This is a rush transcript from "The Story," August 7, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, ANCHOR: Tonight, the president in Dayton and El Paso to meet with the wounded, with the families, to talk to the first responders there. And this morning, he tried to strike a unifying tone before he left. He was at the White House and he said that he thought that common ground fixes in gun laws are possible.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: I think both Republican and Democrat are getting close to a bill on -- to doing something on background checks.


MACCALLUM: But throughout the day today, 2020 candidates were in no mood for unifying language. They aimed their fire directly at the president. In some cases, more than even the shooters themselves.


JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This president has fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation.

SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Sold from the highest office in our land where we see in tweets and rhetoric hateful words.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How worried are you that with Donald Trump, still in the Oval Office, something like this will inevitably happen again?



MACCALLUM: You get the idea. So, Marianne Williamson might have been the only candidate to hold out at least a tiny bit of an olive branch, here she is.


JOHN BERMAN, ANCHOR, CNN: Does the love you speak about, from you, extend to the president?

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, absolutely it does on a universal level. But as Martin Luther King said, God said, I have to love my enemies. They didn't say I have to like them.


MACCALLUM: She is on her way here, exclusively in moments with her reaction to her fellow candidates and all that played out in this huge battle today.

But for Biden, Booker, and Beto, the message is clear. They believe that white supremacy emanates from the White House and is driving the murderous killing that we have seen over the weekend. And that message is being driven hard in some areas of the media as well.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People who are racist or who exhibit racism --


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- frequently don't admit that they're racist.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Voting for a white supremacist is not a moral choice. Supporting a white supremacist is not a moral choice.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Since we have identified this president as being a white nationalist or a racist, that means if you support him, you bear some responsibility.


MACCALLUM: So, Heather Mac Donald, studies crime, she studies race in America, law enforcement, she break looks at the numbers. She is the author of the diversity delusion and she joins me once again back on THE STORY again tonight.

Heather, good to see you this evening.


MACCALLUM: You know, first of all, as you listen to all of that from the candidates and from the media, what goes through your mind?

MAC DONALD: What goes through my mind, Martha is we are getting an absolutely false picture of America. Of course, this violence is appalling, it strikes at the very heart of our civilized society here. But America is not a white supremacist country. The left profoundly misunderstands this country.

White supremacy is a fringe movement condemned across the board. Americans are big-hearted compassionate people. People of color, the world over are beating down the doors to try to get into this country because they know they will be safer here than in most places on earth. The left knows this too.

The left is the epitome of hypocrisy. It is encouraging mass migration from third world countries. People of color to come into this country. If the Left believed what it is pumping out in this poisonous propaganda, it would tell people of color the world over not to come to the United States.

Let's look at the numbers. The numbers back up this picture, Martha, that this is not a country riven by racism or white supremacy or white nationalism. Those numbers are all over the map, everybody has different counts. The official hate group monitors are very quick to label something as white supremacy.

Let's remember in 2009 when Army Major Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and wounded another 30 at Fort Hood. The government refused to characterize that incident as Islamic terrorism even though he had been radicalizing for years.

But let's look at the numbers that we've got. The FBI reports in 2017 an 11 percent increase in hate crimes when you account for increase in reporting blacks are 50 percent over-represented among perpetrators of hate crimes.

Whites are 26 percent underrepresented among perpetrators of hate crimes. The same goes for mass shootings. Blacks are 50 percent over-represented among perpetrators of mass shootings.

When it comes to identified white supremacist incidents according to one source, there were 17 white supremacist homicides last year. That's 0.01 percent of all homicides in this country.


MAC DONALD: It doesn't even register.

MACCALLUM: I mean, I think when people look at what happened in El Paso and Dayton, I think the American public is heartbroken because of the loss that these families suffer. And I think that's something that gets lost.

MAC DONALD: Of course.

MACCALLUM: In -- you know, the sort of crazy back and forth over, the name-calling for what happened. But -- you know, one of the things that they point too is that in El Paso, the manifesto included words about the invasion of Mexicans and Latinos into our country. And they point to that and they say, well, the president has said the same thing.

Therefore, it's the president's fault that this man decided to take this gun and go to Walmart and kill 22 people.

MAC DONALD: Well, as he said himself, this awful killer that I hope he gets the death penalty very quickly -- he said this is not motivated by Trump. You know that we were used to this strategy on the left from academia. It categorizes any policy that it disagrees with as hate speech and bigotry.

