ABC News facing backlash for never airing Epstein accuser video
ABC News pursuing source of leaked hot mic video; 'MediaBuzz' host Howard Kurtz weighs in.
This is a rush transcript from "The Story," November 6, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARTHA MACCALLUM, HOST: That's pretty good. All right, thanks, Bret.
Good evening, everybody. This is “The Story,” and tonight on “The Story” as the latest transcript is released. This one from Bill Taylor, U.S. diplomat to Ukraine. He claimed that he believed that there was a quid pro quo.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham says this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: What I can tell you about the Trump policy toward the Ukraine, it was incoherent. It depends on who you talk to. They seem to be incapable of forming a quid pro quo.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: Now, that's an interesting angle on all this as well. We're going to talk to him and also about the latest on the whistleblower. Plus, tonight, new revelations in The Wall Street Journal about a U.S. consulting firm that was doing work for Burisma in Ukraine, and used Hunter Biden's name to get a meeting with the State Department.
Also here, Republican Daniel Cameron who is a rising star. He's going to be the next attorney general of Kentucky. We will get his take on what he thinks happened in last night's elections.
And also this evening, the plot is thickening in Mexico. There is a long history of violence between the cartels and the LeBaron family in northern Mexico. We will investigate as some family members say that they do not believe that this was any case of mistaken identity.
Also with me tonight, Howie Kurtz on why ABC executives are reeling over the reports that they quashed the story, a serial pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
But first, let's go back to our top guest tonight, Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham. Senator, welcome, good to have you with us tonight.
GRAHAM: Thank you.
MACCALLUM: So, you say that the policy -- you know, when you read through all of these transcripts, which I know you haven't done, and we're going to get to that in just a moment.
GRAHAM: Yes.
MACCALLUM: But that it proves that there was a lot of incoherence from the administration on what they wanted to do.
GRAHAM: Here is one common theme. Not one person has talked to President Trump about whether or not he wanted a quid pro quo. So, Taylor is saying that he assumed there was a quid pro quo based on what Sunderland told him, the E.U. ambassador.
He has said previously there was not -- now that his memory has been refreshed -- I presumed there was, but this whole thing is a joke. And Volker, the envoy to Ukraine said there was no connection between meetings and investigating Biden.
MACCALLUM: So, it is interesting though, because Sondland said he is the one who actually spoke. He did pick up the phone and speak with the president at one point.
GRAHAM: Right.
MACCALLUM: And he said the president told me that there was no quid pro quo.
GRAHAM: Right.
MACCALLUM: And that he wanted Zelensky to do what he ran on. That -- that's a pretty telling statement.
GRAHAM: Well, so, you've got -- you've got a statement from the president to Sunderland, says no, this is not a quid pro quo. I want him to clean up corruption before I give him $400 million.
The president of the Ukraine said, no, I was never threatened by President Trump. I never believed there was a quid pro quo, where I had to investigate Joe Biden and Hunter Biden to get $400 million of military aid.
MACCALLUM: Yes.
GRAHAM: The whole thing is a joke. The whole thing is being driven by partisans in the House. Adam Schiff is not looking for the truth and the testimony is incoherent. It depends on who you talk to.
But there's one common theme here. The President of the Ukraine and the president of the United States have both said there was no quid pro quo.
MACCALLUM: All right, with regard to Adam Schiff, here's what he said today when he walked out of this transcript release.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: Most important facts are largely not contested. The president enlisted the whole departments of government in the illicit aim of trying to get Ukraine to dig up dirt on a political opponent as well as further conspiracy theory about the 2016 election that he believed would be beneficial to his re-election campaign.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: So, once again, just like during the Russia probe --
(CROSSTALK)
GRAHAM: Right, yes.
MACCALLUM: Adam Schiff before this process has really actually begun, the public hearings are until next week, he already knows what the answer is here.
GRAHAM: Yes and that statement is full of crap. So, Bill Taylor would -- what does he base his belief that there's a quid pro quo on? What is the factual basis, a conversation with Sunderland?
Now, here is a question. Why did Sunderland change his testimony? Was there a connection between Sunderland and Democratic operatives on the committee? Did he talk to Schiff? Did he talk to Schiff staffers?
I've been a lawyer for a very long time, but when somebody changes their testimony, they suddenly recall something they didn't know before. It makes me incredibly suspicious. Why did Sunderland change his mind? What were -- what prompted him to change his mind about maybe there was a quid pro quo when I said there wasn't?
