This is a rush transcript from "The Story," December 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ED HENRY, HOST: Bret, good to see you again. Got a lot breaking tonight. Trump derangement syndrome seems to be spreading overseas. Turns out not even combat zones are immune from this horrific disease. It was a time in America when we were told politics at least ended at the water's edge.

Yet now, Democratic lawmakers, some in the media have found yet another way to slam President Trump. First, they went after him for not going to the battlefield. Then, he and the first lady paid a holiday visit to our troops in Iraq. And the critics quickly pivoted to more attacks over a nice gesture.


REP. DENNY HECK, D-WASH.: Deeply disappointing is that when he went to Iraq, he used it as an occasion to advance his specific policy objective as a new policy to withdraw from Syria.

SAM VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: The president seems to have confused in some way this troop to point -- this troop visit with a campaign rally by raising things like the border wall and things that he's done for them.


HENRY: Our nation's hall monitors are also mad that the President signed some MAGA hats. Getting perhaps that then-Senator Barack Obama signed a few autographs of his own for the troops back during the 2008 campaign. Guess what, we have the tape. Good evening, everybody. I'm Ed Henry, in again for Martha MacCallum, on the growing backlash over that petty criticism in moments.

But first, the same nastiness is infecting the battle over funding for the wall on our southern border. Breaking tonight, a top Republican says "the needle has moved toward a very long shutdown." That remark made to Fox News a short time ago but Congressman Mark Meadows signals not just that the shutdown is very likely to extend into the first week of January or maybe longer.

Take a listen to just how personal some of the Democratic attacks on the president have got.

REP. JIM MCGOVERN, D-MASS.: We had to work at it until we get to an agreement where a majority say yes. But, and I think we had that until the president -- you know went off his meds and who the hell knows what happened.

HENRY: Off his meds. Wow! With all this obvious animus towards the president, our negotiation even possible at this point. Especially, since some of the loudest voices against the wall -- yes, they voted for barriers in the past.

That hypocrisy not lost on the president, who tied some of it to former President Obama little earlier today, retweeting this 2011 message in which Obama called for, yes, a crackdown on illegal immigration.

That's where we begin tonight. In a moment, we'll get the state of play from a leading Republican pushing for the wall. But we kick things off tonight out west with Jonathan Hunt live in our West Coast Newsroom. Good evening, Jonathan.

JONATHAN HUNT, CORRESPONDENT: Good evening to you Ed. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, says the immigration system is at breaking point. Border Patrol agents say they're overwhelmed.

Around 1,000 immigrants have been released onto the streets of El Paso, Texas this week alone. And two young immigrant children have died after being taken into custody by CBP, the first deaths of children in CBP custody for a decade.

As for the El Paso situation, immigration and customs enforcement officials say they have little choice but to release the immigrants there because of, decades of inaction by Congress. That they say has limited their ability to remove families who are in the U.S. illegally and set limits on how long they can hold those families.

So, they're being dropped off at a bus station in El Paso where aid groups are offering support. More, by the way, are expected to be released today.


DYLAN CORBETT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HOPE BORDER INSTITUTE (through translator): They have spent eight to 10 days in cells. Now, they've been released. What we've been doing as a community is to support them. Giving them food, a place for them to stay at night.


HUNT: President Trump has repeatedly said the era of so-called catch and release has ended. But that is exactly what is happening in Texas right now. And it all comes against the backdrop of the government shutdown over President Trump's demand for a border wall that he says could stem the flow of illegal immigration.

Now some conservative commentators have pointed out that many Democrats supported the 2006 Secure Fence Act, which mandated 600 miles of fencing along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico and the 2013 immigration reform bill that called for 700 miles of pedestrian fencing.

But consensus as we know it almost impossible to find right now. And a fence, of course, is physically and symbolically different to a wall. The Berlin Fence would have sounded very different to the Berlin Wall.

And Mr. Gorbachev tear down this fence, would have sounded very different to Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall. As so, if there is to be some sort of consensus in the future, Ed, it may turn on language on building and most especially talking about fences and barriers rather than walls. Ed.

HENRY: Jonathan Hunt, appreciate that report. Let's now go to our next guest who represents a border state. And says Democrats must, "bite the bullet and pay for the wall" if they want to stop this problem and want to finally end the shutdown.

He's Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs. He joins me live right now. Congressman, good evening.

REP. ANDY BIGGS, R-ARIZ.: Good evening, Ed. How are you doing?

HENRY: I want to start out in -- Good to see you. I want to start out in California where Jonathan Hunt is. There's a police officer who lost his life in the middle of this Christmas season. Gun down Officer Ronil Singh, as you know.