Trump has not used racial terms. He is an opponent of open borders. He has a good-faith disagreement with how the left has been running this country when it comes to immigration.

He has never advocated for violence against minorities. This is absurd. You know, the one by one count by the ADL, they were over a -- little over 1,000 instances of white supremacist propaganda distribution incidents, 1,000 last year.

That compares to the daily rhetoric coming out of universities that we are a white supremacist, white privilege toxic masculinity country. That is the ideology that governs our society today in every mainstream institution.

As you say, Martha, there is not one word of encouragement for this madman who was hate-filled but he does not represent the American people.

MACCALLUM: I want to just play one quick exchange on CNN which I think demonstrates sort of the encouragement of that narrative. That he was speaking to a Republican leader in El Paso who's a Hispanic background man, which he explained himself when he was giving his answer.

Just listen to this, then, quick response on the other side if you would. And then, Marianne Williamson is going to join me.


BERMAN: How on earth can you call that a hoax?

ADOLPHO TELLES, CHAIR, EL PASO COUNTY, REPUBLICAN PARTY: White supremacy is not a hoax. But that doesn't mean it's a national very large or a group. There are pockets of radicals from any type of focus that you want to look at all over this country.


MACCALLUM: What do you think about that?

MAC DONALD: Well, of course, that's right. Again, again, we are not a white supremacist country, Martha. Every institution condemns this. The American people condemned this. Their hearts are open.

If you want to see a radical ideology, look at what's coming out of academia that is telling white males across the country that they are worthless. That is creating enemy, it is creating a sense of resentment, but it is not leading to violence.

The violence problem in this country -- if you want to save lives, you go into the inner city and you work on policing and make sure that the people committing drive-by shootings are off the streets.

There's 11,000 gun homicides a year overwhelmingly committed by drive,-by shooting, by street crime, the number of white supremacist killings as awful as they are, and every single killing in this country should not exist.

It is irrelevant if you want to save lives, support the police and care about the inner city victims who are the overwhelming victims of gun violence in this country.

MACCALLUM: All right, well, you spent several years in ride-along as with law enforcement and inner cities in this country documenting all of this for people who are not familiar with your work.

So, Heather, thank you. It's good to see you tonight. Thanks for being here.

MAC DONALD: Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So, here now exclusively, 2020 presidential candidate Marianne Williamson. Marianne, thank you. I know the weather is crazy out there and you've been traveling a lot. So, thank you so much. It's great, great to have you with us.

WILLIAMSON: Thank you for having me.

MACCALLUM: You know, we started off the program tonight showing the president's visit to El Paso and to Dayton. Do you think that it was the right thing for him to go to those two places as president?

WILLIAMSON: Well, of course. That's I think part of the job of the presidency, and I think it would have been wrong of him not to go.

MACCALLUM: Absolutely. Yes, I mean, there's a lot of discussion that, you know, the protesters -- there was Representative Escobar came out and said, you know, I spoke with people in the hospital, no one wants him here.

The mayor of Dayton came out and said, you know, people don't want him here. You know, as president, it would be -- if he didn't go, the criticism would be that he didn't go. Right?

WILLIAMSON: Well, I was not aware. I knew that there were voices that did not want him to go. But I didn't know that the mayor's had actually asked him not to go. So, that is relevant --


MACCALLUM: Well, she -- just to clarify, the mayor said he could come. They had, I guess a good conversation on the phone when all of this happened. But she's been quite critical of him since then.

When you look at some of the other candidates who are running for the Democratic nomination along with you, they were very outspoken today. Sort of -- one of the major themes was that they believe that the president is fanning the flames of white supremacy and that there's a direct link between the act that we saw in El Paso, at least.

Because we know that in Dayton, that killer supported -- and you know, another candidate, Democratic candidate, they are drawing a direct link between the president and this white supremacy movement. Do you think that's fair?

WILLIAMSON: I think there are two different things. Fanning the flames is different than a direct link. Do I feel he's fanned the flames? Absolutely. Do I think there's a direct link? No.


MACCALLUM: How so? Tell me how.

WILLIAMSON: He has from the beginning of his candidacy. From the day he walked down the elevator talking about Mexicans the way he did, he has talked very disparagingly of people.

Now, let's be very clear here. To me, this should not be a right-left issue, it should not be a Democratic or Republican issue. He has spoken in a way George Bush would not have, neither George Bush would have.


