Judge Napolitano on Cyrus Vance Jr and Jeffrey Epstein

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," July 10, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, HOST: Hi there, John. Good evening to you. Thanks so much.

So, nearly 18 years ago, we all watched these scenes in horror as it unfolded in New York, in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and of course, at the Pentagon. Islamist radical terrorists had attacked the United States and had killed almost 3,000 Americans on that early September morning. Days later, President Bush, promised there would be retaliation.


GEORGE BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT: I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people -- and the people who knocked this buildings down will hear all of us soon.


MACCALLUM: It was clear that life had to change in America. The government worked to harden our airports, our ports of entry around the country all designed to prevent another attack.


BUSH: Department of Homeland Security will have nearly 170,000 employees, dedicated professionals who will wake up each morning with the overriding duty protecting their fellow citizens. I'm pleased to announce that I will nominate Governor Tom Ridge as our nation's first Secretary of Homeland Security.


MACCALLUM: DHS had a heavy burden to bear. And 18 years later, it appears that their work has worked. But this week, the entire apparatus has now come into question by a new member of Congress who at the time was 12 years old on September the 11th.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you get rid of Homeland Security too?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-N.Y.: I think so. I think we need to undo a lot of the egregious -- a lot of the egregious mistakes of the Bush administration did. It is a very qualified and supported position, at least in terms of evidence and in terms of being able to make the argument that we never should have created DHS in the early 2000s.


MACCALLUM: Karl Rove live through 9/11 at President Bush's side as his deputy chief of staff and he joins me now. And her panel joins me in just a moment as well. Karl, thanks for being here. What goes through your mind as you listen to her saying that we really need to get rid of what was created after September11th?

KARL ROVE, CONTRIBUTOR: I think it's moronic, stupid, naive, and dumb. And a strong message to follow. I can't believe that a member of Congress admittedly she was 11, about ready to turn 12 the following month. But she should study the lessons of history. She should talk to her colleagues, she should investigate what happened.

I was there on 9/11, I was the guy that at 8:48 a.m. walked up to the president of the United States and said a plane has flown into the World Trade Center. We don't know if it's jet or prop, private or commercial.

I was with him all day and I saw a man in that day resolved that within the Constitution and laws of the United States, he would do everything necessary to protect our country against a similar attack. And the Department of Homeland Security had brought together a series of agencies, and departments, and capabilities to meet that challenge.

Some of those capabilities didn't exist before the Department of Homeland Security. Does she really want us to go back to an age in which there's no -- which you can go and board an airplane carrying a box cutter or a bomb? Does she really want our borders to be unprotected? Does she really want to abolish the customs? Does she want to get rid of the Secret Service?

The Department of Homeland Security has kept us safe. And she -- if she doesn't believe that, have her go talk to her colleague, the Democrat chairman of the Homeland Security Committee in the House and Senate. Go ever talked to the Democrat chairman of the Intelligence Committee and asked for a briefing.

Go across to Langley and ask for a briefing on what the DHS and our intelligence agencies have been able to foil in the way of plots against America. Go talk to the New York Police Department for God's sake. And talk to them about how DHS has helped her city, the city that she claims to represent in the United States Congress from having suffered through other horrible incidents including bombs in Times Square.

I would like her to go to the parents and the loved ones who lost someone on 9/11 who live in her district in New York, and ask them if they think that the United States of America should be placed in or in a place where people, other families will have to suffer through the pain and grief that they have.

The Department of Homeland Security was a great accomplishment, bipartisan in nature, it protects our country and provided a new way to meet the challenges of the 21st century. And those challenges have not gone away no matter what Congressman Ocasio-Cortez may think.

MACCALLUM: Well said. And I think it is shocking, especially from a New Yorker, you know, who has to know people who were in the line of fire that day, people who are related to the members of our fire department who ran up those staircases, and many of whom never came down them.

To have that, you know, lack of context for the understanding of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, I think is somewhat surprising, especially, for someone who is an elected official.

The problem is that the context now has shifted so completely to what's going on at the border. Now, there is overcrowding at the border. There are a lot of agencies who are tasked with organizing the chaos -- trying to organize the chaos and the overwhelming nature of the number of people who are coming in here. You know, with regard to that part of the story, does DHS need to make any adjustments, Karl?