You can see his image right now. And he was gunned down by an illegal immigrant. There's a manhunt at this hour. Still trying to track down this illegal immigrant. Right in the middle of this shutdown debate.

BIGGS: Yes, you know, the problem is I -- my heart goes out to the officer and his family. I wish this was an isolated incident. It's not so much. I mean, the problem is we have angel families, it's an organization of parents and loved ones of people who have been killed by illegal aliens.

We have got to stop that. We've got to get it under control, and I hate to sound like I'm politicizing this because I'm not. Because I really have tremendous sympathy for this officer. But we have got to step it up as a Congress as of the United States and get this border wall built because it's the first step at restoring national security on this issue.

HENRY: Well, I'm glad you mentioned Congress, because leaders in both parties certainly bear some blame here, we're going to get to each side. Let's start with the Democrats because of what I mentioned with the president's tweet a short time ago.

It's rare this president quotes Barack Obama. But he quotes that tweet from 2011, where Barack Obama in a State of the Union address, this wasn't just some throwaway, said, "We finally need to do something about cracking down on illegal immigration, that's 2011. What in the world have the Democrats done for the last seven years?

BIGGS: They've done nothing. Actually, and they've made it worse. They've gone -- if you -- if you realize in what they've done, they've gone completely 180 degrees opposite. They want open borders, they have supported legislation to authorize sanctuary cities throughout the country, and they've just gotten completely to the -- to the left wing of their party.

And I just think it's antithetical to what most Americans want because we know we need the security and we know we need to change our immigration laws. But we have to enforce those laws. But before you get to that, you have to secure your border. And the best way to do that is a wall barrier -- a wall, actually.

HENRY: And, in fact, Jonathan just mentioned two different bills. One of them in 2013, it was the so-called Gang of Eight bill. In which, over 60 Democrats and Republicans in the Senate voted for this. Including Chuck Schumer, all kinds of other folks that had 700 miles of they called it fencing.

But why the flip-flop now? They were for fencing, walling, whatever you want to call it in 2013, but not now.

BIGGS: Well, it's really simple. I've talked to some of my friends who are Democrats. This is not about border security, I don't believe. I think this is ultimately they do not want Donald Trump to get a victory. It was a linchpin to the Trump campaign. Republicans ran on this part of our platform. And you know what, I just don't believe that they think that this is a good thing to do for politics.

And I really have a problem with that because that's placing politics above the safety and security of this country.

HENRY: All right, Congressman, I said it was going to come after both party. So, I mentioned what the Democrats have done or not done in recent years. What about the Republicans? Now, the Democrats defend those previous votes for the wall in part by saying they were getting something. They didn't really necessarily want a wall, but they were getting a path to citizenship for millions of illegals who are in the country now.

I see the president now saying, I want $5 billion in funding to get the government back open. $5 billion for the wall what are the Democrats getting?

BIGGS: Now, the Democrats are getting the one thing that they should be most happy about, and that's an immigration security. Border control, border security. And that leads to additional discussions on immigration reform. That's what they really want.

HENRY: But, Congressman, pardon me, you and I both know that's not what Nancy Pelosi's priorities, that's not what Chuck Schumer's priority is. So, what I'm trying to get at is, the president promise of the campaign the art of the deal, right?

And so, part of the deal is he gets something, in this case, $5 billion. What -- why would Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer sign off on something where they're basically getting nothing?

BIGGS: Well, I think that you have to realize that there is a significant number of Democrats in this country that want border security. This is not to the -- to the broad Democrat Party that she's playing and the Chuck Schumer is playing to. They're playing to a narrow edge of their party. And that narrow edge, says, "We want open borders."

When you look at it, the people who are from independents and Democrats who voted for Donald Trump, they voted for him and he got -- he got the Republican Party nomination but the Democrats also voted for him when he started saying we're going to secure the border. We're going to build the border wall. But we're going to enforce our laws.

When he did that, all of a sudden, the Rust Belt states that have been particularly hard hit by illegal immigration came to them. This would be a win for Democrats in my opinion.

BIGGS: Democratic --

HENRY: So, I got less than 30 seconds, congressman. Well, what's the win then? How do we get there? Because on my understanding is the president has offered to come down from the $5 billion somewhere in the range of $2- 1/2 to $3 billion. How do you get the Democrats to yes?

BIGGS: Well, right now they're dug in. At some point, their base is going to have to come to them say look, we want the government open. That's why the government shutdown is a leverage right now.