MACCALLUM: He's a totally different person.

WILLIAMSON: He's a totally different person, but my point is that this criticism is not based on his politics. This criticism is based on the way he speaks about fellow American. So, absolutely, I believe that he has found the flames of some of the worst aspects of the American character. That is not, however, to say there's a direct link. That would be unfair.

MACCALLUM: OK. This is -- you know, I think that the supporters of the president would say that he is blunt, that he is not as -- you know, sort of not as elegant in his speech, as some of the people that you mentioned - - prior presidents.

But that his motivation has been pretty clear in terms of wanting to make the border a place where you can come through legally but not illegally. Here is -- here is what he said when he was asked about that this morning. Let's play that.


TRUMP: I think illegal immigration is a terrible thing for this country. I think you have to come in legally. Ideally, you have to come in through merit. We need people coming in because we have many companies coming into our country. They are pouring in.


MACCALLUM: What do you disagree with in that statement?

WILLIAMSON: I don't disagree with anything that he made in that statement, and I don't disagree with anything that he said in his speech, which was quite beautiful. The problem is how often his words and his actions have not been the same as statements that he just made.

Legal immigration, you know, I heard your former guest talk about how lefties want open borders. No, we don't. I think that a place where there is a reasonable consensus on both left and right is that we want legal immigration. So what is --


MACCALLUM: That's what the president wants.

WILLIAMSON: That's what he just said. But when you look at some of his actual policies, there were many of us who have found them extraordinarily.

MACCALLUM: Like what policy?

WILLIAMSON: Such a separation at the -- at the -- at the border of parents from children.

MACCALLUM: I mean, we saw that under the Obama administration as well.

WILLIAMSON: No, we didn't see anything like what he has done as stated policy.

MACCALLUM: Look, we did. I mean, you know, even some of the pictures that were used by the media were pictures that were dated back to the Obama administration. I think that it's correct that it's there are more of them now because what's happened is we've seen a flood of people coming across the border with children.

In some cases they're not even they're own. And some cases they've grabbed the wrist of a child and brought that child in.

WILLIAMSON: That's all the more reason why you don't just separate the child from the adult because we have -- we have agency --


MACCALLUM: In some cases, you're helping the child by separating them because that child has no connection to that family in some cases.

WILLIAMSON: But we have -- we have trained -- we have trained agents within our police agencies at the border who know how to vet that, who know how to ask the questions of the child than the adult. So, you need -- you need that agent there with the child and the adult to ask the kind of questions that would actually let them know for sure.

Also, the president closing so many of the point -- that ports of entry. So, actually, yes, there are those of us who feel that we have very legitimate points --


MACCALLUM: They are pouring through the ports of entry and they're being housed, and they're not close. The ports of entry are not closed.

WILLIAMSON: He has closed some of them, he absolutely has. And he -- and this flooding as you -- the pouring through is because of humanitarian crisis in Guatemala, in Honduras, in El Salvador, and traditionally Americans cared. Traditionally, when there -- when there's a huge humanitarian crisis somewhere and people are coming because they're in such desperate circumstances, traditionally American policy -- immigration policy has been -- you know, give me your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, kind of where we've been there in the past.

MACCALLUM: You're right. Legally.

WILLIAMSON: Of course, legally. But there are ways --


MACCALLUM: But you say, of course, legally, but people are coming through illegally.

WILLIAMSON: And yet we are making --


MACCALLUM: Hundreds of thousands of them in months.

WILLIAMSON: And all that -- that's all the more reason why we need more agents.


MACCALLUM: So, do you think he should just let them through?

WILLIAMSON: No, I did not say that. Please don't (INAUDIBLE).


MACCALLUM: OK. So, all right. I don't want you. What would you do?



MACCALLUM: So, there all those people come to the border, and --


WILLIAMSON: We definitely need more agents, we definitely need more ports of -- ports of entry that are open. We definitely need more technology, we need -- we definitely need more ways to handle.


MACCALLUM: All those things that you just mentioned are all in the president's -- and what he is wanted to do.

WILLIAMSON: But the president, it's not about some of the things that he has said that he has wanted to do. The problem is with many of the things that the president has already done.

I do not agree with you, and I don't think facts bear out that the kind of stated policy of separating children from their parents in such a cruel way which --


MACCALLUM: Nobody likes -- I don't -- I don't think anybody -- I agree with you. I mean that that's not something that anybody want to see.