MACCALLUM: All right. Well, you know, the whistleblower issue with regard to Adam Schiff is a big one here.
GRAHAM: Right. Right.
MACCALLUM: And I know that you said that you believe that this process can't go forward until the whistleblower is known and questioned in some way shape or form.
GRAHAM: Right.
MACCALLUM: A lot of stories out there about who this person is and it all seems to be coming from sort of one source. So, we're still hanging back on this, but there are indications that this person may have worked in the NSC, may have worked in the Obama administration and been a holdover.
GRAHAM: Right. Yes.
MACCALLUM: Why do you think you have to hear from that person in order to move forward?
GRAHAM: Without the whistleblower complaint, we wouldn't be talking about the subject matter right now, right? So, what if the whistleblower was tied to a Democrat? What if the whistleblower was tied to Brennan and people from the Intel community, he'd been out to destroy the Trump presidency even before he got elected? What if this person came from that world? What if they had a bias?
The whistleblower statute is being abused here. It does not give person anonymity when it comes to making a claim of wrongdoing it protects them from being fired.
The Constitution Trump's the statute no American including Donald Trump should be accused of something based on an anonymous source. I want to know who the whistleblower is, what ties they have to the Intel community if any, and were they working with the Democrat? Did they have an agenda like Brennan and Clapper?
MACCALLUM: All right. So, you know, a lot of folks would say that that's exactly what needs to happen. And that the Judiciary Committee needs to bring Adam Schiff before it and ask those questions.
GRAHAM: Yes, yes.
MACCALLUM: Is that something that you are going to do?
GRAHAM: No, you -- I'm not going to subpoena a member of the House. If they subpoena me, I wouldn't go. We have separate branches of government. The State Department is the entity in question, not the Department of Justice.
I'm hoping the Foreign Relations Committee will look at whether or not Hunter Biden and Joe Biden did anything wrong when it came to firing the prosecutor. The point I'm trying to make is if Adam Schiff talked to the whistleblower before he actually filed the complaint that becomes relevant.
But you're not going to have one body subpoena somebody from the other body, but if you do bring the whistleblower forward and there -- they've been asked under oath, did you talk to Adam Schiff? Then all bets are off about Adam Schiff being a witness, he can be called then.
MACCALLUM: Yes. Well, you know, I mean a lot of folks have pointed to statements that you've made in the past and said that they want you to bring forth Hunter Biden, and perhaps even Joe Biden, the former vice president.
GRAHAM: Yes.
MACCALLUM: And ask them these questions from your position as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
GRAHAM: Right.
MACCALLUM: And you said that you can't do that.
GRAHAM: No. Number one, the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't have any jurisdiction over the State Department. The allegation is that they withheld aid to the Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden's company. That's a State Department inquiry, not a Department of Justice inquiry.
So, at the end of the day, the Senate is set up, we have jurisdiction is limited to the Department of Justice and the FBI. But I do believe based on John Solomon's reporting, somebody needs to look at whether or not the State Department was being asked to do things to get rid of the prosecutor because he was getting too close to Joe Biden.
MACCALLUM: All right. So, you believe that is not your jurisdiction. Despite the fact that some people say that they think laws might have been broken.
GRAHAM: Well, the point is a lot of people are frustrated. They want to get back at Hunter Biden and Joe Biden because they think they did more wrong than the president. We have a process in the Senate.
I think what we need to do is take the John Solomon evidence that he and -- that he disclosed and have a hearing regarding the State Department about what role they played in having this prosecutor fired, and see where it goes from there. That's what I think we should do.
MACCALLUM: Right.
GRAHAM: And the whistleblower needs to be named and we need to be able to cross-examine that person for any bias.
MACCALLUM: All right. With regard to Rudy Giuliani's role in this, you've said that you want him to testify.
GRAHAM: Yes.
MACCALLUM: He is one person you think would appropriately be testifying before your committee. Are you going to do that?
GRAHAM: I invited him and he hasn't responded. He's the president's lawyer, so I doubt we could actually get him to come unless he volunteered to come. So, what I hope will happen is that we will look at to Hunter Biden, Joe Biden connection to firing the prosecutor based on the John Solomon discovery about e-mails between the State Department and this company.
MACCALLUM: Yes.
GRAHAM: That's the way to start this thing as to what's going on in the House. I think it's a political sham. I think there is no evidence at all the president engaged in a quid pro quo, and I am closed-minded to the idea of impeaching this president based on this phone call.