ROVE: Well, it needs to grow. I mean, look, what amazes me as we saw it. We did -- we had problems under President Obama. We had problems under President Bush in coping with surges. President Obama had a terrible problem in coping with a surge of Central Americans. He was the first president who began to deal with the kind of crisis we have today. That is to say, not single man coming up from Mexico or South America or Central America looking for jobs, but families, large numbers of families, and large numbers of children coming to this country. And he had to deal with them.

I don't remember the outrage of Democrats. And maybe it was because she was still tending bar at that point. But if she wants to be clear about this, then let her attack President Obama for having constructed walls. Let her attack President Obama for having detained people. Let her attack the President Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, who spoke out.

So, I think, courageously, about how this is a real crisis that ought to be dealt with in a bipartisan way. You know what? This is it, she views the world through a left-wing prism. And so, she can't -- she can't deal with the reality that we face as a country that we would be -- that we are in grave difficulty if we do not control our borders. I'm a big proponent of immigration reform.

I'm a huge proponent of immigration. I am a great-grandson of an immigrant. And yet, I know that we have to control our borders. And for her to sort of blindly and sort of dismissively -- I mean, how condescending should when she says, well, the evidence is there.


ROVE: If you send an informed opinion, no, it's not, it is about a misinformed opinion. I've seen coming out of a member of Congress in a long, long time.

MACCALLUM: Yes, I mean, it's interesting to know, you know when you look back at that quote, she talks about how, you know, there's people understand all the evidence and that there's this, you know, sort of consensus she suggests that DHS has to go.

And then, you look at the frustration that we've seen in Nancy Pelosi this week, and she essentially said, "No, there isn't. I've got, you know, four individuals in Congress and they have four votes who seem to feel the way that I do about, you know, supporting the money that needs to go to fixing the problem at the border.

How do you feel about the bind that Nancy Pelosi finds herself in with regard to this, Karl?

ROVE: Well, she a --she's a tough leader. She's smart. She knows she got into the speakership because the Democrats took 31 seats held by Republicans that were carried by Donald Trump. And you look at those centrists, they understand the reality that we have to deal with, and are trying to act in a bipartisan way on many of these issues with regard to immigration.

But you know, AOC is right, there is a consensus in Congress, among four members of the Congress. It's AOC, and Tlaib, and Omar, and it may be one or two others. They're the nuts. They are the people who have these really outrageous viewpoints and try to pass them off as if they are normal and ordinary, and worthy of serious consideration by the United States Congress and the American people.

The idea that we're going to abolish the Department of Homeland Security assumes that the world has changed in a way that it has not changed. We face a threat from abroad, we have to have secure borders. We have Islamic terrorists who want to destroy our country. We have -- we have held the deal each and every year since 9/11 with plots to strike the homeland, many of them aimed at the city that she represents.

So, I'd say, wake up, get a -- get a grip on reality, and realize that you are dealing in a world that requires things like the Department of Homeland Security.

MACCALLUM: Karl Rove, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight.

Let's bring in Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy and Juan Williams, Fox News political analyst and co-host of "The Five".

Juan, you listens to the intro and to Karl's take on these young members of your party. What do you say?

JUAN WILLIAMS, POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think it was miscast because, obviously, we're not talking about Homeland Security and 9/11. We're talking about, as you said, the border. And we're talking about what's going on at the border --


MACCALLUM: Yes, but she's saying that we need to get rid of the Department of Homeland Security, which was created absolutely for the express purpose right after 9/11 (INAUDIBLE).

WILLIAMS: Well, there's two arguments here. Right. There is bipartisan concern that there are too many agencies now under the umbrella of DHS. And that we have overlapping responsibility, budgeting, and spending. So, that's one issue.

But I think the real issue she's speaking to, I think, she's a voice for little people who are concerned and specific that ICE on this border issue on this immigration issue is threatening. People see them and it's not just the people who are immigrants. We're talking about the Catholic Church synagogues, mosques, we're talking about employers who feel like, you know, their business or their home could be invaded any minute by ICE, families could be separated. And they think that this is a little bit out of control and that the people of America need to take it back under control.

And I think she is a voice for those people. And I think we are -- we are deaf if we don't understand how people feel that their families been separated.

MACCALLUM: Let's just put up that quote again. And then, I want to hear Rachel's response.


MACCALLUM: We're going to listen to it again, just to be clear.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you get rid of Homeland Security too?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-N.Y.: I think so. I think we need to undo a lot of the egregious -- a lot of the egregious mistakes of the Bush administration did. It is a very qualified and supported position, at least in terms of evidence and in terms of being able to make the argument that we never should have created DHS in the early 2000s.


