Jonathan Turley reacts to details in Fusion GPS testimony

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," January 18, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, HOST: Breaking tonight, we are waiting as Bret just said, for the crucial vote on the House vote where they hope to avoid a government shutdown. There are big questions also tonight in two other big stories that were going to get to the heart of here on the story this evening as we watch that vote as it comes in.

So, here is one, a new report reveals FISA abuse from the FBI and the DOJ during the election according to lawmakers who call it alarming, shocking and Watergate level. Here is Congressman Matt Gaetz.


REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA.: Any American that would see this document would feel as though people like Rod Rosenstein and Bruce Ohr need to be fired immediately.


MACCALLUM: And remember Agent Peter Strzok, who said he wanted insurance against a possible Trump presidency. Also, more dossier revelations this evening, we are continuing to comb through the testimony that has just been released of Glenn Simpson on the House side of the Intel committee, they have just put this out.

So, did he use the dossier to influence the media against then-candidate Trump? He says, he did. So, the FBI use the dossier to get FISA warrants. Another big question, Chief National Correspondent Ed Henry, very busy at tonight absorbing all of this from the White House with the late-breaking details on this transcript. Hi, Ed.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Martha, great to see you. I can tell you top White House officials here are watching this release of information very closely, because it moves the House Intelligence Committee a big step closer to getting the public a look at this four-page memo that those Republican congressmen were talking about that might give us evidence for the first time that the Obama administration used that unverified Trump dossier to conduct surveillance of Trump officials.

Let's start with what happened today. The House Intelligence Committee voting unanimously to release all 165 pages of Glenn Simpson's testimony last November. He revealed that in order dig up dirt on candidate Trump, Fusion GPS was being paid 50,000 bucks a month plus expenses. Remember, some of that money coming from the Clinton camp and the Democratic National Committee.

Simpson denies he gave the dossier to BuzzFeed news, saying he got very upset when they published it because it was very dangerous to put this raw information out there. Then, he goes on to charge in the testimony that Russian President Vladimir Putin, went on a witch-hunt to track down U.S. Intel sources, and Simpson claims people were killed, testifying, quote, "I mean, there was a series of episodes where people were arrested or died mysteriously that came shortly after the disclosure of the existence of this information. And I do believe there was a bit of an old-fashioned purge."

Simpson though did admit he was involved in leaking other sensitive info, including the fact that FBI Director James Comey was investigating alleged Trump connections to Russia. All because Simpson was angry that Comey had announced he was reopening the Clinton e-mail probe right before the election. On why they went to press with that info, Simpson testified, "We decided if James Comey wasn't going to tell people about this investigation, you know, he had violated the rules, and he would only be fair if the world knew that both candidates were under FBI investigation."

Also worth noting Simpson hedged on the accuracy of this dossier, when pressed, a congressman saying, "So everything in that dossier, as far as you're concerned is true or could be true?" Simpson, "I didn't say that. What I said was it was credible at the time it came in. We were able to corroborate various things that supported its credibility."

Important, because House Intel Chair Devin Nunes is trying to get at the question of whether Obama officials used that unverified information to get approval for surveillance of Trump officials. As Fox first reported last week, Nunes was privately told colleagues there was FISA abuse by FBI and Justice Department officials, perhaps, most significant, Simpson testifies in this transcript that just came out that top Obama Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, asked him to turn some of Fusion GPS's info over to the Justice Department.

The question now is going to be, "Did they then use that to get FISA warrants to conduct surveillance? We should note the top Democrat on the House Intel Committee Adam Schiff, just put out a statement a few moments ago, saying that what Nunes is doing is a distraction from the fact the Steve Bannon, Corey Lewandowski, and other Trump officials are not answering their questions about alleged Russia connections. Martha.

MACCALLUM: Ed, thank you very much. Here now with more and his take on all of this Jonathan Turley, constitutional law attorney and law professor at George Washington University. So, there's a lot to chew over from this two different documents that their related and they do cross over.

One is the four-page document that Congressman Peter King encouraged the release of because he thinks there is FISA abuse going on at the DOJ and the FBI leading up to and after the election.