WILLIAMSON: And it has continued. Hundreds of these cases have been reported since he said he was stopping them.


MACCALLUM: But the reason that is happening -- Right. So -- I want to move on to some other issues.


MACCALLUM: But if you were president, you know, what -- how would you get both sides to come together because I think there's a lot of Americans in this country who are in the middle on this issue and think that there are reasonable solutions? And even the president has said, you know, let's get Democrats and Republicans into the room. We can solve this in 45 minutes. But politically it behooves both sides to stay dug in. How would you bring them together?

WILLIAMSON: I think Americans need to be aware of what our history is. You know, Ronald Reagan gave eight million people amnesty. And until 1973, if people were undocumented they simply went to a registry office. I want what I want as president is to end one chapter and begin a new one.

I think the only answer is to say to every undocumented person who is not committed a crime, whose committed some crime of transgression or felony against an American citizen, I think there should be a path to citizenship, there should be the kind of efforts that we need to make at the border from this point forward and let us move on to a new chapter of American life.

MACCALLUM: All right, I want to speak to you one -- about another topic that you brought up recently which is reparations. You say that there should be a $200 to $500 billion fund that would be dispersed over 20 years, and you want to have a council that just decides how the money is dispersed. How would that work?

WILLIAMSON: Well, the stipulation on the part of the United States government should be very clear, and that is for purposes of economic and educational renewal. But I believe that within that, although that stipulation is extremely important it must be strictly adhered to, I think that there's a -- there's a moral principle here.

If I owe you money, I don't get to tell you how to spend it. So I believe that it's very important that this reparations council, 30 to 50 people is what I've recommended which obviously should be very carefully chosen, people from academia, culture, politics, etcetera, who are known for their connection to this issue, for their research on this issue, etcetera who make the kinds of decisions whether it has to do with historical black colleges, whether it has to do with housing, whether it has to do -- whatever it has to do whit, but I believe part of the power here is that it would be the black community deciding how they wish to spend that money.

MACCALLUM: Before I let you go -- and you know, you got a lot of attention in the debates as you were speaking out I think a lot of more people became familiar with you. What's your sort of -- you know, what's your cut off point -- you know, at what point would you say -- you know, how do you grow your campaign? How do you get from one or two percent to you know, seven, or eight, or nine, or ten percent? Do you see that happening? What's your vision for the future of your campaign real quick?

WILLIAMSON: Well, listen, if you're in a debate and the only state that doesn't put you as number one Google search the next day is Montana because the Montana governor was there, and you're the one that's talked about all over the place is the breakout, I think that's kind of a sign to continue. So it's a good sign to continue.

MACCALLUM: Are you going to get into the next debate? Will you make that cut off?

WILLIAMSON: Yes, yes, yes, yes. Anybody listening can go to and I need about 16,000 more unique donors, even one dollar by August 28th. And yes, I need to get up in the polls. But you know, this is democracy. I think it's healthy for our country. I think it's healthy for the Democratic Party. A lot of voices you had in the Republican Party last time, it was good for you. I think it's good. Let Americans hear. I think it involves more people in the process. I think it's exciting.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Well, Republicans, you're right. They had a lot of candidates on the stage and now you guys have beaten the other side with the 20-something. Thank you for coming in and for taking the questions.

WILLIAMSON: Thank you for having me. Thank you.

MACCALLUM: It's good to talk to you tonight, Marianne Williamson. So at the top of the hour, we told you that the president wants Democrats and Republicans to come together on gun control. Listen to what he just said moments ago. Watch.


TRUMP: We met with also the doctors, the nurses, the medical staff, they have done an incredible job. Both places were just incredible. And the enthusiasm, the love, the respect, and also the -- telling me, let's see if we could get something done. And Republicans want to do it and Democrats want to do it.


MACCALLUM: All right, so will the President go where a few Republicans have gone on this issue, next.


MACCALLUM: So President Trump spends a lot of time shoring up his base, but he may be about to do something that some of them may not be on board with. And it could be -- some would see it as a courageous move on his part and some might be disappointed.

He was asked early today if he's open to expanded closing of loopholes on background checks for gun purchases and he said that he wants to make sure that some of the mentally ill are not able to buy guns. Here he is.


TRUMP: There's a great appetite and I've been a very strong appetite for background checks and I think we can bring up background checks like we've never had before. I think both Republican and Democrat are getting close to a bill on doing something like background check.