You're not going to get there at this point because right now Chuck Schumer has said, we're not going to move off where we've been. That's why I think Mark Meadows said today, it's going to take longer. Going to take longer.

HENRY: Congressman Andy Biggs. Happy New Year to you a little bit early. Thanks for coming in.

BIGGS: Yes. Thanks, Ed. You too.

HENRY: All right. Here now, Lauren Claffey, Republican strategist, former deputy assistant secretary for public affairs to the Department of Homeland Security.


HENRY: And Bryan Dean Wright. He's a former CIA, CIA officer, pardon me, and a Democrat. Welcome to both of you. Appreciate you both coming in.


CLAFFEY: Yes, happy to be here.

HENRY: Lauren, let's pick it up where the congressman led off, which is what would the Democrats get in a deal? What do you see them actually getting moving forward?

CLAFFEY: So, I think that at this -- at this stage, the Democrats aren't getting too much, right? The president's asking for a lot. And from what I've heard, there hasn't been any real offers. You hear about them offering perhaps additional expansion or permanent status for the temporary protected status TPS recipients that the administration has slowly been eliminating.

You hear them -- you know, that we just heard the congressman say that maybe, they would get the government open again. I think that that's not nearly enough. And if I'm Nancy Pelosi, I have a week until I get the House in my control. Why am I negotiating on anything right now?

HENRY: Sure. And Bryan, when you get out of the politics, though, that may be good for Nancy Pelosi to wait and try at the beginning of January, open up and look like a hero. But I just mentioned, we have a cop killer on the loose right now in California who's an illegal immigrant.

WRIGHT: Look, the broader issue, and including the gentleman that we are now trying to find is that we have a thousand to 3,000 people crossing the border every single day, both uninvited and unvetted. And so, there is a critical requirement by our Congress to solve this.

Because every day we don't, we are increasing the risk of folks that are bringing themselves into this country, their families, their children, who we have seen two of them die. So this is a humanitarian issue, this is a security issue, and this is ultimately an economic issue because a lot of these folks are coming into the country, they're taking jobs that in turn depress the income that is the wages of people who are already here.

So, this is a big problem that we need to solve not just because it's a wall or a fence but because it ties into so many other things.

HENRY: Yes, and Lauren, what about the Democrats here who -- you know, I mentioned Barack Obama, 2011. President Trump retweeted that today, talking about cracking down on the illegal immigration. Bill Clinton did it in a State of the Union address, as well, many years before that. And yet, Democrat after Democrat now are against the wall.

CLAFFEY: That's mostly because the wall has become the symbol, right, for this populist anti-immigrant sentiment that they think that the president harbors. You know racist views et cetera. And what's lost in this conversation is when you say wall, physical barrier, fencing, other things, it's not actually what CBP says that they need.

Most of the time when the Democrats have said that they would support border security, it's more personnel at the border CBP officers, it's additional technology like drone or other surveillance. It's tools that CBP can use to get operational control of the border. And that's what Democrats are traditionally supported in the past. And usually, they've supported it in conjunction with some form of pathway to legal citizenship for the illegal population that's already in the United States.

So, when we talk about the Democrats before this, like for example, with the Gang of Eight bill. With the Gang of Eight bill, included massive provisions to increase legal immigration so they were getting a huge benefit to supporting border security which at that time was a non- political easy thing for them.

HENRY: Yes. Bryan, I've got 30 seconds. To Lauren's point, why is it that Democrats in your own party, you are pretty tough in saying we need to crack down on the illegal immigration, but why there are other Democrats who fall back on what she said, which is that the president is a racist for wanting to do something that a lot of Americans think is actually common sense.

WRIGHT: Well, first, we find Trump distasteful. That is a progressive side of the party. In fact, so distasteful that people refer to him as Hitler. So you're not giving in the party or people in Congress, that space to have those negotiations.

And look, the second piece is our party has drifted hard left on this issue regarding the activists because of identity politics. We need to rebuild a base because we have abandoned rural America. We have really given up some of those traditional blue-collar voters.


WRIGHT: So, we were rebuilding with, with urbanites and people of color. You know, and those are really the two big reasons why politically we don't want this -- at least, the D.C. leads in the media don't want to give President Trump a deal.

HENRY: Well, you're being honest about it. We had Ed Rendell, former DNC Chair on this program last night. He was insisting the party has not drifted to the left. We'll see. We'll let people decide. We've got a big election coming up in 2020. Bryan, Lauren, we appreciate you both coming in.

CLAFFEY: Thank you.

WRIGHT: Pleasure.