MACCALLUM: Never should have created DHS in the early 2000s, just right in the wake of 9/11.

RACHEL CAMPOS-DUFFY, CONTRIBUTOR: I think that Juan, no offense, but I think you're being disingenuous about her concerns about DHS. She's hardly concerned about, you know, many conservatives were worried that -- you know, we're creating this big federal agency when Bush create it.

WILLIAMS: That's right.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: That is not the concerns that AOC has. AOC likes big federal agencies, the bigger the better. Her concern is with the mission of DHS. She doesn't just want to eliminate DHS, she wants to abolish ICE. She wants to get rid of Border Patrol. She agrees with Julian Castro in decriminalizing illegal border entry.

So, we're looking at someone who's basically wants to give you the wish list for terrorists, the wish list for criminal cartels, and sex traffickers. And you have to wonder, is she working for them or is she working for the American people?

The American people, especially, those constituents that she represents in New York City want the border secure where we already know, Juan, that not -- it's not just desperate economic migrants from Latin America, we have seen people from terrorist countries come across, from hostile countries come across the border, from Africa, from the Middle East. This is an -- this is not a -- this is -- this is this national security issue.


MACCALLUM: Yes, that just his concern, yes.

WILLIAMS: This is -- this is -- this is not the main issue. The main issue is immigration and what we have now is the crisis with regard to families coming seeking asylum in the difficulties we have --


CAMPOS-DUFFY: And she's --

MACCALLUM: Well, let's put up the picture that we have (INAUDIBLE), Juan.

WILLIAMS: But let me just finish this one.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: But she said there is no crisis.

MACCALLUM: No, I will let you finish. Put the picture up while Juan is talking of the overcrowding at the border. Well, Juan.

WILLIAMS: Right. So, that's a -- that's -- but that's the problem.


WILLIAMS: And I think this is what is sparking her and it's also the idea of people coming in in the middle of the night to break up families. But let me just also say, she recently had to deal with Custom and Border Patrol postings on Facebook that were deeply offensive, disrespectful, not only of her as a member of Congress, they derided her.


CAMPOS-DUFFY: This is the same --

WILLIAMS: But they also went after and made fun of people who are immigrants, and even today we have --



MACCALLUM: You know, that criticism -- I totally agree with you. Those Facebook postings are nothing that anybody would defend, they were completely disgusting.

WILLIAMS: It's awful. Right, but you can imagine.

MACCALLUM: However, she went down there, the border agent said, and yelled in their faces. These people are overwhelmed with what is going on at the border.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: And these --

MACCALLUM: And it -- you know, I think as incumbent of Congress --


WILLIAMS: Who is -- who is -- who is responsible? A member of Congress is responsible.


CAMPOS-DUFFY: Wait, wait, Juan, Juan, that's right.

MACCALLUM: Yes, all the members of Congress are responsible.

WILLIAMS: Correct, right.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Juan, she said just a few months ago that this was a manufactured crisis. She has not voted to give $1 to help the detention centers or even to add one more bed. So, even the last vote, she refused to vote to give more funding toward this crisis.


WILLIAMS: You know, why? Because she thinks that Trump administration has been using the money not with -- not with regard to helping, but talking about building a wall or sending troops to the border.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Well, well, well, if she cared so much, she would go for it. By the way, she's so -- she's so foolish that she actually said a few months ago that the people were coming from Latin America because of climate change. These are economic migrants fleeing socialism, dysfunctional governments, corruption.

WILLIAMS: That's true.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: And she wants -- and by the way, she's the one who wants to take away the opportunity that all these people are coming here for. So, no --


MACCALLUM: So, Nancy Pelosi, you know, is struggling right now with this faction of her party. She was asked today, "Do you have any regrets about telling them to stay off Twitter?" She said, "I have no regrets about anything. Regrets are not what I do," said Nancy Pelosi. She went on to say, "I have -- I'm here to help the children when it's easy and when it's hard. Some of you are here," she said this to her caucus behind closed doors. "To help make -- are here to make a beautiful pate, but we are making sausage most of the time," says Nancy Pelosi.

I think she's saying, wakeup. You know, and I think it's interesting what Karl Rove, said. You know, everybody has their moment in Congress when they're new, when they're learning, and it's great to be fired up about what you believe in, that's all wonderful. But it's also great to listen to the people and the voices around you who have some experience. And I do think it's very offensive, Juan, to people who lost someone on 9/11.