MACCALLUM: So those have already passed in the House. They're waiting on action in the Senate. Here now Florida Congressman Michael Waltz. It's good to have you here this evening, sir.

REP. MICHAEL WALTZ, R-FLA.: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: What are you -- what did you hear in there? What do you agree within that, what don't you agree within that?

WALTZ: Well, I can tell you what the answer is not. The answer is not broad bans on firearms for all law-abiding Americans. The Second Amendment is a fundamental right in our Constitution and is just important as all of the other amendments and it absolutely has to be protected.

Now, if we want to look at different ways, we should to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill or the deranged or people that shouldn't have them, absolutely. But you know, a lot of these databases are flawed. If you look at the Texas shooter of the church a few years ago, the Air Force did not input his information properly. It didn't communicate with the FBI properly, and he bought a firearm. You look at the Parkland shooting where he was reported 39 times. So the systems have to be executed appropriately.

And in Florida, we do have the Baker Act which is a red flag law that a lot of people do support. But Martha, you know, we have to get it the deeper ills here on why these young men are committing these heinous acts.

We've had guns in our history, our entire history. But these shootings are new and it's this generation. I think we have to take a strategic look at how we get these young men off their couch, off their video games, and out serving identified with their communities again.

MACCALLUM: How would you do that? How would you do that?

WALTZ: Well, I think if we look at the difference, it was -- it's been national service that we've moved away from. I'm proposing a bill that gives it -- that that will incentivize us to get back to national service.

And if you look at the societal benefits that we moved away from when we moved away from the draft, you took kids from the inner city, from middle America farms, from L.A., you name it, and they were all forced together at 18 years old, taught how to lead, how to follow, how to work together as teams with people that they had, you know, inherent differences with, and then they went back into society after learning to serve a bigger cause for their country and for their community.

I think if we get back to national service, that's not a draft, that would be inner-city tutoring, that can be elderly care, that can be national parks, or the military.

MACCALLUM: We've been talking about that a lot over the past couple of days here. And I just want to clarify that I mischaracterized your take on the assault weapons ban and I apologize for that. But Mike Turner who has 90 -- who's the Dayton representative has a 93 percent approval rating with the NRA.

His daughter and her friend were across the street from the Dayton bar and he has now -- he's now calling for an assault weapons ban. He is voting -- he had voted against the expanded background checks because this personal experience with his own family has changed his mind completely on this issue. What do you say to your colleague?

WALTZ: Well, look, I think there is a -- there is a fundamental difference that we will see debated in over the next months and year in this Congress. And there is a difference between keeping firearms out of the hands of people who absolutely should not have them and then just outright bans.

And so I don't -- do not support going that route. I think it is much more nuanced to look at how we enforce the existing laws that keep firearms out of people that shouldn't have them but get at why these people are doing it in the first place.

And I think -- I think if we get back to national service and serving with each other and getting that focus, we will move away from the societal ill.

MACCALLUM: Lieutenant Colonel Michael Waltz, now a congressman, sir, thank you. Good to have you here tonight.

WALTZ: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So after their Mueller disappointment, House Democrats have a new investigation target rewinding nearly 20 years to dig up dirt on Brett Kavanaugh and his time at the White House. Congressman Matt Gaetz and Geraldo Rivera take this on next.


BRETT KAVANAUGH, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, UNITED STATES: When I worked in the Bush White House, 84 women signed a letter saying that in the pressurized environment of the West Wing, I always treated them with equality and promoted women's advancement.



MACCALLUM: So, after the Mueller hearings didn't exactly end the way that Democrats wanted them to, House Democrats have set their sights on another target for possible impeachment of Brett Kavanaugh.

Nearly one year after his confirmation to the United States Supreme Court, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler is demanding 18-year-old e- mails from Kavanaugh's time in the Bush White House.

Joining me now Congressman Matt Gaetz, member of the judiciary committee, and Fox News correspondent at large Geraldo Rivera. Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Good to see both of you this evening.


MACCALLUM: Geraldo, let me start with you. What do you make of this move from Jerry Nadler of New York?

RIVERA: It seems to me, Martha, almost like he is in mourning that the Russiagate hoax did not play out. He was counting, it seems to me, Jerry Nadler was, after all his years in the Congress of the United States being the center of attention in an impeachment hearing.