HENRY: All right, first, the President was attacked for not going to visit troops overseas, then he visited them and guess what? Some are still not satisfied. Iraq war vet Amber Smith and former Obama official Marie Harf, they debate the legitimacy of these latest attacks on the Commander-in- Chief. That's next.



TRUMP: There is no military more capable, and now more lethal, more fearless, and more skilled than the United States Armed Forces. You are the warriors who defend our freedom. You are the patriots who ensure the flame of liberty burns forever bright. That's who you are. That's who you are.


HENRY: Well, after initial inaccurate criticism that the President was not going to visit the troops overseas, it seems some in the media still are not satisfied. They're blasting the President's first trip to a combat zone for everything he did wrong while there.


DON LEMON, HOST, CNN: He's like The Grinch. Instead of -- I'm being honest.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, he stole Christmas.

LEMON: Instead of being -- instead of being positive with the troops saying this is about the troops, it's not about me, you want positivity when it comes to Christmas. It is perplexing. Why would he visit the troops and do that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Look, I think it's important that the President goes and visit to the troops, but he's doing this backwards.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. It is, in fact, a campaign slogan. That is a campaign item and is completely inappropriate for the troops to deal with.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not supposed to do it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But look, the President has to take some ownership of this too. Every time he's around military audiences, he tends to politicize it any brings in complaints and grievances from outside the realm of military policy.


HENRY: Well, as you can imagine, a few moments ago, the President decided to fire back tweeting CNN and others within the fake news universe were going wild about my signing MAGA hats for our military in Iraq and Germany. These brave young people asked me to sign their hat, I'll sign. Can you imagine me saying no? We brought or gave no hats as the fake news first reported. He was referring to how some suggested perhaps he brought the hats.

Amber Smith is a former Army pilot and Pentagon official, now a Senior Fellow at the Independent Women's Forum and Marie Harf, of course, is a former State Department and CIA spokesperson, now a Fox News Analyst. Good evening, ladies.

MARIE HARF, ANALYST: Good evening, Ed.


HENRY: Amber, the President was being criticized for not going, then he goes, and all of a sudden he's the Grinch.

SMITH: I think this is a new low for media personalities and the news network to go after U.S. troops who are fighting in a combat zone right now with the sole purpose of hurting President Trump. When I first heard this news breaking, I said, this is absolutely fantastic. Republicans, Democrats, Americans we can all get behind this because there is literally nothing negative about the Commander-in-Chief going to visit troops who are in harm's way. And so this is real life for them.

Every single day, they're going out on missions that are extremely dangerous. So they're not sitting there behind a desk in Washington D.C. researching the latest on political policy out of the Department of Defense. They're wondering if they're going to make it home tonight and if their butter -- buddy is going to too. So I think this criticism is absolutely ludicrous and they just want to criticize the President to criticize him. President Trump could cure cancer and they would still find something negative about it.

HENRY: I've heard that one before, and you might be right after this latest criticism because Marie, even USA Today wrote an editorial. They were fair and they said, look, for Trump to take time away from his own holiday at home to visit with combat deployed troops reminds them America has not forgotten. Politics aside, what's important is a simple fact that he showed up. Why is that not good enough?

HARF: Well, I think it's a good thing that the president went to visit the troops. Finally, he should have done it sooner but I think it's a good thing, Ed, and I think he gets credit for that. And some of the criticism goes too far. But I will say on two points it is absolutely fair to criticize the President. He told lies basically. I'll just say it. He said things that were not true to the troops about the fact that he said he was the first president to give them a pay raise in several years, that is not true. He said he gave them a period of 10 percent, that is also not true. It is absolutely fair to criticize that.

He also did as you heard John Kirby say on another network, and let me tell you I know John Kirby. He is not a liberal Democrat. He's probably not even a Democrat as far as I know. He said that the President bringing in issues that are domestic political issues like the wall, going after Nancy Pelosi that substance is not appropriate, and that is fair to criticize.


HARF: I think that's absolutely fair to bring up.

HENRY: OK, I want to talk to you. I think you make a fair point about the pay raise. I'm not quite sure why the President keeps repeating that.

HARF: I know.

HENRY: But you're making the case now that this was about politics and somehow it was wrong for the President to inject politics. Here's one of your former bosses President Barack Obama. I wanted to play this clip, December 6th, 2016 talking to the troops. And by the way, that's the picture of him signing autographs in 2008 that I mentioned earlier. So he signed autographs as well whether it's right or wrong, both sides have done it. Barack Obama was trying to be nice to the troops, so was President Trump. I'm not sure why that criticism. But then on your point about politicizing things with the troops, here's what Barack Obama said to the troops.


BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: The United States of America is not a country that imposes religious tests as a price for freedom. The United States of America is not a place where some citizens have to withstand greater scrutiny or carry a special I.D. card or prove that they're not an enemy from within. We're a country that has bled and struggled and sacrificed against that kind of discrimination, an arbitrary rule. In other words, we are a nation that at our best has been defined by hope and not fear.


HENRY: Marie, he said this in December after Donald Trump had been elected, never used his name. You and I both know he was going after Donald Trump.

HARF: But I would say the President -- President Obama was very careful not to go after specific political opponents or political members of the other party. He did not use their names. He was talking about ideals --

HENRY: He didn't said his name but he said, we can't have a religious test -- pardon me. He's talking about the Muslim ban. You and I know that. He was attacking Donald Trump.

HARF: But he was -- look, he was talking about ideals that he believes are important to all Americans, OK. Donald Trump went to a military base and started talking about Nancy Pelosi and the shutdown and Democrats being responsible and told things to the troops that were not true about their pay raises. I don't care if he signs hat --

SMITH: The President says it's a national security issue.

HENRY: Let's get Amber --

HARF: I don't care if he signs hats. I don't care if he signs hats, but there's a fundamental difference between what he did and what Barack Obama did in that clip you just played.

HENRY: Go ahead, Amber. You've been patient.

SMITH: The clip that you just showed just shows the hypocritical nature of the media when it comes to the President. Let me tell you what matters to those troops who were on the ground in Iraq. Some of who have been in Syria and who are back in Iraq now. They care about their Commander-in- chief who came to visit them. And you want to know why because him visiting them in country, in the war zone, says that they matter, that they are recognized and they're remembered by the American people.

And so that's what they're going to take away from this, that the Commander-in-Chief took time out of his holiday schedule and came over into a combat zone to see them. That is what matters. And so when people are away from their families during the holidays, that's what they're going to remember not side comments against politics.

HENRY: OK. Maria, I pressed you on that with the tape. I want to give you the last word. I got less than a minute but I want to be fair and give you the last word. I am glad the President went to visit the troops. I think that going into the New Year, we as a country need to take a hard look at what our policy is in Syria, what it is in Iraq, who the next Secretary of Defense is going to be. These are bigger questions than political fights over a visit to troops which I think he was right to do, and I hope that the national security team is having those discussions right now because these are really important decisions we have to get right.

HENRY: That point we can all agree. Some major national security decisions ahead in 2019. Marie, Amber, thanks for you both coming in. Happy New Year.

HARF: Thanks, Ed.

SMITH: Happy new year, Ed.

HENRY: All right. You too. From a record low to a record high, just a couple of days. The markets have been all over the place this month. You talk about 2019 and people wondering what's next. What does it mean for your wallet, and the state of the economy, and the state of the President's political standing? We're going to get into that with our Wall Street Journal panel. They're here to answer your questions next.


HENRY: Yet, another wild ride on Wall Street today after being down more than 600 points early in the day. The Dow staged a comeback in the afternoon rallying more than 850 points to close up to 60. Continuing a stretch of historic volatility in the final days of 2018, leaving many to wonder what lies ahead.

And so, now we want to give you an idea about your 401K among other things. Joining me now Wall Street Journal editorial members, Mary O'Grady and Dan Henninger, also a Fox News contributor. Good evening to both of you.



HENRY: Mary, ladies first. What in the heck is going on?

O'GRADY: Well, I think most of the volatility I would chuck up to program trading, algorithms and so forth. There's not any one individual or groups of individuals who decide that they are going to sell like in a movie. Sell! Sell! Sell.


O'GRADY: It's really triggered by this program trading. But at the end of the day stocks are priced off of earnings and earnings multiples. And there's a lot of nervousness in the market about what's going to happen next year.

We are in a long-term growing economy and eventually we are going to hit a recession. Interest rates are going up. I don't think you can argue that the Fed increase in December can explain any of this. But the market knows that rates are going to be higher next year and that means--

HENRY: Sure.

O'GRADY: -- that it's the end to free credit which we had during Bernanke years. That will change the equation in terms of earnings. And I think that's shifted sentiment a little bit.

HENRY: Sure.

O'GRADY: People are a little bit more nervous.

HENRY: Dan, Mary makes a lot of good points. One of them being about earnings. But to sort of decipher it for viewers I thought I heard Kevin Hassett, one of the president's economic advisors say that earnings are the mother's milk. And this is really important. He claims at least, earnings have been good and are going to continue being good. Is he wrong?

HENNINGER: No. Well, they'll be good. I think the current estimates are they are going to come back a little bit from the predictions that people were making about a month ago which kind of raises Mary's point. How sustainable the recovery is and the growth is going into 2019 and beyond into 2020.

I mean, in your introduction just before the commercial break you said what does it mean for people's wallets? I think the answer for that is hold on to your wallets.

I mean, that's what the big money is doing on Wall Street. They are sitting on a lot of cash. They are waiting to see the bottom of this market. They don't know where it's going to be. Markets love predictability and now the watch word now is unpredictability anywhere you turn.


HENNINGER: I mean, even the Fed chairman Jerome Powell, the president has talked, there's been rumors about the president wanted to fire Jerome Powell. And people like Kevin Hassett--

HENRY: Sure.

HENNINGER: -- he had to come forth and say no, the president will not fire the chairman of the Federal Reserve. That just, you know, introduces a lot of unpredictability into market calculations, Ed.

HENRY: So, Mary, on that point, there is also political volatility. We're just talking about James Mattis is stepping down as defense secretary. that might have rolled the markets a bit. But when our viewers here algorithms and the Fed and earnings, you know, to Dan's point, what does it mean for their wallet? How do you figure all this out?

O'GRADY: Well, behind the scenes I mean, you do have policy implications of the trade war if it gets worse. And you also have the shutdown, which if it drags on it's going to cost the economy. But I think the main problem here is that we don't know how much free money for so many years under the Bernanke and Janet Yellen Fed, how much did that inflate financial assets to levels that maybe they shouldn't be at in a real world?

HENRY: Sure.

O'GRADY: I mean, it's an artificial world you have where you have negative interest rates and you have this what we call quantitative easing, all of this extra cash that's lashing around.

HENRY: Sure.

O'GRADY: Sow when we come back to reality, what are those financial assets worth in a world where you actually have to pay for credit? We don't know that.

HENRY: Dan, last point. I've only got about 15 seconds unfortunately, but the president has been upset about the Fed.


HENNINGER: Well, keep in mind, we are talking about the stock market. Kevin Hassett makes the argument that the real economy is strong and it is. There's a lot of people getting jobs today. Wages are rising. And in terms of those pocketbooks, we are on pretty solid ground right now.

HENRY: All right. An optimistic note to end as we head into 2019. Dan and Mary, we appreciate you coming in.

O'GRADY: Sure.

HENNINGER: Good to be with you.

HENRY: All right. She supported Brett Kavanaugh, and faced death threats at the time. Well, months later she is still being shamed for that vote. The latest attack against Republican Senator Susan Collins, I'm not sure you are not going to believe. That's next.


SEN. SUSAN COLLINS, R-ME: My job as a senator is to apply my best judgment. And that's what I did in this case despite tremendous pressure, horrible tactics, abuse of my family and my staff and myself.




COLLINS: I have been alarmed and disturbed however, by some who have suggested that unless Judge Kavanaugh's nominated is rejected, the Senate is somehow condoning sexual assault. Nothing could be further from the truth.


HENRY: Senator Susan Collins of course addressing the controversy surrounding then Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. And what supporters argue was a thoughtfully prepared speech based on facts. Collins would go on to vote yes on sending Kavanaugh to the nation's highest court. Yet, she continues to be attacked for that vote.

Just this week, the Huffington Post accusing her of this year's, quote, "most shameful hijacking of feminism." Saying, quote, "The shameful and shamefully affected cynicism of Collins politicking is uniquely insidious in this insidious year. Just as shameful are the women who listen to her speech and nodded along."

Well, Ashe Schow is senior editor at the Daily Wire. She read it as did I, and it seems like was pretty concerned with that conclusion. Ashe, I appreciate you coming in.

ASHE SCHOW, SENIOR EDITOR, THE DAILY WIRE: Yes, no problem. Thanks for having me.

HENRY: I thought part of the Me Too movement was that, when there is a strong woman who has the guts to either speak out or specifically in this case, is a senator who has a vote on any issue and decides to vote her conscience, we should support that?

SCHOW: Right. I mean, that's what ultimately you would think would be the movement. But as we have learned, since it has come to the fruition, is that, basically it's, you have to toe the liberal line. You can't just simply be a woman, you have to be a liberal woman.

So, now Collins is being attacked for this. And what she is essentially getting attacked for is standing up for due process and evidence and the presumption of innocence, you know, the basic tenets of our justice system.

HENRY: Yes, which in the and prevailed for Kavanaugh because he was confirmed. But here we are. It's being relitigated again. And Huffington Post went on in this piece to say, quote, "She painstakingly the alleged, attempted to explain using debunked, junk science disregarding any credible neuropsychology about how trauma affects memory." They are obviously talking about Christine Blasey Ford and her testimony and they're attacking Collins.

SCHOW: Right. So, the debunked science, I don't even know what she is referring to. Because most of the statistics revolving around today's current assault epidemic as we are told there is one, that's junk science. It is self-reported surveys that, you know, broadly the definition of sexual assault, so that pretty much anyone is a victim.

And you know, there's a respondent, there's all kinds of problems with the studies. But the bigger issue here is, attacking Collins for standing up for, you know, due process.


SCHOW: And you know, when you go after someone for that, I mean, you are basically saying that due process is the enemy of justice in this country.

HENRY: Sure.

SCHOW: And you know, Christine Blasey Ford wasn't served well by the way all these allegations came about either. I mean, here is a woman who something may have happened to her, she might be misremembering things. These allegations thrust her into a position that she didn't initially want.

HENRY: Sure.

SCHOW: And so, due process in an actual investigation handled the correct way--


SCHOW: -- could have saved a lot of people a lot of problems.

HENRY: Ashe, I've got 30 seconds. But the other thing that really strikes me. Martha MacCallum did a remarkable interview with Susan Collins, and among other things. Collins really detailed these horrific, just trash voice mails she and her staff received. "I hope you die." Much, much worse than that, and vile, vile things. And for people to continue to pile on after all that, it just seems remarkable to me.

SCHOW: Absolutely. It is not shameful that Susan Collins stood up for due process and the presumption of innocence. What's shameful are the people that are condemning her for doing so. For speaking her mind and for being strong and for giving those phone calls.

HENRY: Absolutely. Ashe, we appreciate you coming in tonight.

SCHOW: Thank you.

HENRY: All right. Up next, the bad news for actor Kevin Spacey, well, it may have just gotten a little worse. Could his alleged sex assault be caught on camera? The problem that Frank Underwood from "House of Cards" may not have been able to talk his way out of. That's next.


KEVIN SPACEY, ACTOR: Some believed everything and they've just been waiting with bated breath to hear me confess it all. They are just dying to have me declare that everything said is true. And that I got what I deserved.



HENRY: Some disturbing new details tonight about actor Kevin Spacey and the chargers that he sexually assaulted a teenage boy. A police report now confirming there is in fact video of the alleged attack. Just days after Spacey posted a rather bizarre defense on social media.

Jonathan Hunt has “The Story” from our West Coast newsroom. Good evening again, Jonathan.


Kevin Spacey and his alleged victim was 18 years old at the time of the incident. He says he was groped by the actor at Nantucket restaurant in 2016. And there is apparently video of the encounter. Though, Spacey's lawyers have already challenged exactly what the video shows.

The 18-year-old sent the video at the time via SnapChat to his girlfriend, it allegedly shows Kevin Spacey touching the front of his pants. According to a police report field in Nantucket district court. Spacey's lawyers, though, argue the video merely shows someone's hand touching another person's shirt, according to audio of the court hearing obtained by the Boston Globe.

Now the case came to light when former Boston news anchor, Heather Unruh, announced in November 2017 that Spacey has had groped her son.

Spacey has not responded directly to the allegations, but on Monday -- on Monday, he released a video best described as odd in the voice of his "House of Cards" character Frank Underwood. It appeared to reference accusations made against him. It should be allowed to speak for itself. So, here's part of it.


SPACEY: And you trusted me. Even though you knew you shouldn't.

Of course, some believed everything and they've just been waiting with bated breath to hear me confess it all. They are just dying to have me declare that everything said is true. And that I got what I deserved. Wouldn't that be easy? If it was all so simple. Only you and I both know it's never that simple, not in politics and not in life.


HUNT: If you want to work out exactly what is going on in that video, the full three minutes and seven seconds is easily found online. Spacey meantime at faces arraignment on January 7th on a charge of indecent assault and battery. Ed?

HENRY: Wow. What a bizarre turn. Jonathan Hunt, I appreciate you coming in.

HUNT: Yes.

HENRY: Still ahead, how one foundation is making 2019 a little bit brighter for a very deserving Afghanistan war veteran who will make you proud to be an American.


HENRY: Finally, tonight, an inspirational story about a deserving veteran receiving a life-changing gift in the new year.

Marine Corporal Scott Nokes was serving in Afghanistan when he came down with a rare infection. Ultimately, it led to the loss of his legs and eyesight. His story got the attention of Tunnel to Towers, a nonprofit that helps both veterans and first responders. They named Corporal Nokes as a recipient of a brand-new smart home.