The other side of it is this Glenn Simpson document which everybody is going through. One of the things that I found interesting here, in addition to what Ed just spoke about, is Simpson on talking to Bruce Ohr. He said -- and this is after the election, he said, "We were frankly, you know, very scared for the country and for ourselves and felt that if we could give it to someone else, we should, higher up. And so, Chris suggested," Chris Steele, that "I give some information to Bruce," who was at the DOJ, "Give him the background to all of this. And we eventually met at a coffee shop, and I told him the story." What do you think of all of that, Jonathan?

JONATHAN TURLEY, PROFESSOR OF LAW, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL: Well, there is a lot to be concerned about here in terms of the process. First of all, the question is, why would Ohr stand out as the person that they wanted to give this information to.

This is someone who has also testified that they intentionally leaked material for election purposes. This dossier itself was funded by the DNC in part and the Clinton campaign in part. If that document was used to get it out to the media, to try to balance the books as he suggests in the election. And then, became the basis for a FISA warrant that would be deeply, deeply troubling. And when you add to that, that there were people in the FBI that were viewed as being more receptive to bringing this information inside, those raise legitimate questions. And so --

MACCALLUM: And we know that, that Bruce Ohr's job was downgraded and eliminated eventually because of what the Department of Justice learned about the way behaved during this time, correct?

TURLEY: Right. And I have been a critic of FISA for many years. I was back in FISA in a prehistoric age in the Reagan administration as a young intern. And I have opposed that court because the standards are so low in terms of engaging in surveillance of U.S. citizens. So, it always raises alarm when people go to the FISA court as opposed to a regular federal court to engage in surveillance.

If you add to that, that they used a dossier if it is true, that was funded by a political candidate, and a political party at the DNC, as the basis for the FISA, you're talking very serious allegations.


TURLEY: Now, we don't know for sure, there is other serious allegations here that should concern others. I mean, the suggestion of money laundering.

MACCALLUM: That's why I just wanted to ask you about the issue of money laundering, and that's something that Steve Bannon also raised in the book. He said, you know, I think this is where the Mueller investigation is going. What do you make of it?

TURLEY: I think he may be right about that. They -- is that Mueller brought on his team notably, a number of people whose specialty is to follow computer and financial lines. We know that there have been subpoenas given to foreign banks. The money laundering allegations are very, very serious if they're proven to be true. But the problem for the Trump White House is that these are the types of allegations that require you to open all your books. There the widest scope you could possibly have for a federal investigation. So, if Mueller believes that these are credible allegations, we're talking about an investigation that will expand exponentially from its original purpose.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, that's -- you know, there's always the concern about a widening scope of the investigation when you bring on a special counsel. And the Trump folks have long said that they don't think looking into these financial side stories are fundamental to the foundational question of whether or not there was any collusion between Russia and the Trump administration. But, you know, this is what like -- they could do that, right? There's nothing to stop them from doing that.

TURLEY: Yes, they may be.

MACCALLUM: They think it may support their argument.

TURLEY: Yes, and may be too late to get that cat to walk backwards. I mean, these allegations are out there. And you know, there were a lot of business deals that the Russians had with -- that the Trump family and businesses had with the Russians. So, they've admitted that Trump's own son said that they had access to like a $100 million in Russian funds. Those are type of things that will easily sustain the special counsel investigation.

Now, these are just allegations, you know, just saying that there's a lot of turnover deals doesn't mean its money laundering. But it does mean that Mueller can follow that trail and it could go a long way.

MACCALLUM: And it could take a very long time. Jonathan, thank you very much. Jonathan Turley, always good to see you.

TURLEY: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Thank you for being here tonight. All right, let's bring in Kayleigh McEnany, spokesperson for the Republican National Committee, and author of the new book, "The New American Revolution", and Michael Blake, vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.

A lot going on and we're watching the floor of the House right now as they are about to vote. And I want to get your thoughts on that as well. But first, Michael, just, you know, weigh in on what Jonathan Turley and I were just talking about.

MICHAEL BLAKE, VICE CHAIR, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE: It's incredibly concerning when you are assessing the possibility of money laundering which clearly has been something that had been conveyed regularly. Kayleigh and I have a lot of respect for Kayleigh, we do these hits regularly. But, this is not something that we should be shaking our head about its very serious and concerning especially when you think about how the Trump administration has not rejected the comments that has come out in recent reporting of essentially conveying to Steve Bannon, what he should or should not be saying in your respective conversations.

That said, we should continue to let Mueller and the team go through their investigation and should let them continue with their process. We should definitely take serious, seriously what's happening right here. There has been evolving commentary from the Trump administration and their team about their supposed engagement with Russia.

But what we're consistently seeing as more information is presenting itself, there is a reason to be concerned. And for the everyday voter and everyday American who sometimes wonders, why should this matter to me? While you have an administration that is essentially being very weak when it comes to Russia or a country that 21 State --

MACCALLUM: All right, Kayleigh?

KAYLEIGH MCENANY, NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE: Michael, know what we saw through this Glenn Simpson testimony as the fake phony dossier which was funded by your organization, the DNC, and Hillary Clinton --

BLAKE: And the beacon as you talk about it for.

MCENANY: And Hillary Clinton was sent to the Obama Justice Department, it was baseless, it was false it was defamatory, and potentially used at -- to get a FISA warrant to spy on individuals connected to a U.S. presidential candidate.

BLAKE: That was fundamentally not true. We've done this for weeks.

MCENANY: And here's the question -- here the question I after you Michael, I let you finish so let me finish. Here is the question I have for you, the other piece of the story. The House voted to release this transcript, the Glenn Simpson, Simpson testimony but only Republicans voted to release the document that speaks to FISA abuses. What is your Party trying to hide? Why can't we get the document that talks about the FISA abuses that went on during the Obama administration, why won't your Party release that?

MACCALLUM: I want to jump in, I --

BLAKE: Because it's completely absurd. These things comes really absurd that the FISA was released because, as we've been indicated because of George Papadopoulos.

MACCALLUM: All right, I want to get your thoughts on what's going on, on the Hill right now because we are waiting for the vote. It looks like it's going to pass the House but the Senate is likely to be problematic. Michael, what do you mean, Kayleigh?

BLAKE: When we look at what's happening right now that the Senate, the Republican Senators, they don't have the votes that measure has been mentioned. At least four Senators have conveyed that they're not in support of what's coming forward to continue the government funding. We have come to the table. We have conveyed these elements that we are not completely a fan of when it comes to immigration as being put on the table.

But when you see that at least four Republican Senators saying, "We do not support this, essentially because we don't think Trump would sign this." It's ridiculous.

MACCALLUM: It is mind-boggling that we go to this routine all the time. When we go through it again and another month if it pass this tonight, ridiculous that people who are sent to Washington to do a job can't been to get it done. We're told that Paul Ryan though is trying to get his job done tonight. He is on his way to the floor, so, we do expect a vote soon. Final thoughts from you, Kayleigh.

MCENANY: Yes, it's interesting to hear Michael say that Democrat have come to the table when Chuck and Nancy wouldn't even show off for the meeting to provide funding for our government last fall.

Well, what's interesting and it's really important for people to know where Democrats' priorities lie, because tied to this bill is funding for a program for 9 million U.S. citizen children who are in impoverished conditions but Democrats will not vote to fund these impoverished children because they are voting because there is no deal for 700,000 illegal immigrants on DACA. Where did they're priorities lie? Every -- there thinks should take to notice.

BLAKE: That is a fundamental lie, Kayleigh. Fundamental lie.

MACCALLUM: I got -- I'm sorry, guys, we have to pick it up next time. Thank you very much. Good to have both of you here tonight.

BLAKE: Thank you.

MCENANY: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So, coming up next, if a country that we allow immigration from is guilty of high levels of fraud and abuse of that system, should we rethink that relationship? That is what the Trump administration is taking heat for tonight. My friend Tucker Carlson, joins us next, coming up, don't miss that.

Also tonight, we will tell you how these two cartoon characters are changing our kids' future. Plus, the unsung heroes, the very first U.S. special forces who were sent into Afghanistan to fight the fight after 9/11.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 19 minutes after a country, the 12 of you will be the first ones to fight back.


MACCALLUM: And so, the Trump White House now doubling down, essentially, putting the brakes on workers from Haiti, Belize, and Samoa, to come on worker visas to the United States. Critics are slamming the President's move just a week after the alleged x-hole comments broke. DHS noting the Haitians have demonstrated high levels of fraud and abuse of the visa system and a nearly 40 percent rate of overstaying their visas. Leland Vittert lays it all out for us from Washington tonight. Hi, Leland.

LELAND VITTERT, FOX NEWS FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Martha. As you might imagine the outrage from immigration advocates is swift. Categorizing this as another slap at Haiti by President Trump. And there is the optics of this, coming at the time when Democrats are trying to link the President's immigration policies with his alleged bleep hole comments with a potential government shutdown.

And then, there are the facts of this specific decision, and here are those facts. This takes Haitians off the list of a special non-immigrant guest worker program. Citizens of roughly half the world's countries are able to apply to come into the United States in non-skilled jobs like agriculture or hospitality, and then, return home.

The reason obvious, even low paying jobs here are many time the wages in their home country. According to the new government guidelines, leaving Haiti off the list, Haitian nationals applying for H-2A and H-2B visas present extremely high rates of refusal, and those issued said visas, have historically demonstrated high levels of fraud and abuse and a high rate overstaying the terms of their H-2 admission. Haiti has shown no improvement in these areas. Haiti's inclusion on the 2018 H-2A and H-2B lists is no longer in the U.S. interest."

Reuters cited DHS report that 40 percent of Haitians on these visas overstayed their welcome back in 2016. To be clear, it's not that many people, to begin with. In the past two years, under100 from Haiti were granted status here in the United States to work. Belize and Samoa were taken off the list as well.

And DHS issued this statement this afternoon for context. "The decision to remove Haiti, Belize, and Samoa from the lists was made as a result of interagency coordination between DHS and the Department of State."

It, of course, would be hard for the administration to have picked a worst time to announce this as they are fighting Democrats. Martha, doing everything possible to paint Republicans and specifically the President as both racist and anti-immigrant to gain the political leverage as the government shut down fight continues, quite literally as we speak, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Leland, thank you very much. Here now Tucker Carlson, to talk about this. Tucker, good to see you tonight. Thanks for --


MACCALLUM: -- popping up a little bit early for us because this story has you and the work that you done on it, sort of written all over. You know, it strikes me that it says something about President Donald Trump, that he's willing to essentially double down on this in this moment and say essentially, you know -- you know, the language has been disputed about what was said in there.


MACCALLUM: But you saying that these developments don't play by the rules that we have laid out. Belize has a human trafficking issue in terms of playing by the rules, and the laws that are put down. Haiti, the same thing, from Leland's report. And Samoa also has issues that are breaking the rules that we've set for them. So, why wouldn't we be able to say, you know what? We're going to hit the brakes here.

CARLSON: Well, you'd like to think that whatever the President said or didn't say would be totally disconnected from these decisions because the point of immigration policy, the points of all U.S. government policies, is always the same, which is to benefit American citizens.

So, the question isn't does this country need to send people here for its sake, the question is do we benefit from their coming here? And so, the real debate is, are these numbers right? And I don't know if they are or not. But no one seems to be even arguing over that.

DHS says that they are higher than average fraud rates among Haitian immigrants and higher than average overstays. If you think that's wrong, I think that's a completely fair conversation to have. But no one's bothering because virtually everyone in Washington, including most Republican leaders, believes the U.S. somehow, for reasons they never fully explained has a moral obligation to let people in to relieve economic pressure on their countries, to assist in disaster relief, for whatever.

But, none of those reasons have anything to do with Americans or helping America. And I think that's maybe the best part about Trump, is forcing the conversation back to its core. Is it good for us or is it not?

MACCALLUM: Yes, and it's a valid conversation, it's a valid argument that as you have pointed out many times it's almost -- as if, you know, most of the country is not willing to even have that discussion. When you go back historically, we've had several pauses on immigration.


MACCALLUM: You know, we hit the brakes, we said, in or during the Irish and Italian immigration after that, there was a big pause for several years so that people could become assimilated and acclimated before we decided to open the door and allow other people in.

So, you know, you have that issue of hitting the brakes, and then you have the issue which I raised earlier of whether or not these countries are playing by the rules.

CARLSON: Well, previous waves at immigration had clear economic justification. So, the country was opening up to the west, manifest destiny, someone needed to farm the land, immigrants need that. Then, it was industrialized, factories needed workers, we brought them from abroad, from western and central and Eastern Europe and other places.

There is no economic justification for the current wave of immigrants coming. None, we don't have a massive need for low wage labor. In fact, just the opposite that's going away, according to every estimate because of automation.

So, what is the point of this? How does it help? Now, I understand how it helps foreign countries and a lot of those people are nice great people, I'm not attacking them. But how does it help America? The people who put these leaders in office who pay for the whole thing. No one bothers to explain that because they don't care.

MACCALLUM: All right, we're watching the vote just to switch to one other topic before I let you get back to getting ready for your show. Dianne Feinstein said this about the possible shut down of the government. She said, "It's a very serious thing, people die, accidents happen. You don't know. Necessary functions can cease." She called the shutdown a last resort. I feel like I have seen, you know, these scenarios so many times in covering politics over the years.


MACCALLUM: And usually almost nothing happens as a result.

CARLSON: No. They keep you out of national parks just to spite you. But, it's interesting. I mean, up until about 24 hours ago, Democrats were saying, "Look, you got to keep these illegal immigrants covered by DACA in this country by shutting it down. They finally realized that's probably not a good sell to defund the government on behalf of people who shouldn't be here anyway.

So, now they're claiming it's about rural healthcare or something. I mean, I don't think anybody believes that it's about getting new voters for their Party through amnesty, period.

MACCALLUM: Tucker Carlson, always a pleasure to talk to you.

CARLSON: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Good to having you on tonight. Thanks for coming on the story, we will see, coming up next.

CARLSON: I appreciate it.

MACCALLUM: So, get back will they too.

So, coming up right here, a lot of kids used to want to grow up and be professional athletes, that's what they dreamed of. But a new survey shows that what they're watching on T.V. is changing that dream in a way that you might not anticipate.

Plus, 13 months after President Trump announced a huge deal to keep hundreds of jobs at Carrier, some critics say that he hasn't held up his end of the bargain. So, we are digging in tonight on the story. This Carrier employee of 24 years has his own opinion on all of this, you're going to hear from him, next.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Within 24 hours, I'll get a call, the head of Carrier, and he'll say, Mr. President, we have decided to stay in the United States. All right? That's what's going to happen, a 100 percent.




TRUMP: And to show the world that America is back and that we are coming back bigger and better and stronger than ever before and we're making our own product again, and we're opening up our factories again.


MACCALLUM: That was an appearance earlier today in Pennsylvania. President Trump touting the nation's economic surge during his make America great again promise. The President spoke at Pennsylvania manufacturing plant and he looked at, you know, talked to the folks on the ground. Talked about the success that they have seen, but workers at another plant, some of them feeling betrayed by President Trump. Trace Gallagher, live in our West Coast Newsroom with the story. Hi, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Martha. These days, President Trump spends less time talking about keeping jobs from going overseas and more time talking about the new tax bill and the robust economy.

And in fairness, there is reasons to boost applications for new unemployment benefits are now at their lowest level in nearly 45 years. And the numbers of Americans now collecting unemployment hasn't been this low since the 1970s when the job force was much smaller. On top of that, the stock market is red hot despite a down day today, the down remains above 26,000, and so far, this year, the Dow, NASDAQ and S&P 500 up nearly 5 percent. Experts say it's because of tax cuts, consumer confidence and expectations for a strong earning season. But the smiles at the corner of wall and broad have done little to raise spirits on the streets of West Indianapolis where some manufacturing workers think the president has found new talking points and forgotten old promises. Remember, in December of 2016, then President-elect Trump cut a deal between the state of Indiana and Carrier heating and air-conditioning, the company would get $7 million of incentive money in exchange for not shipping out jobs to a manufacturing plant in Mexico. Depending on whose numbers you believe, the deal saved between 7 and 1100 jobs, but since then, Carrier has had two rounds of layoffs and some workers feel the president has moved on. Watch.


UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: I now feel betrayed, and felt angry, and I feel forgotten.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: He was the only candidate to talk about these forgotten men and women, to talk about unfair trade deals, to talk about offshore, but the problem is he didn't deliver.


GALLAGHER: Despite the layoffs, Carrier says that in keeping with its 2016 commitment, more than a thousand jobs remain at the Indianapolis facility. And it should be noted that in 2017, an average of 16,000 manufacturing jobs nationwide were added each month. That is up from 9,000 each month over the previous five years. Martha.

MACCALLUM: Trace, thank you very much. So, my next guest has a different opinion about this story. He works at Carrier. He believes that the president made good on his promise.


TRUMP: United Technologies and Carrier stepped it up and now they're keeping -- actually the number is over 1,100 people, which is so great, which is so good.



MACCALLUM: Here now, Robin Maynard, a Carrier employee of 24 years and a supporter of President Trump. Robin, thank you very much for being here with us tonight. You heard in Trace's story the sound bites from some of your co-workers who feel that they got the bad end of the deal. What do you say?

ROBIN MAYNARD, CARRIER EMPLOYEE: I feel that President Trump, when he took office he came in and took the bull by the horns and started running with it. And he, I feel like he's stuck to his promise as far as keeping Carrier here. But not all the jobs were kept, and I think that was something that was done behind closed doors with Carrier itself. And this is just my opinion that, you know, they were going to take the fan coil lines to Mexico regardless of whether they kept the whole factory here or sent it all to Mexico. But, I think it's something that they had already had done. And so the.

MACCALLUM: Do you think that the factory would be open at all if it weren't for the deal that was struck?

MAYNARD: No, it wouldn't. I truly believe that it would have all gone across seas and down to Mexico, and we wouldn't have a job especially if it hadn't had been for the video that came forth that first day of the announcement.

MACCALLUM: In terms of the future, what do you think that holds? Do you see Carrier digging in and expanding or keeping, you know, the number of jobs between 700 and 1100 jobs in that plant? What do you see it from the corporate side?

MAYNARD: I think that they will hold their bargain with the state of Indiana and the government with the money that was put there, $7 million. I feel that they'll keep at least the 700 employees that are on the factory floor. The other numbers come from the salary side, that 300 or so. So, you know, the incentive was 7 million for 10 years, and to keep a thousand employees working. So, I think they'll stick to their end of the bargain on that at least.

MACCALLUM: You heard some of your fellow workers in Trace's story. You know, what's your take? We're about at the one-year mark of the Trump presidency. Overall, do you think he's been good for the economy?

MAYNARD: Yes. You know, like I said he's stepped in and took off running. He's made some changes that should have been made under the former administration that never got taken care of. He's changed some of the tax incentives and helping to try to keep the jobs here in America and keeping the USA products here. And trying to keep us employees having jobs where the factories shut up and go across the borders and stuff we wouldn't have anything. We would all be fighting for jobs.

MACCALLUM: We're glad you're doing well and we thank you very much for being here tonight, sir. Thanks for your time.

MAYNARD: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: You bet. So tune in tomorrow night, we will be live in Washington as President Trump marks his first year in office. I will be joined by some very special guests. "The Story" in D.C., tomorrow night live at 7:00. And now a Fox News alert, right now the house is voting to avoid a government shutdown. We're going to have a final tally after the break. But, first, as the black lives matter movement appears to have lost some of its steam and momentum, on and off the field, are the dreams of young children manifesting themselves in any way because of all of that? A fascinating look at who children's new idols are in the wake of all of that. The surprising answer when Amy Holmes and Wendy Osefo join us next.




UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's get you checkups fast. Time for your checkup, time for your checkup. I'm going to check your ears, check your eyes, find out how much you've grown.



MACCALLUM: So, the vote has passed in the house to keep the government open. It was 230 to 197 with five Democrats voting in favor. So we'll see if that's reflected on the senate side. The senate side has a bit more of an uphill battle, you've got Rand Paul and Lindsey Graham who are registration now that they will be no, so the tougher part of this equation is about to get underway. But it has passed the house. So, we'll keep you posted on that development as we get more.

In the meantime, so athletes, you know, generally considered to be role models, at least they were when we were growing up. But now it's become very political in many ways taking sides of groups like black lives matter, refusing to stand for the national anthem and turning down invitations to the White House to shake hands with the president of the United States. We've seen all of that over the past year. So what kind of message our kids taking from that? This is fascinating. New online survey asked kids what they want to be when they grow up. Pro-athlete used to be number one, now it is number 8. Police officer used to be number 10, and it has moved all the way up to number 3. And the biggest influence on our kids when they make these career predictions, not your parents, the media. Amy Holmes of Rasmussen, and Professor Wendy Osefo join me now. Good to have both of you with us today. You know, I think it's out of the mouths of babes in some way, right? So, they've watched everything that's unfolding in the world and they have made an interesting choice, Wendy. More and more of them want to be police officers. Does that mean that the blue lives matter, you know, statement in all of that has been more powerful than the black lives matter statement, perhaps?