MACCALLUM: To listen to someone say that they -- without any context or understanding of what President Bush did in the early 2000s. That was egregious when he wanted to set up an agency to protect the borders of the country?

WILLIAMS: No, obviously, she is wrong on that point.


MACCALLUM: It shows a lot of context and understanding of history.

WILLIAMS: But, I hope you heard what was said earlier. That there are Conservatives, Republicans who feel it was a mistake to create such a big agency with so many overlapping responsibilities because people think we need a government that's responsive to us.


CAMPOS-DUFFY: But after 14 years, they know that's worth it.

MACCALLUM: I think that that's the point that's we're taking. But I think that Rachel is also under something as you are when she says that, that -- that's concerns are not what out -- what AOC is --


CAMPOS-DUFFY: That's not she concerns out. Makes no -- make no mistake, Juan, she wants open border, should decriminalize border crossing.


WILLIAMS: I think it is part of her concern. Oh, yes, that's just better. She is --

CAMPOS-DUFFY: She said that. She said that.

MACCALLUM: All right, we're going to pick this up later, guys. Thank you very much. Great to have both of you with us tonight.


MACCALLUM: Still Ahead this evening, this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you have to say?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you deserve?

RAPINOE: I deserve this.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You deserve all of it, everything. You deserve this. She belongs --


MACCALLUM: Jesse Watters is coming to follow up on that. This should be interesting. Also tonight, Judge Napolitano coming up next.



REP. JERRY NADLER, D-N.Y.: Acosta perverted justice to give a very sweet deal to an accused multiple child molester and has no business in government. This will just say it be added on to the list of things we have to investigate.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y.: It is now impossible for anyone to have confidence in Secretary Acosta's ability to lead the Department of Labor. If he refuses to resign, President Trump should fire him.


MACCALLUM: So some analysis today done in the Wall Street Journal's editorial pages suggest that the effort to paint Labor Secretary Alex Acosta who they argue successfully prosecuted Epstein and laid the groundwork for the new charges he faces is at its core they say in the Wall Street Journal an effort to get President Trump.

And the paper says while Chairman Nadler and Senator Schumer who you just saw of New York are calling for Acosta to be fired, they questioned whether their outrage could perhaps be designed to point the finger at the President and away from a prominent New Yorker, the District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., very well known in New York City who they say "sought to undo Mr. Acosta's work by relieving Epstein of his level three sex offender status in New York State knocking that down to the lowest level which would have limited the information on him that was available to the public and would keep him off the sex offender list here in New York City."

The judge who heard this argument in 2011 said: "vehemently denied this request saying I have to tell you I'm a little overwhelmed because I have never seen a prosecutor's office do anything like this." Now Cyrus Vance Jr. says that he disagreed with that movement on the part of his staff.

Here now Judge Andrew Napolitano Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst. A lot of tangled web here, Judge, but -- and I know you have different feeling about Acosta which I want to get to in a moment, but about that roll of Cyrus Vance Jr., what do you say?

ANDREW NAPOLITANO, SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: I think it's more than curious and merits investigation and I suggest you it may very well be under investigation because Geoff Berman who's the U.S. attorney in New York who revealed the recent indictment of Epstein said at this press conference what he didn't need to say that there are two teams investigating the Epstein matter, one is the sex trafficking team, of course, the other is the public corruption team.

Public corruption, who could they be investigating? Secretary Acosta which we'll get to in a minute, and D.A. Vance for allowing this person, Jeff Epstein, with the record with which D.A. Vance was familiar to slip under the radar and continue to do these horrific acts right underneath the nose of the District Attorney here in New York.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, it's stunning. And there was a 51-page indictment that have been put together by the FBI. Now today, Alex Acosta argued that it was unorthodox for you know, the federal government to intervene in this state investigation and the way he portrayed his own part of activity in this was you know, we came in there and we made it sure that at least he was charged with something.

NAPOLITANO: So I watched the press conference, of course, and then I read the transcript of the press conference. It reads a lot better than it sounded. It was very lawyerly and very methodical in his answer, but it was timid, it was not persuasive. There was no passion. There was no outrage.

Basically, instead of indicted this monster and having an indictment hang over his head while the lawyers negotiated, they negotiated first and the lawyers talked him out of indicted him. He's trying to take credit --

MACCALLUM: Well, they say that they would never be -- that there wasn't the evidence that exists now then and that the women were not willing to come forward and they felt like they weren't going to get anything.