MACCALLUM: All right, you also -- just going back to the origins of the Russia investigation, because I know you met with the Attorney General Bill Barr today, right?
GRAHAM: Right.
MACCALLUM: So, what can you do to update -- tell us to update us on that and will there be any further hearings with regard to Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe and invoking the 25th amendment and all of those things that you've mentioned in the past?
GRAHAM: Right. Well, the first thing I'm going to do is start with Horowitz. His report is about done. We'll get him to come before the committee to talk about what he found in terms of FISA warrant abuse in the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign.
I think his report is going to be stunning, I think it's going to be damning, I think it's going to prove that the system got off the rails and we need corrective action. Where I go from there, I won't know until I hear from him.
But here is the difference. I trust Horowitz to be fair. I don't trust Adam Schiff to be fair. I trusted Mueller to be fair. I don't trust the House Nadler-Schiff team to be fair to the president.
This whole process in the House is driven by partisan politicians who hate Trump's guts. That's the big difference between Mueller and Horowitz.
MACCALLUM: So, now, we're going to -- the American people get a chance to see what's going on in these public hearings, we hope, as that moves forward.
GRAHAM: Yes.
MACCALLUM: So, Lindsey Graham, chairman, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight.
GRAHAM: Thank you. Thank you.
MACCALLUM: So, next up, an exclusive interview with Kentucky Attorney General-elect Daniel Cameron, a person that you're probably going to hear - - be hearing a lot more about. A Republican who won last night and made history in his State.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Your next attorney general, Daniel Cameron.
A star is born. Do you ever see that movie? A star is born.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. MATT BEVIN, R-KY: This is a good night. It has been a good night for Republicans, I'll tell you. We finally got the Attorney General for the first time since World War Two. That's pretty outstanding. Congratulations to Daniel Cameron.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: 33-year-old Republican Daniel Cameron making history last night in Kentucky winning the race for attorney general and becoming the first African American to be independently elected to statewide office in the bluegrass state. Here he is the night before the election.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Should I bring Daniel up? Get up here, Daniel.
DANIEL CAMERON, ATTORNEY GENERAL-ELECT, KENTUCKY: Mr. President, I hope you can tell that Kentucky is Trump country. We are proud to stand with you on pro-life issues in here in the Commonwealth. We are going to stand up for those who cannot speak for themselves.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Joining me now exclusively Daniel Cameron, Kentucky Attorney General-elect. Sir, good to have you with us and congratulations on your election. Now that the -- it's all sunk in over the last 24 hours, perhaps a little bit, how are you feeling about winning this race for attorney general in Kentucky tonight?
CAMERON: Well, thank you, Martha. I appreciate you having me on. It is an extreme honor to have been voted as the next Attorney General here in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. We've obviously hit the ground running today. I was in meetings this morning with my team, sort of working on our transition as we look forward to really in this role, helping to improve the public safety outcomes of the men, women, and children of all 120 counties.
So it's a great honor. Obviously, you're humbled by the experience of having a senior name on the ballot and being voted upon by your fellow Kentuckians. And so I'm so grateful to everyone who ultimately decided to give me an opportunity to serve this Commonwealth as its next Attorney General.
MACCALLUM: Yes. You know, in terms of the sort of barriers that you broke -- I don't always like to focus on those because I just like to focus on the talent that people have and the elections that they won. But I was reading what you said. You said that you grew up in the shadow of the birthplace of Abraham Lincoln. So just you know, on a personal note, how does it -- what are you thinking about all of that?
CAMERON: Well, this was a historic race and in this historic election. As you noted, I'm the first independently voted upon African American to serve in statewide elected office here in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And I don't shriek from that. I'm proud of the history of the Republican Party.
And I grew up in Elizabethtown, Kentucky, Hardin County, which is not too far from the birthplace of Abraham Lincoln. And so he's always been someone who is inspired my interest in public service. And so it was a great honor, again, to be elected as the Attorney General last evening.
I hope that folks that look like me regardless candidly of their political affiliation, not only look at me and say that, you know, I want to vote for him in the ballot box, but also make the decision that perhaps they want to put their name up for public service and for public office.
It has been a great thrill to have the opportunity run. We started this campaign in January of this year and I spent ten-plus months on the road talking to Kentuckians about what they care about in terms of Attorney General's office. And it was pretty clear that they wanted somebody that was going to renew the promise of the office as the chief law enforcement office in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and also be in the position of defending and enforcing the laws that are passed by the General Assembly.