He wanted the president to be spy for the Russians. He wanted the president to be guilty of treason. He wanted to chair that just like Peter Rodino did back in the day, he wanted to be famous finally, Jerry Nadler did, as chairman of the judiciary committee.

So, they are focusing now on Brett Kavanaugh, a guy who was collateral damage in the total war the Democrats declared. They savaged his reputation. They put him through the ring. I still can't look at him without thinking of Matt Damon on Saturday Night Live jugging beers and so forth.

MACCALLUM: Well, I bet he can't look at Matt Damon that way either anymore.

RIVERA: I bet he can. I bet he can.

MACCALLUM: Without thinking of it. You know, Congressman Gaetz, let me bring you in here. You know, when you look at some of the issues that they potentially are digging around for in these e-mails, you know, it's possibly memos that were written about Roe v. Wade and whether or not it could possibly ever be overturned in the future. Immigration profiling during the post-9/11 period. Discussions about that.

And it looks like the effort is potentially to try to, if not impeach him, try to make it so that he has to recuse himself from certain issues. I mean, is that something that something that could ever happen in our system?

REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA.: This is an effort to delegitimize Brett Kavanaugh, despite the fact that --


GAETZ: -- he was nominated and confirmed. Someone should remind Chairman Nadler that he's not a member of the United States Senate. And Brett Kavanaugh is a member of the United States Supreme Court.

I'm with Geraldo. They tried to relitigate the Russia investigation. That didn't work out. Now they are trying to relitigate the Kavanaugh confirmation. Maybe next they'll pull up the old tapes from Riviera Live so that we can relitigate the O.J. trial. You know?


MACCALLUM: That was -- that was --

GAETZ: And at the end of the day what's so troubling --

MACCALLUM: -- interesting. We did that every night in our house.

GAETZ: We really do have serious issues to address with the judiciary committee, like reforming our asylum laws, like looking at ways to maybe partner with the efforts that Senator Graham has ignited to create a grant program for red flag laws for states.

Those are the substantive issues that the American people want to see us addressing. They don't want to see us going backwards to do what the Congress had done previously. They want us to see move the American people and the American experience forward.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, you know, when you look at -- I was looking at a memo that Shannon Bream sent out earlier today which basically laid out that, you know, all of the nationwide panel of federal judges dismissed 83 pending ethics complaints against Kavanaugh.

It basically lays out the argument that the Supreme Court is very unique, Geraldo. That once you are confirmed on the Supreme Court, any sort of, you know, ethics issue that may have been brought up in the past is pretty much considered something that cannot be re-litigated it. I mean, has anybody told Jerry Nadler this?

RIVERA: That's why justices are appointed for life, to remove them from the grip, the sorted dirty, sleazy grip of partisan politics.


RIVERA: They get appointed to the high court for life. He's been confirmed by the United States Senate. It was closed. It was highly contested. It was a lot of vitriol and all the rest of it.

MACCALLUM: The rest.

RIVERA: But now, he is on the high court. He's got a critical job to do. I want America to focus on, we just had two traumas. We just suffered two mass murders. It's time America pulled together in one direction to solve a problem, rather than continuing these --


MACCALLUM: That sounds like a good idea.

RIVERA: -- partisan contentious fights.

MACCALLUM: We'll send that message to Chairman Nadler. Quick thought, Matt Gaetz before we go.

GAETZ: Well, Geraldo is right. We do have serious issues to address. And frankly, I hope that we are able to get beyond this effort instead of gauging people on the substance of their jurisprudence of their ideas. We try to defame, demoralize, de-platform and delegitimize. That's what we got to fix.

MACCALLUM: Congressman Gaetz, thank you. Geraldo Rivera, as always, thank you. We'll see you soon.

RIVERA: Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Still ahead tonight, Democrat Joaquin Castro defends his decision to tweet out the names and phone numbers of high-profile Trump donors in his district.


REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO, D-TX: I don't want anybody harassed or targeted.


WILLIE GEIST, MSNBC HOST: But they will be because you put their names in public.

CASTRO: That was not my intention.

GEIST: But that's what will happen.

CASTRO: These things are --

GEIST: There are 11 retirees and one homemaker who were not public.

CASTRO: Right.




TRUMP: Our country is doing incredibly well. China is not doing well, if you look at the trade situation. China just admitted yesterday that they've been a currency manipulator. First time they've ever been called out.

