Is the media covering the President-Elect fairly?

This is a RUSH transcript from "The O'Reilly Factor," November 11, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET!

O'REILLY: "Personal Story" segment tonight. Beside myself Chris Wallace is one of the first national TV guys to announce that Donald Trump had a good chance to win on election night.

Chris joins us now from Washington. So, before we get to your perspicacity, you talked to the "New York Times" earlier this week in an article they were doing and you actually told them to their collective faces, they didn't cover the campaign fairly. That took some moxie. And how did you arrive at that conclusion?

CHRIS WALLACE, "FOX NEWS SUNDAY" ANCHOR: Well, I think and it wasn't just the "New York Times" although I did say it to the "Times" about the "Times." I think a lot of the mainstream media just decided after the conventions that Donald Trump was beyond the pale. He was just not acceptable as a president and so, therefore, the normal rules of objectivity and fairness no longer applied and so in the "New York Times" case they would use -- they talk about flailing or desperate in a way that they would never say about the Clinton campaign that used verbs like lurched, I remember. And this was not on the opinion page -- it was front page.


O'REILLY: And they only brought things back to Trump's deficiencies. Every article started out a different way and then it all circled back.

WALLACE: Bill, I have got to tell you, if there was ever any doubt about the "Times" bias, I've only got to show you the front page of the "New York Times" yesterday, Thursday, the day -- the day after because, obviously, the results came in the Wednesday paper. Their second day coverage and for those who can't see the headline. Democrats, students, and foreign allies face the reality of a Trump presidency. Not Trump takes over, Trump consolidates power, a new day. But students face reality. I expected them to say the proletariat faces the reality of Trump. I mean, that's an astonishing headline.

O'REILLY: It is. It didn't offend me though because I don't see that as trying to social engineer the country. And that's my next question. Obviously, my opinion is that all of this media bias, which is in disputable helped Trump, helped him because the folks said, you know, I'm tired of this. We know you are being unfair and we -- you know, you as the national media, we know this is not being -- this is a con job by the media, so we are going to vote for him anyway, even though we might not like him. That's what I think happened in a lot of cases.

WALLACE: I think Trump was quite brilliant in going after the media and basically lumping them in a different way than let's say Nixon did. Lumping them in with all the other power elites. All the other special interests in Washington, in Wall Street.

O'REILLY: Yes. It's rigged. Right.

WALLACE: In saying it's all part of a fixed game --

O'REILLY: Right. Right.

WALLACE: And in the particular case of the "New York Times," I got to say, they really let themselves down and, you know, maybe I'm -- being -- I know you have had feelings about this for a long time. I was really shocked to see how openly slanted they were on the front news page of the paper.

O'REILLY: Let me tell you something, I have been doing this 20 years plus, okay? I have been attacked viciously by the national media in general. All right? Viciously attacked. Unfairly, distorting. And you have seen it. You saw it. You know, it's like one every 18 months. What are they going to come up with next and attack and attack and destroy and destroy? I told Trump the first interview I did with him after he announced, I said, they are going to come after you like you have never seen anything because there are certain people, Chris, that they loathe working class.

He is not working class -- not Trump, he's not working class -- but he says he is speaking for them. I am a working class guy. And for us to attain power, for us to actually build up a following offends them, personally offends them because we are exactly what they despise. And that's what this was all about. And the working class people who voted for Trump knew it. They knew it.

WALLACE: But it was certainly the case of Trump. They just decided he was beyond the pale and they were going to treat him that way. They weren't going to treat him as a legitimate presidential candidate and have any sense. And it was not just the "Times," a lot of newspapers --

O'REILLY: Yes. "The Washington Post" --

WALLACE: A lot of newspapers.

O'REILLY: You know, "The Washington Post" was interesting because it did some good aggressive reporting but it's editorial page. I mean, you just one after the other after the other after the other. Although this guy Callum Borcher is an honest guy at the post.

WALLACE: I agree.

O'REILLY: Now, this Sunday, you got Kellyanne Conway, this is an interesting question that I have. Does Trump have the stones to put Ms. Conway in as chief of staff? Because that woman saved his bacon to use a cliche, she saved him. Does he have it to put her in there?

WALLACE: Yes. But I'm not sure that's her best job. I'm not sure that's the right role for her. I have strong feelings about chief of staff because I have seen it done right and I have seen it done wrong. And you put in somebody who -- well, this isn't true of Conway so much and I agree. She could do just as good a job being a senior advisor, a counselor, a Valerie Jarrett, a David Axelrod to him.

O'REILLY: Yes. Valerie Jarrett is a good example. That's a consigliore to President Obama.

WALLACE: Right. But for chief-of-staff you need somebody who knows how the trains run in this town. How you deal with --

O'REILLY: All right. So, you talked to Newt Gingrich then.

WALLACE: How you deal with the Congress, how you deal with the media, I'm not sure that's her strength particularly. That's frankly why I think he should put Reince Priebus in there. You need some, even if you want to change it, it's like Ronald Reagan put Jim Baker in because --

O'REILLY: Why not Gingrich?

WALLACE: Because even though he wanted to change Washington, he knew that you needed somebody who was very familiar with all the levers of power in order to make it work for him.

O'REILLY: All right. I got only 15 seconds. Why not Gingrich? He knows everything and he is a good arm twister.

WALLACE: I don't think Gingrich has an interest in a staff role like that. I think he is beyond that if he gets a department. That's one thing. You get your own plane, you get your own department. He doesn't want to sit there and wake up in morning and brief the president. It's a tough job but it's also a staff job. It's not a principal's job.

O'REILLY: Chris Wallace, everyone.

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.