So we've got an opportunity to present a new vision and a new face in the AG's office. And I'm excited to be a part of that.
MACCALLUM: So you were a legal counsel for Mitch McConnell, and some people are already speculating -- just won one election, they're already saying, you know, maybe someday he would be the successor to Senator McConnell, in that office, or perhaps a governor himself. Are those aspirations that you have?
CAMERON: Well, I just -- as I told the people last night at our election night party, we want to do a good job in serving in this role. I was honored to have the endorsement of the Kentucky Fraternal Order of Police, and they expect me to really advocate for our law enforcement community for a Commonwealth and county attorneys.
So I want to be in the business of improving the public safety outcomes for men, women, and children of all 120 counties. I had the opportunity to serve as Senator McConnell's legal counsel in D.C. and it was a phenomenal and transformative experience. I'm grateful for his service to the Commonwealth. And I hope that Kentuckians will make a determination that he needs to be reelected next year.
MACCALLUM: Well, it's great to meet you and congratulations again on your election. I hope you'll come back and we can talk more about topics as they come up in your office.
CAMERON: Absolutely.
MACCALLUM: Thank you very much, Daniel Cameron. Good to see you. Congratulations again.
CAMERON: You too. Thanks. Bye.
MACCALLUM: So coming up next, there is so much more behind “The Story” of the killing of American women and children in northern Mexico, along simmering battle between a Mormon community and the drug lords in their neighborhood, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MACCALLUM: The death of nine women and children in Mexico revealing there is a lot of history between the Mormon LeBaron family and the Chihuahua and Sinaloa drug cartels in northern Mexico. And it appears that this week, the cartels came back for more. The cartels killed two of the LeBarons several years ago, causing the LeBaron family to build a fortress essentially around their towns with watchtowers and to take turns guarding it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We were never pinpointing drug cartels or anything else. But when it came to them now kidnapping our family members, that's what we took a stand against. When it comes to protecting our family, we have to die doing and we're going to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: So in this part of Mexico, the American guns flood in and the drugs flow north to America. It's a business that is protected in part by some corrupt and terrified Mexican officials as well as the cartels. Chief Breaking News Correspondent Trace Gallagher has this unbelievable backstory tonight. Trace?
TRACE GALLAGHER, CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Martha, the nine people who were killed in the cartel attack were all members of the LeBaron family, a Mormon community with roots in Mexico dating back 100 years. After the Church of Latter Day Saints banned polygamy in the late 1800s, the LeBarons broke away from the Mormon church and move south of the border.
Today, for the most part, the LeBarons have also abandoned polygamy choosing instead to raise large families by up land and build big profitable farms. But their wealth is also caught the attention of the drug cartels.
In 2009, Mexican drug gangs kidnapped 16-year-old Eric LeBaron and demanded a $1 million ransom. The LeBaron's refused to pay and convince Mexican lawmakers to both condemn and respond to the kidnapping. The state then set up roadblocks and provided troops and helicopters.
Six days later, Eric LeBaron was set free. But Eric's old Brother Benjamin called for a crackdown on cartels. And as a 2012 vice documentary shows, the cartels responded sending truckloads of men to Benjamin LeBaron's home breaking windows, breaking down doors. When Benjamin's brother in law came to help, the drug gang punished both. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He came to the rescue. He was an innocent bystander. But they beat him and picked him and Benjamin up and took them about two miles down the road here and shot them both and left them on the side of the road.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GALLAGHER: After the killings, the LeBaron's decided to arm themselves and learn military tactics to protect their families. They also continue to call out the cartels. But this time they convinced the Mexican military to help protect them. Julian LeBaron told Wall Street Journal reporter Robbie Whelan that for the past several years, there have been no cartel conflicts. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBBIE WHELAN, REPORTER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: The latest theory from the Mexican Government is that these families were caught up in sort of collateral damage of a -- of a turf war between two warring factions in northern Mexico.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GALLAGHER: Yes. That would be the Juarez cartel and the Sinaloa cartel. And Mexican authorities now say a man arrested with guns near the scene of the massacre has no connection to the killings whatsoever. Martha?
MACCALLUM: Trace, thank you. Joining me now by phone is Lafe Langford Jr. He's a relative of the nine victims that were killed in the Mexico ambush. Lafe, thank you very much for speaking with us tonight. And, you know, we're thinking about your family. I know this is such an awful time obviously for all of you. How is everyone doing today?