And early this month, the organization surprised him with a 3D printed model of his home. Those homes granted to catastrophically injured service members who seek to live more independent lives.

Here now live U.S. Marine Corporal Scott Nokes, and Frank Siller. You've seen him on Fox before, chairman and CEO of the Tunnel to Towers Foundation. Good evening, gentlemen.


SCOTT NOKES, U.S. MARINE CORPORAL: Good evening, sir. How are you.

HENRY: Corporal, I would love to start with you because I want to talk a little bit about your service to this great nation.

NOKES: Yes, sir.

HENRY: Tell us about your service.

NOKES: All right. So, my name is Scott Nokes. I was a corporal in the Marine Corps. I did two deployments to Afghanistan with Charlie company first battalion in U.S. marines.

During that time, I developed some dysentery on both deployments which later led to sepsis a couple years later and that sepsis caused the amputation of both of my legs below the knee and the loss of most vision in my left eye and all of my right eye.

And luckily, Tunnel to Towers came about right afterwards and I've been working with Frank ever since.

HENRY: And -- that's wonderful. And these smart homes, they give you a chance. Can you talk a little bit about the transition from the battlefield to the home front and what it's like to have a so-called smart home that might do things for you that you might not be able to do on your own?

NOKES: Yes, sir. One thing I'm really looking forward to especially with this winter is going to be able to change the temperature in the house because everything now is off of the thermostat. So, this will all be digital off the phone or an iPad or voice control and the same with cooking and the bathroom. It's going to be incredible.

HENRY: Frank, you have made this your life mission. Why is that?

SILLER: Well, listen, we have our men and women that protect us and give us our freedoms that we have in this great country. And I think it's up to all of us as Americans to have a contract with the military that when they go and serve and they come back with these catastrophic injuries that, you know, we want them to know that we are going to take care of them.

And the Tunnel to Towers Foundation has made that promise and that commitment and I can't think of a better way than to build mortgage-free homes for these great warriors that deserve this and more.

HENRY: That is certainly a worthy cause and then some. Talk a little bit more, Frank, about the smart homes and what they can do for someone, a man or a woman who comes home from Iraq, comes home from Afghanistan with catastrophic injury.

SILLER: Well, look, these are the most independent people in the world. They don't want to ask anybody for anything. So, these houses are giving back a lot of that independence. They can work it off an iPad. The stove lowers so when they are in the wheelchairs and, you know, once again, remotely.

The bathroom is state of the art. I mean, what's in these bathrooms they could take care of themselves. They don't have to ask somebody to help them in the bathroom and climate control. We have sprinkler systems throughout the house. God forbid there is a fire so they don't have to worry about that aspect.

There are so many, so much technology that we put into these houses to give them back their independence. So, their caretaker can have that independence, also.


SILLER: And they care so much about the people who care for them so they are happy about that.

HENRY: Sure. Corporal, I want to give you the final word. You know, we are ending this year there is a lot of political division in this country. It seems hard to bring people together. What do you reflect on about your service to this country? What stands out to you?

NOKES: What stands out the most was that all of us have been from so many different backgrounds and we are on the same place doing the same thing together for one another and for everybody back here. And I just want to say thank you to all the guys I was with. Thanks for bringing me back and I love you guys.

And also, there is many more guys that have been like me and more guys that have been Purple Heart recipients that have been very deserving. And I know Frank and Tunnel to Towers are looking out to help get all of them into a home.

HENRY: All right.


SILLER: Ed, if I could just say--


HENRY: Well, Frank -- sure.

SILLER: -- if somebody wants to help just go to Eleven dollars a month we are asking for all Americans to build houses for these great heroes and for our fallen first responders and gold star families around this country. We just lost somebody in California.


HENRY: I know you did this for a lot of people.


HENRY: Yes, absolutely we did. And we mentioned at the top of the show we know you do wonderful things for the families of first responders who lose their lives. We want to thank you, Frank, for what you are doing for all of these veterans and first responders.

But, Corporal Scott Nokes, we want to thank you for your service to our great nation. Thank you very much. We can't say it enough and we hope you have a happy wonderful happy New Year in your new home.

NOKES: Thank you so much, sir.

HENRY: Yes. All right. That's THE STORY on this Thursday night. I'll see you back here tomorrow night at 7 p.m. Tucker will be coming up next. As I mentioned, I will be back filling in for Martha on Friday night. I hope you will join us again right here for THE STORY.

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