Companies are moving out of China by the thousands. Our country is doing very well. We are going to see how it all works out. Somebody had to do this with China because they were taking hundreds of billions of dollars a year out of the United States and somebody had to make a stand.


MACCALLUM: And also, President Trump insisted that China is not the issue that is harming our economy, he said. He pointed the finger, instead, it's the fed. The president sounding off again against the Central Bank, today saying that they must cut interest rates.

Here now Fox Business Network correspondent Susan Li. Susan, good to see you. I don't think any fed chief has ever born, you know, it's like open opposition from a president, probably behind closed door it appears on that.


MACCALLUM: But this is pretty open. Is the president right that China's economy is really in trouble? Thousands of businesses are closing?

LI: I would say that China's economy is definitely slowing down.


LI: We saw that recently. I mean, they have the worst growth rate in over a quarter of a century going back to 1991. Now, is China collapsing? No. But do -- does China have economic problems on their hands? Yes. But they also have a very high paying threshold as well because, as you know, it's not a democracy over there. However, it is not a one-person dictatorship either. So, President Xi, Chinese President Xi also had to reach across the aisle out to get consensus as well.

MACCALLUM: So, what's going on here, because, you know, the president has said well, we've got close to a deal.

LI: Yes.

MACCALLUM: And then President Xi backed out and the things that he promised he was going to do. He then reneged on. Is President Xi going back to China and getting heat from his own leadership who are telling him that he's got to, you know, sort of stick to the program --

LI: Yes.

MACCALLUM: -- and not give in at all?

LI: Well, my sources told me that they were just -- they were 90 percent of the way there.


LI: And then he took -- he took the deal back. And then the hardliners, because as I mentioned to you, it is not a one-person dictatorship. It's a one-party system in China but he still needs to reach across the aisle to get consensus.

And so, some of the hardliners and the lower layers, lower tiers of government over in China take a look at these things, why are we agreeing to this? What do we get back? Why it does make us lose face?

MACCALLUM: So, we've got a major standoff here. Who do you think is gain to win?

LI: That's a hard call, because President Trump has said that they might wait past 2021. They'll get someone probably more friendly towards China like a Joe Biden, when he gets into office, maybe they'll adhere or sign some sort of trade deal. But I think in the meantime China has a very high paying threshold.

MACCALLUM: Fascinating. Susan, thank you very much. Susan Li. So next up, Democratic Congressman Joaquin Castro standing by his decision to tweet out what some are calling a potential target list of people in his district who are supporting President Trump.


MACCALLUM: Democrat Congressman Joaquin Castro from Texas, a twin brother and campaign chair of 2020 presidential candidate Julian Castro, facing mounting backlash tonight after he tweeted what some are calling a target list of Trump donors, who he called out online from his district.

Chief breaking news correspondent, Trace Gallagher has this story for us tonight. Hi, Trace.


Congressman Joaquin Castro is still standing by his tweet, saying the 44 San Antonio residents he listed were not, quote, "targeted or harassed and that his tweet was not a call to action," except some were targeted and harassed and many did view the tweet as a call to action.

For example, a San Antonio barbecue restaurant faced a social media backlash with users vowing to boycott. And one person writing, quote, "Don't support Trump's racism or blank barbecue."

Here's MidAmerican CEO Mark Hanrahan who was also outed by Castro. Watch.


MARK HANRAHAN, CEO, MIDAMERICAN: But I don't have these business affairs in San Antonio, but I know some of the people on the list, and they are people who helped build that community. I mean, he just, he's a total demagogue.


GALLAGHER: And it gets worse. Some people on the list didn't just donate to Trump. They also donated to Congressman Joaquin Castro. So, Castro actually targeted and outed his own supporters.

Senator Ted Cruz from Castro's home state said, quote, "Elected representatives should not be vilifying and doxing their own constituents."

And the pressure isn't just coming from the right. New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said, quote, "This is dangerous by any campaign." Journalist Yashar Ali called it, quote, "awful." Even MSNBC kind of challenged Castro. Watch.


CASTRO: The first thing is that I don't want anybody harassed or targeted.


GEIST: But they will be because you put their names in public.

CASTRO: That was not my intention.

GEIST: But that's what will happen.

CASTRO: These things are -- these things are public. No. What I would like for them to do is think twice about supporting a guy who is fueling hate in this country.

GALLAGER: Castro said nothing about the hate his tweet have already fueled. And maybe House minority whip Steve Scalise, the victim of a politically motivated shootings said it best, quoting, "This isn't a game. It's dangerous and lives are at stake. I know this firsthand." Martha.

MACCALLUM: Trace, thank you very much. Coming up next, shootings across America. Is a return to church at least part of a potential solution and answer? Bishop Robert Barron joins me next.



MIKE HUCKABEE, CONTRIBUTOR: It's our cultural fault, and part of what we've done, we've created a culture in which we've said there is no God. And human life isn't really worth that much and life is expendable. There are lives that are disposable.


MACCALLUM: That was Governor Mike Huckabee earlier this week, who's also a pastor, suggesting that a decline in faith could be one of the contributing factors to the violence that we see in America today as the nation searches for answers in the wake of yet two more last over the weekend, mass shootings in our country.

A recent Gallup recent poll has found that church membership is at an all- time low. Just 50 percent of Americans belong to a church or other religious institution. That's down 20 percent over the past two decades.

My next guest is a very well-known person, Bishop Robert Barron, is known by some as the bishop of social media where he reaches millions of people every single day with his daily gospel reflections. I'm one of them on a good day.

In his newest book, "Letters to a Suffering Church," he encourages Catholics to stay and fight for their faith and their church. Bishop Barron, thank you very much. Good to have you with us tonight.


MACCALLUM: So, talk to us about your thoughts on the violence that we have seen. The horrific loss of life. The president went to El Paso and Dayton today to be with some of those who are wounded and who lost people. Where does this kind of evil come from?

BARRON: Of course, it's never right to find simply one cause. We can analyze it politically, you can analyze it culturally, sociologically, anthropologically.

But obviously, as a priest, as a bishop, I would look at it spiritually. Because the spiritual is not one compartment among many, but the spiritual undergirds the whole of life.

And so, something like this is always a sign of some kind of a spiritual rupture, a loss of contact with the deepest source of meaning. What you said it earlier is right, about the loss of faith, the decreased in religious practice around the country.

When I was a kid, about 3 percent of our country would have claimed no religion. Now it's up to 25 percent. I don't think that goes without some consequence. There is a coarsening of life when you lose a contact with God, who is the source of moral value, the source of meaning, and finally, the source of human dignity.

I don't think it simply a trivial matter when people are in a very consistent way, staying away from God and the things of God. So, I would point to that is certainly an important cause in some of the social trial that we see.

MACCALLUM: Yes. You know, I think when people look at these, they try to find some reason, right. People talk about video games and people talk about accessibility to guns and you know, the family.

A lot of these young men, when you look over the course of these shootings, a huge number of them grew up in families where their father wasn't really present in their lives. How much of that do you see as what ails the country right now?

BARRON: It plays a very important role. I mean, the family, which is the cornerstone of the society is part of Catholic social teaching. So, when the family is compromised, the society as a whole becomes compromised. When the family breaks down the larger sections of the economy and society tend to break down.

So, I think that's certainly the case. I'm not surprised at all that many of these shooters come out of that kind of environment. And then, I trace it back further. Carl Young, a psychologist famously said, at bottom, all psychological problems are spiritual problems.

So, yes, indeed, we have to keep attending to that deepest dimension of life.

MACCALLUM: Yes. If you could leave everybody with one message tonight for why you think they shouldn't may be rediscover going back to church. Some people will not be interested at all. But what would be -- what would be your pitch to them, especially Catholics who you say need to stay in fight in the face of all the recent scandal.

BARRON: Yes. Because the deepest longing of the heart is for God. There's nothing in this world, no wealth, pleasure, power, honor, any good in the world that can satisfy the deepest hunger of the heart. And so, when you absent yourself from God, you are frustrating the deepest longing of the deepest part of you.

And so that's the reason why you should go back to church. That then has ramifications across the whole of your life, including, and especially the respect you show to other human beings, who have the same longing that you do. So that's my principal argument --


BARRON: -- for going back to church. It satisfies your heart.

MACCALLUM: Good message tonight. Bishop Barron, thank you. We did a longer chat in the podcast which I hope everybody will listen to as well. Thank you so much, Bishop Barron. Good to see you this evening.

That is “The Story” of Wednesday, August 7th, 2019. But as always, “The Story” goes on. So, we will see you back here tomorrow night at 7 o'clock. Have a good night, everybody.

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.