LAFE LANGFORD JR, RELATIVE OF THE VICTIMS: We're just getting prepared for the funeral tomorrow. Families have had to leave the wounded in the hospital behind their fathers to go attend the funeral of his wife and children tomorrow and then try to get back to his children that is suffering and recovering in the hospital.
We're still -- we're all trying to wake up from this. And it was just -- to live in this nightmare it hard to even wrap your mind around it.
MACCALLUM: We're just looking at the pictures of these children. They're so innocent and beautiful and their mothers -- and it's just hard to believe it all. What do you think about whether or not they were caught in between these cartels or whether or not this was a targeted hit of these individuals?
LANGFORD: We, you know, as I said before, we believe that this is a targeted hit. We know it was. There's no -- in our minds, there's no way around it. Once they knew that they were women and children, they continued their slaughter, and we don't know the reason but it's just terrible.
MACCALLUM: Do you have any thoughts on the reasons? You know, it sounds like things were calm over the last several years. Did anything ignite what we -- you know, do you think there is anything that might have tipped this off?
LANGFORD: No. Again, we -- there is just -- no evidence to support that at all. We have been peaceful families that have lived in almost perfect -- just perfect peace and happiness in these valleys and mountains.
And I will say that the only way we can understand it is that our family were used as bait to lure in one cartel against another.
MACCALLUM: Lafe, thank you very much. Lafe Langford, we wish you and all of your loved ones well in this impossibly difficult time. Thank you for talking with me tonight.
LANGFORD: Thank you.
MACCALLUM: Also joining me via Skype is Leah Staddon, who is a relative of this family as well. Leah, thank you very much for being with us. You know, with regard -- I'm reading one account by Alex Lebaron who is an elected official in the area.
He says that it could not have been a mistake. This is terrorism, plain and simple and that there are reports that there was no crossfire at all. Is that your understanding based on what you have been told by the witnesses?
LEAH STADDON, LEBARON FAMILY RELATIVE: Yes. That is my understanding as well.
MACCALLUM: Tell me what you think perpetuated this attack.
STADDON: Honestly, I don't, I don't know. There has been a few different people having different ideas of what could have done it. None of us know. All we know is that it was on purpose. It wasn't an accident. They weren't -- they weren't in the wrong place at the wrong time. They're -- we don't believe that that's the truth. We believe that they knew who they were attacking when they attacked and they had it planned.
MACCALLUM: You know, as we said last night, the evidence that we have so far is that the vehicles were several miles apart and that when they knew that there were women and children in the vehicles, they continued this massacre. Is that your understanding?
STADDON: Yes. That is correct.
MACCALLUM: Tell me what you have heard from the people that you have spoken to so far today.
STADDON: From family members?
MACCALLUM: Yes.
STADDON: About the incident?
MACCALLUM: Yes.
STADDON: OK. We, I mean, I've heard -- I've heard the story of one of the -- my nephews that were in the second vehicle that came up on the first one, and he witnessed -- he witnessed Christina get out -- and he witnessed her on the ground. She was - she got out of her vehicle to let them know that it was a woman, and they shot her. They knew it was women and children. There is evidence of that from the witnesses. And the children.
MACCALLUM: Yes. I can't even imagine how these kids are going to get over what they have seen and witnessed. Leah, we are -- you're all in our prayers and we thank you very much for being with us tonight. Thank you, Leah.
STADDON: Thank you.
MACCALLUM: Coming up next. We're going to talk to Howie Kurtz. He has called out ABC for being timid when it had the opportunity to take on a serial child predator. Jeffrey Epstein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AMY ROBACH, CO-ANCHOR, ABC: She told me everything. She had pictures. She had everything. It was unbelievable what we had. Clinton. We had everything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBACH: I have had this story for three years. I have had this interview with Virginia Roberts. We would not put it on the air. First of all, I was told who Jeffrey Epstein. No one knows who that is. This is a stupid story.
Then the palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways. We were so afraid we wouldn't be able to interview Kate and Will that we got also quashed the story.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: ABC News now investigating the source of that leaked hot-mic moment from anchor Amy Robach claiming that the network deliberately quashed her interview with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, an accuser of the late sex predator Jeffrey Epstein.