NAPOLITANO: He obviously -- he obviously knows the case better than any of us could and hindsight you know can be 20/20. But the evidence that the Miami Herald came up with, much of which seems to have escaped his memory, is clearly enough, was clearly enough to have gotten the federal indictment.

MACCALLUM: All right, before I let you go, do you think -- I mean, one of the most important viewers today for Alex Acosta was the President of the United States --

NAPOLITANO: Is the President.

MACCALLUM: -- who is evaluating whether or not he thinks he should hang in there with his Labor Secretary and what do you think he may have taken away?

NAPOLITANO: Mr. President, wash your hands of this. You don't need this taint. The secretary -- he may be a fine --

MACCALLUM: He needs fire the Labor Secretary.

NAPOLITANO: Yes. He may be a very fine Secretary of Labor and the President has said that but he does not need this issue. His self-defense, the Secretary's today was tepid and unpersuasive. That has nothing to do with the president. He needs to wash his hands.

MACCALLUM: Judge Andrew Napolitano, always good to see you, sir.


MACCALLUM: Thank you very much. Next, chants of USA erupt at a city council meeting after the Pledge of Allegiance is done away with. “The Story” from a fired up protester who was in that crowd next.


AMERICAN CROWD: And to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God. USA! USA!



MACCALLUM: It was one of the most controversial moments of the Democratic debate. Candidates raising their hands to pledge health care to illegal immigrants in the United States. The State of California doesn't have to wait until 2020 for that to become a reality.

Governor Gavin Newsom signing a bill extending coverage to 90,000 illegal immigrants in the State of California through the state's Medicaid program. The legislation covers individuals between 19-25 years old, and it will cost the state they say approximately $98 million in year one.


GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM, D-CALIF.: We are providing health care for everyone regardless of immigration status. If you believe in universal health care, you believe in universal health care.


MACCALLUM: We will keep an eye on that. And also developing tonight with Independence Day just days in the rearview mirror, the city council in the town -- in a town in Minnesota is facing an uproar over the Pledge of Allegiance after they decided "in order to create a more welcoming environment to a diverse community, we are going to forgo saying the Pledge of Allegiance before every meeting."

Here's what happened next.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That pledge to a (INAUDIBLE) 15 seconds.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's too much going on here --



MACCALLUM: So, you get the idea of St. Louis Park and what happened there. My next guest took part in that protest. Michelle Even joins me now. Michelle, what was it like in there, and why -- you know, why do you think they -- they were so surprised at the response that this got?

MICHELLE EVEN, PROTESTS BAN ON PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: It was a really energizing environment and a lot of patriots showed up for this event. I'm not sure the city council was surprised that we were there, I think they knew in advance that we were going to be there. But I think there were a little bit taken aback on how many people showed up and how energized we were in that room.

MACCALLUM: So, I just want to play one of the members of the city council expressing her, you know, sort of reaction to all of what happened in that meeting based on their decision, watch this.


ANNE MAVITY, COUNCILMEMBER, ST. LOUIS PARK CITY: I'm appalled that our little suburban communities meeting protocols have sparked this polarizing conversation in our community on what it means to be patriotic.

There are lots of people that haven't been nice about this and our city staff has been on the front lines, and so I just want to apologize to them because it certainly was not our intention.


MACCALLUM: What you think about what she said there?

EVEN: We were appalled. We were appalled that they took the pledge away from us. That was our reaction, and I think she's really out of touch with reality.

MACCALLUM: So they said at the end of that meeting, you know, in typical city council way, we are going to take this up again at our next meeting, which is July 22nd, and in the meantime we will say the -- we'll say the pledge on special occasions, what do you think that?

EVEN: Well, I don't trust that that's going to happen. At this point they've already voted not to take a pledge again, and so they are going to do a study session whether or not they want to say this pledge again, and so when the next vote comes out, we're not sure if it's going to actually be on the agenda, we don't know. But I'm not sure that they're going to overturn their vote.

MACCALLUM: So the reason when they talked about why they were doing it in the first place, they said that they wanted to welcome -- be more welcoming to a diverse community, and you know, when you listen to the pledge, isn't that sort of exactly what it is trying to do? You know, sort of promising freedom and equality for everybody?

EVEN: Liberty and justice for all.

MACCALLUM: Those are the words.

EVEN: I think the pledge is extremely inclusive and the beautiful thing about the pledge is if you want to say it you can say it, and if you want to opt out, you can opt out. But I don't think that you get to take that right away from me if you're offended by the pledge.