WENDY OSEFO, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, as a daughter of an individual, my grandfather who was in the police force for 36 years, and my brother who serves now as an NYPD police officer, you know, I have the utter most respect for police officers. But I reject the premise to say that there's some type of empirical data or some type of correlation between this and Collin Kaepernick or black lives matter. Just this year alone, Collin Kaepernick has the 17th most popular jersey in the NFL, and only 3 percent of those individuals who said they do not watch the NFL attributed that to the protest when it comes to the national anthem. So, for me, I think that there may be some evidence to say what the media is doing may impact our children, but the long haul is this, civil rights movements in our country have never been popular. At the time that Martin Luther King was alive, 67 percent of Americans did not like him. And those are the same people who are putting up quotes a few days ago for his holiday. So, even though this may be the fad, I do not see a correlation here.

MACCALLUM: I mean, it's interesting, when you look at the characters that are really gaining a lot of traction, Amy, who do we have? We have -- and Doc McStuffen, which we discovered today because my kids are too old for this. But they're adorable. And this may be part of what is influencing these kids, Amy.

AMY HOLMES, RASMUSSEN REPORTS: Yeah, Martha, I have to say, I was very disappointed to not see cable news pundit on that list.


MACCALLUM: We were all expecting to be at the top of the list, let me tell you.

HOLMES: What the kids are dreaming of. You know, the good news is the kids still seem to be having kid dreams of what they want to be. And they're getting most of their influence from kid media like Doc. McStuffen. Eighty percent of little girls because of that character, in large part, want to be doctors and fix up their little toys or their stuffed animals and they see this with Disney. It really inspires them. I would say that the good news in all of this is despite how much politics does creep in to children's entertainment, that you don't see kids saying I want to be a social justice warrior when I grow up. I want to be a feminist marcher when I grow up. They still you want to be a doctor, an astronaut and, yes, an athlete. And part of the reason, Martha, why athlete fell off the list was because it fell off the list for girls. Boys, it still ranks number three for boys. Maybe some of the reason for that is girls hasn't seen female athletes a lot in the news.

MACCALLUM: They've said, maybe the distance from the Olympics is one of the reasons that athletes might have slid a little bit. We'll see of they'll come back. But, you know, athletes have not really held up to the role model, you know, some of them have, but many of them have not held up to that role model status and that might be some part of this. Wendy, last word.

OSEFO: Yeah, I agree with that -- just shout out to my 4-year-old Carter who wants to be a police officer when he grows up. And there is this translation of what they see on TV, and that translate into say I want to be a police officer because they're cool. He goes up to police officers in the grocery store and gives them a hug. So, I think there's a warmth that comes with that as well. So, as a mother of two, I am completely OK with these children saying they want to be doctors and they want to be police officers.

HOLMES: Could I add one more thing, in the same survey they found one little girl wants to be a librarian ballerina.

MACCALLUM: Perfect combination. Thank you both, great to see you.

HOLMES: Thank you.

OSEFO: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So coming up next, imagine going into enemy territory with only a horse as your mode of transportation. This week, the story of our brave troops after 9/11.


UNINDENTIFIED MALE: I choose you. You and 11 men, task force. I would be remiss if I did not say to you even in success, the odds of you coming home.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: They're 100 percent, sir.



MACCALLUM: In the days after September 11th, the country still reeling in shock and grief. President Bush came to New York while the tower still burn and families hunted in vain for their love ones. The president climbed on top of the rubble, he made a promise to America.




BUSH: I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people.


BUSH: And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.



MACCALLUM: What a moment, it lifted battered spirits but it was an actual call to action for our nation's bravest. And "12 Strong," a new movie that comes out this Friday, is the story of the Green Beret special op forces that was then sent into Afghanistan at that clarion call to fight the Taliban. The terrain required that they fly in dust storms over perilous mountains and then mount horses with their guns whether they knew how to ride or not.


UNINDENTIFIED MALE: The most important thing a man can take into combat is a reason why. You are in this fight, boys, you mark my words.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: Here me knocking on the window.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: Nineteen minutes attacked our country. The 12 of you will be the first ones to fight back.


UNINDENTIFIED MALE: Knocking on your door.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: You know I love you, right?

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: I would be remiss if I did not say to you even in success the odds of you coming home.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: They're 100 percent, sir.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: We're coming home.


MACCALLUM: Looks incredible. Earlier this week, I spoke with Doug Stanton, author of the number one New York Times best seller, "Horse Soldiers," and he's executive producer of this movie that hits theaters tomorrow.

MACCALLUM: Tell us what make these men and their skill set so unique?

DOUGH STANTON, "HORSE SOLDIERS" AUTHOR: So, if you've gone to -- after President Bush's speak, if you'd gone to the Pentagon -- after Afghanistan there was nothing. There was no way to really move a lot of troops into that country. We needed answers quickly and this story is in some ways about getting that quick answer, and removing the Taliban. They were chosen for the first time in U.S. history to be a lead element because they can speak the language. They know the cultural sensitivities. The movie does this very well about creating the relationships, the alliances between the Americans and the Afghans fighting a common enemy which was the Taliban. That's what they do and they did it with their air force brothers and the CIA and the army, night stalkers. So, just think of World War II. The underground in World War II. That's who these guys were. They dropped behind enemy lines. They have to link up with the locals and fight to overthrow this, essentially, this dictatorship which is the Taliban.

MACCALLUM: Yeah. I mean, they land and they are, you know, trying to make a connection with these members of the northern alliance, creating the northern alliance together. They don't speak the same language. They're put on horses. And as I said, many of them couldn't even ride horses. We haven't had horseback military in war since World War II at that time. But this is an extraordinary -- talk to me about these individuals.

STANTON: So, they're humble heroes. You know, I spent five years traveling around the country meeting them, going into their kitchens. I want to talk about their wives or at least acknowledge the roles the families had in this mission because without them at home, these guys wouldn't have been able to fight overseas. And so, when you meet them, they look like really fit people, but you'd never know that they were diplomats and warriors all rolled into one. Their training is really, really special. It's unique in American history what they accomplished.

MACCALLUM: They were vastly outnumbered.


MACCALLUM: . against the Taliban. They basically were able to capture Mazar-i-Sharif, the main, sort of, cold place where the Taliban was hunkered down but after that they got surprised.

STANTON: You mean after they took Mazar?


STANTON: They did. After they took Mazar there was an uprising in a place called (INAUDIBLE) They, however, prevail in that moment, too. But the battle continued after they -- they actually achieved what President Bush and others had sent them to do which was to capture this key city, and that in itself was an enormous -- no one thought they could do it. It was mission impossible. They did it in about six weeks. And we thought it might take two years.

MACCALLUM: What are their thoughts on what ultimately happened in Afghanistan?

STANTON: You know, it's interesting, what we're doing today in Afghanistan is kind of what they did back in 2001, which was to train, assist and advise the Afghans to have their own national army and police force. However, as you know, we're now changing or they are changing the posture to an offensive one to try to stop these insurgent attacks. We have about 60 percent of the country now or the Afghans do under their own control. So, I end the book, 12 strong, with the idea let's ask each other in 15 years how it all turned out, I think we need to move that marker forward to maybe another 5 or 10 to really have an answer.

MACCALLUM: Yeah. I mean, I think at that point nobody would have thought it was going to be such a long, long war.

STANTON: Exactly.

MACCALLUM: Doug Stanton, it's a remarkable book.

STANTON: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Remarkable movie. Thank you so much for being with us.

STANTON: My pleasure.

MACCALLUM: Good to see you, sir. Stick around. The quote of the night is up next.


MACCALLUM: Tonight's quote is from General John Mulholland, who was the commander of that mission in "12 Strong." He says, quote, "We went carrying what we believed to be the hopes of the American people with us. If there was any fear that we had it was that we would be worthy of the American people. The people of New York, the people of Washington, the people of Pennsylvania, the people of our great country and all those who lost people that day, so that was with us constantly, the fear that we would not be worthy of the American people."

They were much more than worthy. Amazing story.

So folks, tomorrow night, we hope you'll join us. We'll be live in Washington, D.C., where it's now looking like it's going to be pretty dramatic. There's going to be quite a fight in the Senate to keep the government open. I'll be joined by some special guests, also, as President Trump marks his first year in office. Hard to be it's been a year already, right? That is "The Story" for tonight. See you tomorrow in D.C. We look forward to it. Our friend Tucker Carlson is coming up next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.