Now ABC said the interview was conducted four years ago and it simply did not meet their standards. But the incident is drawing new scrutiny to some of the network's journalistic blunders from their coverage of Brett Kavanaugh's accusers to the false firefight in Syria which turned out to be a shooting range in Kentucky.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This video obtained by ABC News appears to show the fury of the Turkish attack on the border town of Tell Abyad two nights ago.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Almost immediately the web site Gizmodo reported that Twitter users were comparing the ABC to YouTube video from a Kentucky gun range.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: I don't know how could that happen.
Joining me now Howie Kurtz, the host of Media Buzz. Howie, good to have you. So, the reports are that --
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: Hi, Martha.
MACCALLUM: -- ABC executives are, you know, reeling from this whole thing. What are you hearing?
KURTZ: Well I'll tell you what ABC executives say in a moment but I've got to tell you this was such a massive missed opportunity to have the woman, Virginia Giuffre who turned out to be to be the chief accuser of one of the worst sexual predators of the modern era, a man who routinely abused young women, having her on camera detailed on the record allegations.
And we heard Amy Robach, the news anchor at GMA say in that frustration, moment of frustration that people were saying at her network well, nobody knows who this guy is.
Excuse me. He was a wealthy guy who had been a pal of Bill Clinton who had been a pal of Donald Trump who operated in very high circles and had earlier gotten a very light sentence in Florida over sexual abuse charges. So, people knew who damn well who Jeffrey Epstein was.
MACCALLUM: Yes. They absolutely they did. And Virginia Roberts said that she was shocked that they didn't air it because she believed that it could be a game changer not to mention the fact that a lot of people have been trying to interview her over the last several years. We have as well.
That, you know, wanting to be able to get her to come out and tell her very powerful story.
The Miami Herald did an investigative piece back in 2018 after this interview was done, so obviously, they would have been way ahead of the game had they post -- you know, had they gone with this story, Howie.
KURTZ: Right. They forfeited all the benefit of time and being out in front journalistically here. But I spoke late today, Martha, to a senior ABC News executive who says a couple of things.
MACCALLUM: OK.
KURTZ: One, Amy Robach doesn't know all the facts. Secondly, this executive told me that the network was going to broadcast Virginia Roberts' allegation against Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew, both of whom have denied any involvement in anything sexual in connection with Epstein, but it had been in court files, it was removed from the court files and then the network felt it didn't have enough independent corroboration.
But finally, I asked, well, couldn't you have left out Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew and couldn't GMA have at least broadcast a woman who says that she was abused by Epstein and pimped out by him as young as 17 years old? And the answer was, well, yes, we could have run that story but GMA wasn't interested without the --
(CROSSTALK)
MACCALLUM: They had the picture of her with Prince Andrew. I mean.
KURTZ: Yes. Well, clearly, -- yes, I mean, we don't know what happened and I --
(CROSSTALK)
MACCALLUM: No. But, you know, I mean, she can tell her story --
KURTZ: But obviously, --
MACCALLUM: -- and show the picture.
KURTZ: Yes.
MACCALLUM: All right. I've got to leave it there, Howie.
(CROSSTALK)
KURTZ: Yes, it's not that hard to do.
MACCALLUM: We're going to stay on this story. We appreciate you being here tonight. Good to see you tonight.
KURTZ: Nice to see you, Martha.
MACCALLUM: So let's get a live look tonight at Monroe, Louisiana where President Trump will be taking the stage for a rally in a few minutes from now. We will take you there live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MACCALLUM: We are just a few minutes away from President Trump taking the stage in Monroe, Louisiana to boost Republican gubernatorial candidate Eddie Rispone looking to unseat Democratic incumbent John Bel Edwards in a November -- in a run off in November on the 16th of that month.
The race is currently predicted by a toss-up by forecasters. It's going to be the third red state that President Trump has visited this past week on behalf of GOP candidates, most recently alongside Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin who has now formally requested a recanvas of last night's election after a narrow loss to Democratic challenger Andy Beshear by about 5,000 votes.
Correspondent Kristin Fisher live tonight in Louisiana for us. Hi, Kristin.
KRISTIN FISHER, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Martha. Well, this is the last governor's race to be decided in 2019. The incumbent, John Bel Edwards as the details only Democratic governor. So, President Trump really sees an opportunity here to turn it red. To flip it red.
And this could be a preview of what President Trump will likely say when he takes the stage in about 20 or 30 minutes. It seems to be running just a little bit late.