MACCALLUM: Michelle, thank you. This is getting a lot of attention. A lot of people clicking on “The Story.”

EVEN: Yes.

MACCALLUM: And they want to hear about what's going on because I think it has sort of a broader message for a lot of what we are seeing in the country, so thank you very much for being here.

EVEN: Yes.

MACCALLUM: Good to talk to you tonight.

EVEN: We have a web site too. Can I tell you the web site?


EVEN: It's savethepledge.com.

MACCALLUM: OK. Thank you very much, Michelle.

EVEN: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Good to have you here tonight. Thanks for making time for us.

EVEN: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So breaking moments ago, there are reports that Iran unsuccessfully attempted to seize a British tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, something that Iran's President, Hassan Rouhani had threatened to do in retaliation.

Just yesterday, also, new legal troubles for Democratic donor Ed Buck. So, you remember THE STORY? Another layer here. The family of one of the men who died of an overdose in his home is taking this whole thing to another level tonight.


MACCALLUM: There are some new legal troubles tonight for prominent Democratic donor Ed Buck. You may remember the chilling stories that we reported on him. And now the family of one of the men who died in his home of an overdose is now amending their wrongful death lawsuit to include allegations of revenge, porn, and human trafficking.

Chief correspondent Jonathan Hunt has “The Story” for us tonight from our West Coast newsroom. Good evening, Jonathan.

JONATHAN HUNT, CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Martha. Ed Buck has until next week to reply to the new allegations contained in that amended wrongful death suit. The complaint filed by the mother of Gemmel Moore, a 26-year-old man who died allegedly surrounded by drug paraphernalia in Buck's West Hollywood apartment on the night of July 27th, 2017.

Having flown to Los Angeles from his home in Texas earlier that day. That is the basis for the trafficking claim. The allegation, according to the complaint, that Buck, quote, "knowingly utilized interstate commerce for the purpose of transporting -- recruiting enticing and transporting Moore from Texas to L.A. for commercial sex acts.

The amended complaint also accuses Buck of violating Moore's right to privacy by showing a sexually explicit video of Moore to other guests at his apartment as recently as April of this year. Nearly two years after Moore's death.

Buck through his attorney has denied any responsibility in Moore's death and the death of 55-year-old Timothy Dean, who died from a drug overdose, also in Buck's apartment in January.


SEYMOUR AMSTER, ED BUCK'S ATTORNEY: This is not a situation where Mr. Buck has caused the death. This is a situation where Mr. Buck has had longtime friends who unfortunately do not handle their life well.


HUNT: Buck is well known in Los Angeles as a Democratic donor having contributed tens of thousands of dollars in total over the years to California politicians, including Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Congressman Adam Schiff.

Buck, by the way, Martha, has not been criminally charged in either the death of Gemmel Moore or Timothy Dean, although an investigation of Dean's death by the Los Angeles district attorney's office is ongoing. Martha?

MACCALLUM: Jonathan Hunt in L.A., thank you very much, Jonathan.

So, as we mentioned before the break, there's breaking news this evening, reports that armed members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard just tried to seize a British tanker in the Persian Gulf as it crossed into the Strait of Hormuz.

Initial reports say that that attempt was unsuccessful, although there is something that the Iranian president threat -- that is something, I should say, that he threatened to do just yesterday in retaliation for an Iranian tanker that was seized by the British earlier this week.

Also new tonight, the regime accusing the United States of economic terrorism and calling its sanctions, quote, "weapons of warfare" after President Trump today threatened more sanctions soon.

The Iranian ambassador to the IAEA responding, quote, "The statistic tendency of the United States to use illegal unilateral sanctions as an instrument to coerce sovereign states and private entities should come to an end."

Joining me now exclusively is Maria Fernanda Espinoza, president of the United Nations General Assembly. President Espinosa, thank you very much for being here tonight. First of all, what's your reaction to this news that it looks like, according to these reports, Iran actually did try to seize this tanker?

MARIA FERNANDA ESPINOSA GARCES, PRESIDENT, UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY: Well, I think that the United Nations is about peace and security, is about preventing conflict. It's about dialogue, it is about diplomacy and that these are the principles that we stand by.

MACCALLUM: So, there was a statement put out by the U.N. Security Council on the Gulf of Oman and the Strait of Hormuz incidents saying that "The councilmembers urge concerned parties in all countries in the region to exercise maximum restraint and take measures and actions to reduce escalation the tension."

