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COWAN: His next-door neighbors don't want him to feel any guilt. In fact, they say their cat was hiding underneath his house, and so they are grateful his house survived and they are grateful to be alive. They say they barely escape the flames. Active fire continues to pose a threat. The entire city of Calistoga, some 5,000 people are, right now, being evacuated as these fires grow to nearly 200,000 acres. One of California's biggest fire event ever. And things are likely to get worse as the wind picks up tonight. The death toll today rising to 21, with hundreds of others still reported as missing. Now the sheriff says many of those people may have been found, but have not updated the registry of missing people. And officials are pleading with those folks to mark themselves as safe on the registry, or letting authorities know they're OK, which is not always easy because cell phone and internet service is still out in many places. And as the firefight continues, so does the search for a cause. There is some speculation tonight that downed power lines may have played a role in all of this. But, Martha, that is unconfirmed. Back to you.

MACCALLUM: Claudia, thank you very much. So also breaking tonight, the head of NBC News firing back after bombshell allegations that his network decided not to report explosive sexual assault allegations against movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. This is even more women come forward today accusing Weinstein of everything from harassment to assault to rape in three cases. Freelance NBC News correspondent, Ronan Farrow, says his Weinstein expose, which was published yesterday, and got a ton of attention, of course, in the New Yorker Magazine, was turned down when he brought it to his NBC bosses.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: I walked into the door at the New Yorker with an explosively reportable piece that should have been public earlier, and immediately, obviously, the New Yorker recognize that, and it is not accurate to say that it was not reportable. In fact, there were multiple determinations that it was reportable at NBC.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary, and his communication firm offers crisis management, strategy, advice and training to media organizations, he's also a Fox News contributor. Boy, a lot of people need advice in this situation.

ARI FLEISCHER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, this work I never want to touch and never do.

MACCALLUM: I mean, it is so ugly what they're dealing with, and now NBC is dealing with. And Noah Oppenheim, the president, said this incredible story we've all read yesterday was not the story we were looking at when made our judgment several months ago. The notion that we're trying to cover for powerful person is deeply offensive to all of us. There are layers to this. I mean, Ronan Farrow made his case in many places today. He said this is the story that I brought to NBC. NBC Universal had a financial interest in many Weinstein projects, including Shakespeare in love, Inglourious Basterds, I mean, they had a financial connection.

FLEISCHER: Well, I think this is exactly why you have investigated journalism now, and NBC is going to be subject to it. You know, it's a terrible, miserable, he said, she said. Ronan also said that he had some eight people on camera and, of course, he had that audiotape that we've all now listen to with the New York City Police Department with the undercover tape on somebody who's trying to catch Harvey Weinstein. So I don't know who to believe. You know, NBC denies it. He says he has the good. Who knows? But if you're NBC, it's going to be a miserable couple of weeks.

MACCALLUM: You know there so much crisis management going on. You have all of these women coming forward, some of them who also knew about the kind of behavior. Men who've been, you know, accused of having also known, some of whom -- you know, the names on these list, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, they're all kind of struggling to cover their tracks here. You know, as someone who helps people deal with crisis management, and now this particular one, you know, what do you tell people to do? How should they approach this?

FLEISCHER: Well, I think the ones you have to look at next because Harvey Weinstein is dead. Nothing is going to bring him back.

MACCALLUM: There's no P.R. in God's green earth that's going to help him at this point.

FLEISCHER: His career is over. No one will want to associate with him going forward. I don't think he has a second act. The question is, are there other people in Hollywood who have a similar fear that other people now come out to the woodwork. What typically happens on something like this, you saw on Tiger Woods, when the first accusations are made and it becomes credible, now all of a sudden all the other accusations just come flowing forward. It's women who previously thought no one would believe me if I step forward, so I'm not going to take that risk by stepping forward. Now, they know people will believe them, and so they'll be much more likely to step forward and tell their stories.

MACCALLUM: Yeah.

FLEISCHER: And that's what happens now.

MACCALLUM: When you think back to NBC, though, and the Trump tapes. I mean they have those and sat on them for a while. They released it on October, before the presidential election. So their judgment on these issues, whether or not they have their own personal interest, and how they're manipulating perhaps the release of these things, if it serves them or doesn't serve them, is a legitimate question?

FLEISCHER: It is absolutely a legit question, and that's what's getting probed at now. And, I don't know. I'm not on the inside. I don't know the judgments they make in situations. I do know CBS News when -- absolutely unsubstantiated stories by Dan Rather about George Bush's National Guard service. They decided they had the goods on that and they never had the goods. In this case, NBC says they didn't. But here's the other piece, Martha, all these journalists who are allegedly on the payroll of Harvey Weinstein, you need to start seeing their names. If it's true that there were reporters who were receiving money by writing scripts or doing other things for Harvey, and that's one of the reasons the truth didn't come out earlier. I think journalists are going to start digging and say who are you?

MACCALLUM: And apparently, he had a habit -- he thought the gossip columnist were the people who could get to it, he had a habit in investing in their pet movie projects and documentary projects in order to keep them silent as well. This is a story that has -- as I've said many layers. Ari, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight.