Here is what he said when he was in Louisiana last month rallying for the Republican candidate for governor of the state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Louisiana cannot take four more years of a liberal Democrat governor raising your taxes, killing your jobs, attacking your industries and taking money from open borders extremists.
John Bel Edwards. Not good. Goes around saying I like Trump very much. He's very good. But behind my back he doesn't like me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FISHER: On the campaign trail Edwards has been downplaying his differences with the president since the president is so popular here in Louisiana. Well, his opponent, Baton Rouge businessman Eddie Rispone has been playing up his close relationship with the president.
And just like we saw in Kentucky, the Republican candidate and the president are really trying to nationalize this race and turn it into a referendum on the impeachment inquiry.
Like we said, this is President Trump's second rally for Rispone in less than a month and a Republican congressman says that President Trump will be back in Louisiana next week to rally again right before the runoff. Martha.
MACCALLUM: Thank you. A quick break and we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MACCALLUM: As we await President Trump, new poll numbers suggest a decline with women voters in a national match-up against Joe Biden. Trump is even with male voters. But when it comes to women he just get 33 percent to Biden 64 percent, a significant shift from 2016. One exit poll showed Trump with 41 percent of women's voters to Clinton's 54.
I sat down with a panel of women who voted for Donald Trump, but where do they stand now?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MACCALLUM: Why don't I start with you, Sharon. Thank you so much. Sharon, what's your name and where are you from? tell everybody.
SHARON MAHN, NO LONGER SUPPORTS TRUMP: I'm Sharon Mahn. And I'm from right here in New York City.
MACCALLUM: Great. Well, welcome. It good to have you here.
MAHN: Good to be here.
MACCALLUM: So, tell me a little about how you're feeling. You voted for President Trump last time. Now where do you stand?
MAHN: I voted for President Trump as he is from the Manhattan area and we were well aware of who let President Trump was prior to being President Trump and I felt that I was enjoying some of the aspects of his enthusiasm of running for the office and he's certainly a strong business person and I thought that would be beneficial to the country, so he is leading in that direction.
MACCALLUM: But now?
MAHN: I am having some doubts about where the country can go and I'm going to have to just see where it ends up.
MACCALLUM: Yes. Kim, you're from North Carolina.
KIM COSTAKIS, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Correct.
MACCALLUM: It is part of North Carolina near the water.
COSTAKIS: That's correct.
MACCALLUM: Where do you stand?
COSTAKIS: I voted for Donald Trump the first time and I will continue to vote for him. I feel strongly he is exactly what our country needs. I felt like after our last administration, what happened then, we need him more than ever now.
And I really think that he -- the reason I wanted to vote for him originally, I remember the day he announced his campaign, he was a businessman. He knew how to get this country out of debt. Drain the swamp. And as you say it --
MACCALLUM: That's gone up, actually. That's one area that's very tough to get your arms around but there are definitely accomplishments.
COSTAKIS: Yes.
MACCALLUM: That was not quite yet, but we'll see where it goes. Maryse, you are also from New York.
MARYSE SELIT, FORMER TRUMP SUPPORTER: Yes, I am. And I voted for Donald Trump but I have since had doubts -- more doubts in the past than I'm having right now. So, I had doubts because of the fact that he has very unpresidential manner and his rhetoric against minorities, I'm a minority and a woman I find that very offensive.
I mean, he is opposed to Hispanics, Muslims, he's got this horrible -- you know, he's got horrible policies when it comes to minorities. So that makes Trump unattractive to me even though I believe he's actually very good at running the economy.
I mean, he's doing great things. We've got a booming economy. We've got -- unemployment is at its lowest, we've got, you know, the stock market is doing great, he's doing great things, yet he is doing it in such a way that he's alienating people.
OK. I feel that he needs to tone his rhetoric down. So, because of that, I'm actually not sure I will vote for him again.
MACCALLUM: So, let's say it was Joe Biden and President Trump and you are going it walk into the voting booth tomorrow, what are you going to do.
SELIT: Still vote for Trump.
MACCALLUM: You would?
SELIT: Yes.
MACCALLUM: All right. Shelly, also from North Carolina.
SHELLY SANDERS, TRUMP SUPPORTER: Yes.
MACCALLUM: Raleigh-Durham area.
SANDERS: I loved Trump from the very first moment. I grew up with a father who had very vigorous conversations about with me about how a country should be run and I would always say why doesn't it run like a business?