So, what would be the U.N.'s message tonight about what appears to be happening on the part of the Iranians?

GARCES: Yes. It's, avoid conflict, it's about dialogue. It's about conversation --


MACCALLUM: But attempting to seize a ship is not avoiding conflict.

GARCES: Yes. And it is about complying with the commitments we have agreed upon.

MACCALLUM: I guess one of the frustrations that people have when they hear that is that it feels like it doesn't have any teeth, any ability to stop them. This body of nations that was formed to try to be a collective against these sorts of things. What you say to those critics?

GARCES: I think that the key word, Martha, is collective. I think that, for example, the nuclear agreement was signed by several parties, including the permanent members, the five permanent members of the Security Council. The European Union, Iran in the case of a nuclear deal, and it has to be complied by all signatories. It is important that we comply and abide with the commitments we make.

MACCALLUM: Well, I mean, as you know, President Trump decided that he felt that it was not a pact that was achieving its goal and wanted to remove the United States from that.

Here he is last year at the U.N. talking about Iran and I want to get your thoughts on this as we get closer to the repeat -- or the next appearance of the president there in September. Watch this.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: We cannot allow a regime that chants death to America and that threatens Israel with annihilation to possess the means to deliver a nuclear warhead to any city on earth.


MACCALLUM: Do you agree?

GARCES: What I can say, Martha, again, I think I would invite them to read the U.N. Charter where the United States had a very instrumental role, including Eleanor Roosevelt, in the drafting of the U.N. Charter. The U.N. stands by preventing conflict, by promoting cooperation --


MACCALLUM: So, one way to prevent conflict like for not allow Iran to chant death to America and threaten to annihilate Israel, for example.

GARCES: I think -- I think it is about dialogue. It is about conversation, and that's -- that are the principles that we stand by.

MACCALLUM: All right.

GARCES: And we also I think in the United Nations, really promotes multilateralism, even if it's a very difficult word to pronounce, even for me, that I'm not an English speaker. It's about cooperation. It's about solidarity among nations and it's about preventing conflict.

So, our main responsibility is about preventing conflict, promoting a sustainable --


MACCALLUM: I think a lot of people think that that could be accomplished by holding these resolutions that are put out by the U.N. to countries like Iran.

Thank you. You have a lot on your plate and we only got to Iran tonight, but everyone should listen to the podcast because we talk about a lot of different countries on that as well. So, I really appreciate you being here.

GARCES: Thank you. I thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Thank you for coming in.

GARCES: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Coming up next right here.


MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO, D-NYC, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: USA, equal pay. USA, equal pay. USA, equal pay. USA, equal pay.


MACCALLUM: Wednesdays with Watters takes on the equal pay debate, coming up next.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What you have to say?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you deserve?

RAPINOE: I deserve this.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You deserve all of it. Everything. You deserve this. She belongs.


MACCALLUM: That made the rounds today on social media. As you might imagine U.S. Women's co-captain Megan Rapinoe celebrating her team's World Cup victory here in New York City, huge ticker tape parade kind of thing. Confetti now they use since there's no more tape. Urging everyone, she did today in her speech, to be better. Watch.


RAPINOE: I think this team does an incredible job of taking that on our shoulders and understanding the position that we have in the platform that we have within this world.

Yes, we play sports, yes, we play soccer. Yes, we are female athletes, but we are so much more than that. You're so much more than that.

New York City, (muted).


MACCALLUM: Wow! The championship-winning team has ignited debate over equal pay as well after filing a class action lawsuit alleging that they are paid less than their male counterparts despite bringing in about 900,000 more in revenue over the World Cup experience.

And now New York City Mayor De Blasio, also a 2020 candidate for the presidency of the United States, says that he will change that as president.


DE BLASIO: I'll use an executive order to have the Treasury Department enforce on the U.S. Soccer Federation because they are tax-exempt and they are discriminating in effects, against women in pay. That should be stopped through the Treasury Department's power, I would do that as president through executive order.


MACCALLUM: All right. There he is right now. And you know there's a long way to go. That could change completely but he's at four-tenths of a percent in the race to become the Democratic presidential nominee. But that's not dampening his enthusiasm for when it gets into office at all.

Here now for Wednesdays with Watters, Jesse Watters, host of Watters World and co-host of The Five. Good to see you, Jesse.


MACCALLUM: So first your reaction to that moment which was like wildfire today, of Megan Rapinoe, you know, on the float, I deserve this.

WATTERS: I'm not going to say anything negative about I deserve this. I think she does deserve it. She's worked really hard and she's a rock star. I mean, I maybe wouldn't have used the language that she used in front of all the young girls there, but I'm not going to make a federal case out of it.

I did notice during the I guess anthem, she didn't have her hand here, and we know that she kneels sometimes during the anthem. She said she's not going to go to the f-ing White House, which to me was like, wow. And that's your prerogative, but I do think it's damaging U.S. women's soccer.


WATTERS: I think people won't watch if they see the team that's representing our country be unpatriotic. And I've spoken to people who over the weekend weren't watching, refused to watch and I think that's going to have an impact on ratings, and you saw the ratings were good.

It was about 14 million for the women, but four years ago, 2015, that was about 22 million. So, they lost about 8 million. I'm not saying it's because of the lack of patriotism, but I think the numbers could have been higher if they had kept politics out of it.

MACCALLUM: You know, I'm big on sportsmanship and humility, which I know a lot of people disagree with me on this, and maybe my ideas on this are very old-fashioned, because people seem to love to watch people spike the football. As you know, I'm a Tom Brady fan.


MACCALLUM: Who is very humble.

WATTERS: That's right.

MACCALLUM: When he wins, he always, you know, talks about how great the other team was and it's not about him, it's about the team --


WATTERS: I hate to agree with you.

MACCALLUM: I love to see a little bit more of that from this woman who is a great champion, but it's all about her.

WATTERS: It is all about her.

MACCALLUM: It is all about her, and watch her last night with Anderson Cooper. Watch this.


RAPINOE: Yes, to AOC, yes to Nancy Pelosi, yes to the bipartisan Congress. Yes, to Chuck Schumer, yes to anyone else that wants to invite us and have a real substantive conversation and that believe in the same things that we believe in.


MACCALLUM: A very happy to talk to it anybody who believes in the same things that I believe in but I will not talk to anybody who doesn't believe in the things that I believe.

WATTERS: And it doesn't make sense, because today she gave a fiery speech and she said we need all of us to listen.


WATTERS: And to stop speaking so much and to hear other people, yet, she goes on and she says I only want to listen to the people that I agree with. It just doesn't look good for her. I don't know if she's put a lot of thought into some of these interviews.

But I love what you did for the country. I think she's a great athlete. I just wish she would act a little bit more patriotic on the field and off the field.

MACCALLUM: It may be that all of the other women on the team feel the same way that she does. It may very well be that about going to the White House, but it could also be possible that one or two of them harbors an interest in doing that and would never dare step on her message.

WATTERS: She seems like she runs the locker room.

MACCALLUM: I think you're right about that.

WATTERS: Right? And you don't cross her. She's a very powerful person. I would imagine there's I think at least one or two people that won that want to just be at the White House no matter whose president.

I mean, when Obama was president, if he invited me to go, I'd go. And you know, I'd eat whatever he had, I'd have a great time, let's take a picture. I wouldn't boycott it and make it all about my personal political crusade.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Here she is, you know, saying that she thinks everybody agrees with her. Watch.


RAPINOE: Every teammate that I've talked to about it would not go. I don't think anyone on the team has any interest in lending the platform that we worked so hard to build and the things that we fight for in the way that we live our life, I don't think that we want that to be co-opted or corrupted by this administration.


MACCALLUM: You think she's going to run for office?

WATTERS: I think the media wants her to, don't they? I mean, with the crop of candidates they have out now, she could do better than Bill.

MACCALLUM: Absolutely. Everybody to fall. Jesse, thank you.

WATTERS: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Don't go anywhere, we have just received the first message from our friend and colleague Ed Henry, who underwent major surgery to help his sister and I'm going to read it to you just to us when we come back.


MACCALLUM: As promised, an update on our colleague and friend Ed Henry who is recovering tonight after a successful surgery to donate a portion of his liver to his friend.

He just sent us this message, quote, "The doctors tell me that my old liver is functionally normally and my sister's new liver started working as soon as it was put in. Nothing short of a miracle. We have been lifted up by so many prayers today. I got out of bed, sat in a chair and then actually walked to my sister's room so that we could have a toast - apple juice."

Well done. Ed, we are thinking of you and praying for you both, and we're so glad you're doing well. That is “The Story” on this Wednesday night. We'll see you back here tomorrow at seven. Our friend, Tucker Carlson is ready to go.

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.