FLEISCHER: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So still ahead tonight, new audio from the Las Vegas massacre.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: It's at the end of the hallway. I can't tell you what room. He looked like he fire down the hallway when I got close to the door.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Unbelievable. That is a Mandalay Bay worker radioing for help in the moments before the Vegas gunmen started shooting. So why didn't help arrive sooner? And would it have stopped or prevented or delayed the concert shooting? This is a huge question that they're going to have to deal with in Las Vegas. Attorney Mark Eiglarsh gives us expert analysis in just a moment. Plus, rapper Eminem's profanity rhythm tirade against our commander-in-chief, and his special message for Trump supporters, you have to hear this to believe it. Right after this. Come back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: We love our military and we love our country, but we hate Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: Breaking tonight, as several new details just coming in shed more light on the Las Vegas massacre, including a new radio call that was from a maintenance worker who found the security guard who had been shot on the 32nd floor. The call came on day 10 of an investigation that continues to be shrouded in increasing mystery about the timeline. Trace Gallagher joins us from our west coast newsroom with more tonight. Hi, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS: Hi, Martha. Let's begin with that brand-new audio of Mandalay Bay maintenance man, Stephen Schuck, making a radio call for help. Schuck was on the 32-floor to repair a jammed fire exit, when he got into the hallway near the room of killer Stephen Paddock, Schuck said security guard, Jesus Campos, who've already been shot in the leg told him to take cover, potentially saving his life. Now, at the beginning of the tape and, again, at five seconds in, you will hear what sounds like rapid fire gunshots. Watch closely.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: Call the police. Someone's firing a gun up here. Someone's firing a rifle on the 32nd floor down the hallway.

UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: Base to 106 Stephen, security wants to know if you know a room.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: It's at the end of the hallway. I can't tell you what room. It looks like he fire down the hallway when I got close to the door.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: That audio comes amid new questions over the timeline. Police now say the security guard was shot at 9:59 PM, a full 6 minutes before Stephen Paddock open fire on the concert crowd at 10:05. The shooting ended at 10:15, although nobody knows why because police didn't arrive on the 32nd floor until 10:17, 18 minutes after the security guard was shot. MGM which owns Mandalay Bay is disputing that timeline saying, quote, we cannot be certain about the most recent timeline that has been communicated publicly, and we believe what is currently being expressed may not be accurate. MGM is among those being sued by 21-year-old woman who was shot and injured. The sue alleges MGM didn't properly monitor who frequented the hotel and didn't respond quickly enough to the shooting. The suit also includes the concert promoter and manufacturers of bump stock devices that allow semiautomatic weapons to fire at nearly the rate of an automatic.

We've also learned that Stephen Paddock arrived at the Mandalay Bay Hotel three days earlier than police first thought. During the first days, he stayed in a room paid for by the hotel. Paddock then moved into a corner suite that he paid for where the shooting took place. Police say the autopsy shows Stephen Paddock had no brain abnormalities. And despite early reports to the contrary, police say Paddock's girlfriend, Marilou Danley, had no concerns about his mental health. Danley has also been placed on a government travel watch list, and she and Paddock's brother Eric have not been cleared of wrongdoing. Martha.

MACCALLUM: Trace, thank you. So here to lend his expertise on these types of criminal investigation, criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, Mark Eiglarsh. Mark, good to have you here tonight.

MARK EIGLARSH, ATTORNEY: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: You know with these situations, as the days go by, we learn more about what happened. And at one point, it was thought that Jesus Campos, the security guard, went to the door and that was distracting to the shooter in the middle of this shooting, or perhaps at the end, and that he was sort of a hero who had arrived and diverted his attention. Now we know that he was in the hallway, was shot, it was a blaze of gunfire that came out of there. And that 6 minutes later, the shooting began. We know that he called his security people and that we just heard the phone call to 911 from the guy in the hallway who also called. Those calls went out. And 6 minutes later, which is an eternity in this situation, the firing began apparently. What do you make of all that?

EIGLARSH: Well, they're trying to suggest that the hotel didn't do what they were supposed to. OK, and if the facts are, and I don't think they are, that the hotel found out about the shooting, did nothing, then it's a viable lawsuit. But that's not what I'm hearing happened. They must have called law enforcement. And the question is, what did law enforcement do, why did it take so long for them to get there? And could this have been preventable?

Where I take the greatest exception is some of the plaintiff lawyer suggesting that hotel employees, including but not limited to housekeepers, should have done something more. This is where we part company. Somehow a housekeeper, whose expertise lies in changing soiled sheets and replacing shampoos, are supposed to ninja their way into that room and use their mop to somehow help out?

MACCALLUM: I hear what you're saying. And I do want to ask you about that. But I want to stick with this 6 minutes just for a moment here, because we also saw the video of law enforcement running towards the building. Everybody's asking where it's coming from, where it's coming from? They don't know where the shooter is. And yet, 6 minutes prior to that, the shooter has been identified as being on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel. So at the very least, we need to understand why the 911 call or the call to the Mandalay Bay security did not become an immediate all-points bulletin that everybody could be aware of, which is potentially could have saved lives, no?

EIGLARSH: And that is why a civil lawsuit here has merit. They need to sue the shooter and his estate, and any dime that guy has should absolutely go to the victims. So through that process, they'll find out more. But we do know that police have gone through hours and hours of surveillance video to look through and see if there were any signs leading up to that moment that that man started to do the abhorrent acts that he did, and law enforcement can't find anything.

MACCALLUM: They found nothing.

EIGLARSH: How are they responsible, the hotel?

MACCALLUM: I'm sorry. Let me ask you one other thing because Steve Wendt, interestingly, has established that a couple of years ago he brought in the highest level security people he could find. And he established a security protocol for his hotel that perhaps should've be repeated in other places. If you can establish that there's the knowledge and understanding of what should be done in these huge hotels in Las Vegas, for instance, that it is a better protocol to say if someone has a do not disturb thing on their door for more than 48 hours, you've got to make sure there's nothing wrong in there. Is that potentially an argument than an attorney could make that they were lax in terms of their security?

EIGLARSH: They'll make those arguments. There are deep pockets here in the hotel, against the manufacturer of the bump stocks.

MACCALLUM: Right.

EIGLARSH: There will be those arguments made whether they're reasonable or not, because the plaintiff's lawyers want to get their money. Is it reasonable? Should they start disturbing people when they're in a room for 48 hours? I hope not. I don't want to be disturbed. I'm in there for a reason. And some of the worst laws happen after horrible atrocities like this. So, I don't know. I think they should look at the policies and if changes are needed, they should be made.

MACCALLUM: Great to have you back. Thank you very much, Mark.

EIGLARSH: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So coming up next, the NAACP says demands like this are unconstitutional.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I don't think you can disrespect our country, our flag, our national anthem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: The debate over NFL players kneeling in protest takes a very big turn. Lawrence Jones and Richard Fowler on this hot topic coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: Brand new wrinkle in the NFL anthem protest story. The NAACP is now calling Dallas Cowboys owner, Jerry Jones, tone-deaf, saying he's violating player's constitutional right by telling them that they have to stand for the national anthem. This is NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, had said that he would like everyone to stand, but he's not going to demand that they stand. That's still to be played out. Lawrence Jones, conservative commentator and host of the Blaze, Richard Fowler a Fox News contributor and syndicated radio talk show host. Good to see you, guys. Thanks for having you here tonight. So is it constitutional or not, Lawrence, to insist that these employees of these private entities must stand for the anthem?

LAWRENCE JONES, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: Well, first of all, I want to address the tone deafness. Jerry Jones kneeled before the anthem with his team. He let them know that he was with them, and didn't stood for the national anthem. Second of all, this is a private business. This man turned a $140 million investment into a $5 billion company, and we're America's team. And so what he is trying to do is protect his business. And businesses have a right to do that. And your constitutional rights do not apply to a private business.

MACCALLUM: Richard, what do you think?

RICHARD FOWLER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: We've been debating this NFL thing for three weeks. And I had to be honest with you, Martha, because I've done a lot of these segments. I don't think we've gotten anywhere. I think those who believe that these players are unpatriotic still believe they're unpatriotic, and those who believe that these players are kneeling for oppression still believe that.

MACCALLUM: Richard, it sounds like Roger Goodell wants to try to open a dialogue and kind of figure out a way to make all this work. What I think is so sad is that being patriotic has become something that's either liberal or conservative. That's what I think is so sad about this, Richard.

FOWLER: I hear that. And I hear what you're saying, Martha, and I think there might be some truth there. And I think what has to happen is I think we've got to take a moment here and step back and just wear each other's shoes for a second. So I think those people who think these players are being unpatriotic, they've got to wear these players shoes and wear the black community shoes for a moment. And these players have got to wear the shoes of folks who.

MACCALLUM: Let's wear the shoes of Eminem for just one moment here. Just one very short moment. This is President Trump, now President Trump back in 2004 endorsing at Eminem at this like mock fun thing. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I know a winner when I see one. And Donald Trump is telling you right now, slim shady is a winner.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: And here is the answer to that in 2017 from Eminem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EMINEM, ARTIST: This is for Colin -- and keep that (BLEEP) like Donald the (BLEEP). The rest of America stand up. We love our military, and we love our country. But we (BLEEP) hate Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Yeah, lovely. Lawrence, what do you think?

JONES: Well, this just tells you that this protest has nothing to do with the -- when people are talking about police brutality. This is now about Donald Trump. And it's amazing to me to see all the celebrities that were once Trump supporters and went to dinner with him, now be so against him. And the reason is it's because they know it helps them politically. They become martyrs. All they have to do is attack the president, do something-- twitter war with him and you become famous and become a trending topic.

MACCALLUM: I've got to leave it there. Richard, I'm sorry. I'll give you the first shot next time. Thank you very much, guys. We'll take a quick break here, and we will be right back with more of The Story.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: So that is our story for tonight. If you have a story that you think we need to know about, tweet me @MarthaMaccallum #TheStory. We will be back here tomorrow night at 7:00 Eastern. Right now, my friend Tucker Carlson coming up next. See you tomorrow, everybody.


END

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 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.