And so, for that reason, I like everything he's doing for our country. I think he makes promises. He keeps them. He's not a professional politician and I see the country going in a direction that without his leadership scares me.
I didn't go to war. I wasn't part of any great political movement but I'm certainly going to be in this fight and I'm going to fight to get him re- elected and do make sure my children don't end up living in a country of socialism that is just headed for ruin.
MACCALLUM: So, in many ways it becomes ultimately that choice, right, between one or the other. We don't know who the Democrat candidate will be yet. But Sharon, let me put the same question to you that I put to Maryse. Let's say, let's say you walk into the voting booth and it is President Trump or Elizabeth Warren. What would you do?
MAHN: I would probably lean towards Donald Trump at that point rather than Elizabeth Warren. I just feel that I don't necessarily agree with some of the things that Elizabeth Warren has put out there, so for that reason I probably would lean to him in that direction.
MACCALLUM: What is it that you, what sort of disenchanted you or whatever word you would use after you voted for President Trump? What kind of change your mind?
MAHN: I have to say I agree with what Maryse say in that I feel that he's done a great job with the economy. I feel that he's been doing well with the jobs. I am from a military family by background and I think that he's doing a great job with some of the security, but I don't necessarily agree with some of the things that Trump has done -- President Trump has done with some of the immigrants and some of the treatment of the children at the borders. I question some of that treatment.
And I also, like Maryse indicated, wonder if President Trump carries himself sometimes in a presidential manner. And I think that matters.
MACCALLUM: If you could tell him one thing right now, if he were watching, what would you say -- you know, what would you say like here is how you can get my vote again? What would you say?
MAHN: I'd say tone down the Twitter account. And think before you write. And listen to people who are supporting you and listen to women. They want to be treated with respect and it does matter. No matter what you are doing as the president and great acts that you're doing, you're doing so many good things for this country but that being said, respect women because it does matter.
MACCALLUM: Kim, what would you say to the president?
COSTAKIS: My gosh. You know, the Twitter does not bother me like it does someone. I just think he's doing a great job with all the promises he's made. The things that other presidents in the past have said they would do but they haven't, but yet he's doing the things. I'd say keep up the good work. He has a genuine love for the country and I appreciate that.
MACCALLUM: Hoe do -- I'm curious. You know, when you have like dinner or lunch with your girlfriends around the country at home, you know, do you get into these discussions? Even among people who may have been supportive? In New York you probably get a lot of heat for voting for Trump in the first place. What do your friends say to you?
SELIT: You know what, I mean, people, everybody just cannot believe that I voted for Trump but I'm a Republican. I believe in the free market. So, I am not going to, you know, vote in a socialist and the options on the other side are precisely that. Right?
I mean, we're going to go back -- has socialism ever worked? I mean, it hasn't worked in Venezuela, in Russia. It is not going -- this great country is a capitalist nation and Trump is fabulous at that. He's doing -- this is a great economy.
(CROSSTALK)
MACCALLUM: So, you're on with the friends do you say, what would you say to the president?
SELIT: I would say to him stop telling women like me to go back home. I wasn't even born in this country but you told four elected congresswomen to go back home.
MACCALLUM: And that bothers you.
SELIT: That bothers me. That really bothers me. That was -- that makes me -- it sticks to my core.
SANDERS: I guess I feel that the left is so apoplectic now. I think that the media is so -- always wants to have a big story. I don't want let that stuff bother me. The conversations I have with my girlfriends are about the fact that exactly what I said.
I've got two kids in college. I feared for the first time in the history of my family that they might be the first generation that didn't have the opportunity to better themselves, a tiny bit, I didn't want them coming home and living in the basement. And so -- and so --
(CROSSTALK)
MACCALLUM: Out. Out everyone.
SANDERS: And so, I think all the things that he's doing for the future of this country are so much more important. I don't know a human psyche that could take the criticism and the bombardment of negativity like he does. And so, if he fights back a little bit, you know what, I can take that all day.
MACCALLUM: We got to leave it there. I could talk to you ladies for the rest of the evening. And maybe we'll get a chance to do it again as we kind of move forward in this process. So, thank you all very much.
(CROSSTALK)
MAHN: Thank you.
SANDERS: Thank you.
MACCALLUM: Great to have you here tonight.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MACCALLUM: Interesting chat with them. My thanks to all of them for coming in. That's “The Story” of Wednesday, November 6, 2019. Trump rally ahead. We'll see you tomorrow night.
Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox