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


WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I am on a -- political campaign is a big deal.

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN, D-N.H.: You're not suggesting though that spying occurred.

BARR: I think there is a spying did occur. Yes, I think spying did occur.

SHAHEEN: Wow. Let me --

BARR: But the question is: whether it was predicated. I think there was probably a failure among a group of leaders there at the upper echelon.


MARTH MACCALLUM, HOST: So, there's a lot there. That was kind of a mic drop moment of the day today on Capitol Hill as the Attorney General leaned in on the narrative that he began that set some people's hair on fire with his original letter that stated that after two years of being told the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, that it had not actually happened.

And now, as Barr says, it is worth finding out if all of this was set in motion by the "upper echelons" that he referred to today in the Intel agencies. The reaction today was fierce and it went something like this.


LIZ HOLTZMAN, FORMER CONGRESSMAN OF NEW YORK: Look, he's a Republican hatchet man.

JOHN KING, CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, CNN: When the Attorney General the United States says spying, on number one he's channeling his boss, the president.

JENNIFER RUBIN, JOURNALIST, THE WASHINGTON POST: And another telltale sign of dictators as they corrupt the people around them. So that people like Bill Barr who had a reputation coming in, that's kind of a lawyer's lawyer, is now in the position of really shading and pandering.


MACCALLUM: And the reaction on Capitol Hill was equally alarmed.


REP. STENY HOYER, D-MD: I believe the Attorney General of the United States of America believes he needs to protect the president of the United States.

REP. JERROLD NADLER, D-N.Y.: It's Republican conspiracy theory nonsense.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Is Attorney General of the United States of America not the Attorney General of Donald Trump.


MACCALLUM: Here now, Juan Williams, Fox News political analyst, and co- host of "THE FIVE". Juan, good to have you here tonight.


MACCALLUM: You know, did they overreact?

WILLIAMS: No. I think, in fact, if -- what Bill Barr said is to take -- is taken at face value. He is suggesting that an American political campaign was subjected to unfair tactics by either the FBI, the intelligence community. Let me just say quickly, he did try to walk back some of this. He said, it's not talking about the FBI, but the intelligence community more generally. And that he's really interested in the predicate. You said, he's talking about the elite.


MACCALLUM: He be -- he can separate those two things, Juan. He said very clearly. And this is someone who worked as an analyst for the CIA. So, he understands what it means when you say spy, it means gathering intelligence.

WILLIAMS: Well, later he said --


MACCALLUM: And that's exactly what he referred to. He wants to know --

WILLIAMS: No, later he said, it wasn't a pejorative spy. I don't know exactly. I'm trying to help him.

MACCALLUM: Right. He is saying that they were gathering intelligence and he needs to find out whether or not they had a predicate, a reason to do that. Did they have a good reason to tap in to Carter Page?


WILLIAMS: Well, they had a great reason. Of course.

MACCALLUM: And do they have a good reason to send, potentially, Stefan Halper in to talk with George -- to Papadopoulos. And how did all of those wheels start turning? That's the question that he wants to answer.

WILLIAMS: Well, obviously, they had a terrific reason which was that everybody agrees that Russia was interfering the 2016 election. And when the intelligence agencies and the FBI became aware of this, in part through Papadopoulos, they then tried to find out exactly what the Russians were up to? What are they doing interfering?


MACCALLUM: Which if as you say, makes perfect sense. I think the thing that is surprising here today in some regard. And I want to get to something that you raised which Lindsey Graham also raised today in just a second.

What I'm trying to figure out is why -- is how Bill Barr went so quickly from being someone that was sort of perceived on both sides as a straight shooter, a lawyer's lawyer, as you heard from Jennifer Rubin there who now says that he is a corrupt -- it has been corrupted by someone who wants to be a dictator.

Now, what would Bill Barr's motivation be exactly? He's done this job before, he -- you know, took it on basically. He's -- you know, and probably not going to go from here to running for office or any other politically. What do you think his motivation would be to sort of throw his reputation out the window?

WILLIAMS: President Trump has said that he was subjected to a witch hunt and an unfair witch hunt. In fact, in the recent days, he said it was an attempted coup, Martha. And I think, Bill Barr is playing to Donald Trump. He is satisfying the Trump argument and this could be part of what's coming in terms of the Mueller report release. And it could be simply the spin here which is ignore the Mueller report. This is all trash and it was caused by people who were unfairly and for political reasons, going after Donald Trump.

MACCALLUM: Right. I -- you know, all I'm saying is that, at this point, I think it's a little early to say that Bill Barr is corrupted. I mean, you know, this is a short time ago, this is a person who when he was brought in for his confirmation hearing got a lot of kudos from both sides. I know there were some questions that raise about an editorial that he wrote which were -- which were put out there.


MACCALLUM: But -- you know, it's -- and the three Democrats voted for him, which was basically unheard of in the current environment.

WILLIAMS: Correct.

MACCALLUM: Anyway, you know, I just think that maybe we need to see a little bit more. Maybe we needs to see if he's actually right about what the Mueller report says. And whether or not it backs up when he says. But another question was raised by Lindsey Graham that I want to get your thoughts on: is why -- if they started a counterintelligence investigation, which we know was started by FBI agent Peter Strzok in July of 2016, around the same time that the dossier showed up at the FBI.

Why would they not have come to the Trump campaign and said, "We got a problem here, Mr. Trump, and we'd like to let you know what we think might be going on because we want to stop it.

WILLIAMS: Well, we didn't -- that the American people, but also the FBI and the intelligence agencies did not know to what degree the Trump campaign had been penetrated by the Russians. So, it was an open question. So, you can't come and say, "Oh, Mr. Trump." They wanted to try to help arguably Mr. Trump by finding out what they could prove before they went to him and said, "Hey, we've got a problem." You can't just go stirring up suspicions without some foundation.

MACCALLUM: You know, and Dianne Feinstein had someone working in her office who was believed to be a Chinese spy, so they went to her right away.


WILLIAMS: Correct. No, no, no, they knew. They have --

MACCALLUM: And say, "We have problem here." You know, you might want to know that Stefan Halper is been reaching out to your folks, and we're a little bit -- but Stefan Halper also has connections to the FBI. So, you know, it raises so many questions that I think still need to be answered.

WILLIAMS: I don't -- well, look, I think Senate Intelligence, House Intelligence both had been briefed on this point. And today, I think part of a blowback that you saw, Martha, was people saying, "We were thoroughly briefed, and everybody: Republicans and Democrats agreed there was no spying. So, we don't know what Bill Barr is talking about, what he's doing, other than trying to pander --


MACCALLUM: Yes. (INAUDIBLE) I spoke to some people about this on the Hill today. You know, the, who would say that that's absolutely not the case. That they never got the documents from the DOJ (INAUDIBLE).


WILLIAMS: I'm just telling you, that's what they feel that we heard today that from Senate --


MACCALLUM: That is what they think that, that Nadler would definitely agree with.

WILLIAMS: Not, not Nadler. But we heard that from Senator Warner and Senate Intelligence, and we heard that again from Nadler and others.

MACCALLUM: Well, no doubt.

WILLIAMS: They're having briefings on this and he has stirred the pot in such a way that it looks very political for Bill Barr.

MACCALLUM: Right. We will -- we will see as it all plays out. Juan, thank you.

WILLIAMS: You're very welcome.

MACALLUM: Thank you very much for being here tonight. Here now, Bill Bennett, Fox News contributor and host of the Bill Bennett podcast. Bill, good to see you tonight.

You think that what happened today in that room was really a game changer in this whole story.

BILL BENNETT, CONTRIBUTOR: It could be -- very well could be politically, the political impact. Now, Bill Barr wasn't speaking as a political figure, he's speaking as attorney general. But the reason you describe the reaction as fierce, Martha, the reason that heads were knocked back as one put it was because the wheel was turning.

You know, for two years, Donald Trump and his reputation and taken a beating. Bang, bang, bang, punch after punch. Today, Bill Barr, turned the wheel and said there was spying going on. And it wasn't by the Trump administration it was maybe by the Obama administration, or the Obama FBI.

But certainly, there are facts there, we know that Carter Page was wiretap by the FBI. We know that Steven Halper -- Stefan Halper went to London to talk to Papadopoulos. So we know this took place.


BENNETT: Why? That's what Bill Barr is going to find out. But yes, it could be a game-changer because people have been watching and seeing the way the tide has been going. And today, Bill Barr might have turned it.

You know, you're a mom, a football mom. You know, Notre Dame Football mom.


BENNETT: Your on offense, you're on defense. Today, today, may signal the day that the Trump administration went on offense and not the two years of defense, they've had to play.

MACCALLUM: Yes. What does you think about the -- you know, sort of all- out blowback on the character of Bill Barr that you heard earlier from some of the folks on the Hill today?

BENNETT: Yes. Yes, well, Juan, Juan cited as his witnesses -- you know, Jerry Nadler, and the -- and the -- and Senator Warner. It's not exactly unanimous across the board America. They're all -- they're all Democrats.


MACCALLUM: He -- to said, Senator Warner --

BENNETT: He did not answer your question.


BENNETT: But he did not answer your question. Why would Bill Barr, sully a lifelong reputation? Perhaps, he didn't sully it, perhaps, he was telling the truth as the Attorney General, and this bear is looking into.

Look, we have all known that there were these things going on. We all know that there was a surveillance going on. We know about Strzok and Page, and all that. What he is saying is based on what he has seen. And he's not done yet that there was spying going on.

Now, he was accused, I noticed right away. Well, how can he say that without saying, why? He said, he will say, why, at a future time once the inquiry is concluded. The most amazing thing to me --


MACCALLUM: And I think -- Go ahead.

BENNETT: Go ahead.

Well, the most amazing thing to me was the run of Democrats I was watching Fox all afternoon, saying, "How can he say that without evidence? What have we been hearing for two years about Donald Trump? But collusion, collusion, collusion, turned out not to be evidence.

Bill Barr says he has evidence, and you will see it.


MACCALLUM: Agree. And they have all -- yes, exactly. That that's been the thing that I've just been sort of wanting some more caution and slowdown on this as we go through because we -- you know they -- people say they really want to see the report. We all really want to see the report.

So, now, you know --


MACCALLUM: Everybody who was clamoring to see the report, now sort of -- is suggesting that -- you know, that he's not telling the truth about what's in the report. Let's see -- let's take a look at it. Let's see what comes out and let's take it from there as this whole thing moves forward.

Everybody seems to be wanting to jump the gun very early here. And I think that it is a big question about why he would -- why he would jeopardize his reputation which he's built over all these years if he didn't feel like he was facing his statements on something substantial. So, we shall see.

BENNETT: We also have another reputation, which is Mr. Horowitz, who were the Inspector General at justice. And he will give his report in May -- in May or June.


BENNETT: But the facts come out. Let the facts come out.

MACCALLUM: Bill Bennett, always good to see you, sir. Thank you very much.

BENNETT: Good to be back, Martha. Thank you.

MACCALLUM: You bet. Good to have you. So, here now, Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano. Good to see you, Judge. Thanks for being here tonight.


MACCALLUM: What's your take on all of this?

NAPOLITANO: I think he knew what he was talking about when he said spying. It's an incendiary word, but he wanted that word out there. It depends on who's doing the spying. If it's good guys, it's lawful surveillance. If it's bad guys, its spying. Was it the FBI? Was it the intelligence community? Was it a foreign intelligence community?

I don't think if it was a foreign intelligence community or domestic, we'll ever know about it. That stuff is always kept below the radar. But if it was the FBI and it appears it was; if it was pursuant to a FISA warrant, and it appears it was, then it was lawful.

Even if the material given to the FISA Court was garbage, that's on the judges --

MACCALLUM: That's a good point.

NAPOLITANO: That's on the judge's shoulders for accepting this garbage.


MACCALLUM: Right. And as you have said here many times, they sign off on them constantly, easily, and almost 100 percent of the time.

NAPOLITANO: Correct. And I have also said, I will say it again that the FBI has been seduced into the ease with which they can get a FISA warrant, and they often begin criminal cases investigations under the guise of a national security. Martha.

MACCALLUM: It's a great point and it may force a re-evaluation of that system.


NAPOLITANO: Why, do I hope so?

MACCALLUM: And why these -- why these judges seem to be so quick to hand over the ability to listen in on an Americans communications whenever the FBI gives them a file that says that that's what -- that's what they need to do?

I want to get your thoughts on something else though that was controversial today. That Barr said with regard to his decision to determine in his letter that there had not been obstruction or it didn't rise to the level of criminal obstruction. And what -- watch this exchange at home, everybody.


SEN. PATRICK LEAHY, D-VT: Did you have any conversation with the special counsel about why he did not reach a conclusion, one way or the other on obstruction?

BARR: Yes, I did.

LEAHY: Did he express any expectation or interest in leaving the obstruction decision to Congress?

BARR: He didn't say that to me, no.

LEAHY: He said the obstruction decision should be up to you?

BARR: He didn't say that, either.


NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, the Bob Mueller is going to have those questions put to him by Senator Leahy at some point.


NAPOLITANO: Here is what he meant when he said leave the obstruction decision up to Congress. In the articles of impeachment against President Nixon, and in the articles of impeachment against President Clinton, obstruction of justice was deemed by the House Judiciary Committee to be an impeachable offense. That's where he's going. He's a lawyer and he knows what door he is knocking on.

I don't know how this is going to end obviously. There must have been some evidence or the belief on the part of some of Bob Mueller's team, of evidence of obstruction. But the Attorney General, said either not enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, or not the type of obstruction that is criminal.

MACCALLUM: Right. It's my understanding that he may have just been referring to what he saw as DOJ procedure there. That because there was no finding in the Mueller report on obstruction, it then falls to the Department of Justice to determine based on the evidence that they have before them whether or not there was, and that may be why he says, well, no, he didn't tell him what to do because it's obvious what you do.


NAPOLITANO: I hope. I hope we see enough of the Mueller report that you and I can come and analyze, and come to an answer. And I don't know if we're going to.

Today, he hinted that he might show some of the redacted portions to Senators and members of the House, or on the intelligence committees who are allowed to see redacted materials in a secret environment.


NAPOLITANO: But will they keep what they see to themselves?

MACCALLUM: Of course they won't. Of course, they won't. Thank you, judge.

NAPOLITANO: You're welcome.

MACCALLUM: (INAUDIBLE). All right, Judge Napolitano, good to see you tonight. Coming up next, breaking news on the President's tax return and as climate change behind the rush at our southern border. The woman on the right side of your screen says yes. She said, this is what people don't get about what's going on at the southern border and she has the video to explain it all.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The rich getting richer by wrecking the climate and abusing workers. As the saying goes, the enemy does not arrive by boat, he arrives by limousine.



MACCALLUM: This just coming in. Moments ago, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin has now officially rejected the deadline that was imposed by House Democrats asking the President to turn over his tax returns through the Treasury Department. Mnuchin wrote in a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal "the legal implications of this request could affect protections for all Americans against politically motivated disclosures of tax information regardless of which party is in power."

He goes on to say that he will be consulting with the Department of Justice to ensure the response is consistent with the law and the Constitution and will continue to review that request.

So Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez says that if you're trying to figure out the reasons behind the rush at our southern border, you need to understand this. She tweets, the far-right loves to drum up fear and resistance to immigrants. But have you ever noticed that they never talk about what's causing people to flee their homes in the first place? Perhaps that's because they'd be forced to confront one major factor fueling global migration, climate change with a video to -- a link to this video. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: From wildfires in Alberta, to hurricanes in Puerto Rico, climate change is one of the reasons many of us are forced to leave our homes in search of a safer place to live. We keep hearing that migration is a crisis and it is for the people affected. But did you ever notice that the same leaders denying climate change are the ones drumming up fear and hatred against migrants, hatred with horrific consequences?

We know their argument aligns in the real world. Immigration builds our economies. Wealthy countries are already facing age in populations and seriously taking on climate change will create millions more jobs than there are workers to fill them. But it's not about the truth. These leaders are stoking fear to divide the progressive majority so they can take power and protect the status quo.

The rich are getting richer by wrecking the climate and abusing workers. As the saying goes the enemy does not arrive by boat, he arrives by limousine.


MACCALLUM: Joining me now Jason Chaffetz former House Oversight Committee Chairman and Fox News Contributor and Richard Goodstein a former adviser to both Bill and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaigns.

Jason, you are first up on this. So what did you think about -- does that all make sense to you now? Do you understand how that all works, how that all gets pulled together?

JASON CHAFFETZ, CONTRIBUTOR: That is a special kind of crazy when you can draw climate change. And I love that she highlighted Alberta because I can tell you what, there's not a surge of caravans coming from Alberta across our border, they're coming from Central and South America.

And I got to tell you, we have to deal with this responsibly but the misinformation -- there are there about a dozen things in that video that are just fundamentally totally wrong. It's the kind of thing you feed a cult or something because it's just stunning how stupid that -- those statements are.

MACCALLUM: Richard, what did you think of it?

RICHARD GOODSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: You know, AOC has a way of overstating things but I think in this case there's actually a lot of truth to what she's -- the underlying points that she's trying to make. Look, first of all the public in the United States believes that climate change is a pressing problem, the President doesn't but most people do.

What's happened in El Salvador and Honduras and in Guatemala, there's been a drought so there's been no harvest for the past year so the farmers have gone to cities, they're dealing with criminal gangs, and guess what they say, we're out of here. We're heading north.

Is the United States the place that they need to go to kind of resolve their problems? No, or at least that's debatable. But it's not a joke that because of there being a drought and no harvest that these people are fleeing their country. And that's happened in Syria, it's happening all over the place.

MACCALLUM: When you go through the reasons that people state you know in so much of the reporting when you go back and look at the interviews with people who are in these caravans, they talk about corruption, they talk about poverty, they talk about extreme violence, and to sort of skip over the corruption that exists in the governments of these countries is I think to mislead people.

And she talks about how you know she sees the other side as stoking people's fears. Jason, isn't this also you know stoking people's fears to some extent? Is she guilty of the same thing?

CHAFFETZ: No, I think she is. Look, it is -- the word has gotten out that it is easy to get into the United States of America. There's a way to manipulate the system. It's almost impossible to get deported. Just last month there were more than 100,000 people who tried to cross our southern border that we either repelled or apprehended and the numbers are just staggering. But it's not because there was a drought.

I understand that people are suffering and it's terrible to live down there. No doubt the United States of America is the greatest country on the face of the planet but you -- the messaging that the Democrats are putting out there is take this horrific trek, put your life at risk is the wrong message.

MACCALLUM: Well, there's also a tag line in there that basically says because you've ignored climate change, you have to pay the debt of allowing everyone into your country. That's one of the arguments that's made. You can take a look at it at leap -- and you know, see what you think of the argument.

Another big development this week, Richard, is the shake-up that happened at Homeland Security. And staying with AOC as she's known for a moment here, this is something that she tweeted about that. She said in stealing thousands of children deporting their parents and refusing to provide info for reunification, Secretary Nielsen oversaw one of the largest human scale -- human rights violations in recent history. Awarding her a lucrative deal or prestigious post is to delegitimize and celebrate that abuse. And she was retweeting something from someone else with that. There's there seems to be a social media campaign to make sure that Kirstjen Nielsen never gets a job again. Do you think that's fair?

GOODSTEIN: It's hard to say what the appropriate kind of after government experience is for somebody who's done something that a lot of people think is heinous, you know. And as heinous as the president Trump saying this was Obama policies. That's a fiction. It's kind of got you know, Pinocchio's to the nth degree because what Kirstjen Nielsen did, I think at the instigation of President Trump, her boss was thinking that if they divided children from parents, some of these parents will never see their children again, hundreds if not thousands and at a minimum will take years.

CHAFFETZ No, no, no.

GOODSTEIN: No, no, no. I think even the federal government said on the record in court this week it's going to take years -- Jason, the federal government admitted it will take up to two years for many cases, right?

MACCALLUM: Hundreds and thousands, do you -- can you document that number?

GOODSTEIN: Hundreds or thousands. I'm just saying, it's a big number. And to basically separate these kids from their parents, I think there must be another way to it.

MACCALLUM: Jason, I think it's pretty clear that that was -- that was a move that backfired in a big way for the administration. You know, it appears that it was an effort to discourage people from coming. That's not what happened, and then these families did get separated. But just with regard to you know -- to you know, speaking of decency. Is that a decent thing to try to avoid -- you know, to try to prevent somebody from getting hired anywhere based on social media which we all know now is really powerful?

CHAFFETZ: No, it's fundamentally wrong. Kirstjen Nielsen I think provided a service. I think she was a patriot. I think she worked hard. I think she was trying to do the very best job she could. But to continue to go after her or anybody in any administration after the fact and try to harm their livelihood and their ability to pay for their family and their future, that's just wrong.

We got to be encouraging people to engage in public service. But I got to tell you, for the Democrats and the left, to ignore the human trafficking, the rapes the pillage, the other things that are going on --

GOODSTEIN: Nobody is ignoring that.

CHAFFETZ: -- oftentimes these kids have to be separated because you don't know if they're their parents. And there is a responsibility by a responsible government to verify and vet these people because the human trafficking toll is huge and it's ignored by the left and AOC and other people like you.

MACCALLUM: We got to leave it there, guys. Richard Goodstein, thank you very much. Jason Chaffetz, thank you both for being here tonight. So this question coming up. Was another cold murder case just cracked by DNA, who killed these two women, next.


MACCALLUM: Tonight, a 80-year-old man in custody. A New York City man he's suspected in the brutal murders of two teenage girls from Pittsburgh who were found dead while they were vacationing together in Virginia Beach.

Trace Gallagher in our West Coast newsroom with what may have cracked this case finally. Hi, Trace.


In the summer of '73, the 19-year-old victims Janice Pietropola and her best friend Lynn Seethaler, rented a cottage just a few blocks from Virginia Beach. On the day they were supposed to go back home to Pittsburgh the women missed their checkout time and an employee peeked inside the cottage and found their bodies.

Pietropola had been raped, strangled, and shot three times in the head. Seethaler had been strangled, slashed with a bottle and shot twice. Police believe the killer climbed through their window before dawn and attacked.

Pat Trainor lived in Pittsburgh across the street from the Seethaler family. Watch.


PAT TRAINOR, FORMER SEETHALER NEIGHBOR: I remember what happened. They came over to tell us about it, you know, I was shocked. They went away for the weekend, the two girls from what I hear they were supposed to come home that day.


GALLAGHER: It remains unclear if the killer knew the victims or if the attack was random. But Virginia Beach police thought it was the work of a serial killer. And over the next 12 years, eight other women, all white, all attractive all between 18 and 25 were murdered in the same area.

DNA was recovered from the original murder site and at least two others. Then last year the Virginia Beach police cold case unit got a strong lead. And with the help of the FBI, naval investigators and New York police the evidence began to mount.

And now our corporate cousin the New York Post is reporting that police have used advanced DNA technology to link 80-year-old Ernest Broadnax to the murders of the two 19-year-olds. Broadnax who lives in Queens reportedly also made admissions that connected him to the crime.

In 1990, Broadnax was convicted for burglary and spent two years in an upstate New York prison. No word if he might also be connected to other killings in Virginia Beach. So far, he has been charged with two counts of murder, one count of rape. Martha?

MACCALLUM: What a story. Trace, thank you very much.

Coming up next, it's the number one cancer killer in America. And chances are you would never know you had it.


MACCALLUM: They say life can change in an instant. And for my next guest it did. A vibrant healthy middle-aged woman who ran half marathon in her spare time went to the doctor because she had hurt her shoulder picking up bags of potting soil when she was gardening.

And she walked out of that office with a diagnosis of stage four lung cancer. Her life was turned upside down. Now facing the number one cause of cancer deaths in America, deadlier than colon, breast, and prostate cancer combined.

Her now lung force hero and patient Christine Manniel, and Deb Brown, chief mission officer of the American Lung Association who met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill today to advocate for change.

Great to have both of you with us today. Christine, you know, take us back to that moment and how shocked you were. What do you want people to understand about that?

CHRISTINE MANNIEL, LUNG FORCE HERO: You know, until this day I'm still numb about it. I had no symptoms at all. I mean, I hurt myself. Thought it was just a regular pain. I feel -- I just want to let everyone know, if you feel something, go get it looked at. You just never know. It can happen to anybody. If you have lungs, you are at high risk because it can happen to you.

MACCALLUM: Absolutely. And you know, when you look back and you -- I'm sure your reaction was, you know, I don't think you were not a smoker, right? So, you are thinking don't people who smoke get lung cancer?

MANNIEL: It could be anybody. It could be anybody. And you know, I feel like it doesn't matter if a person smoked or doesn't smoke, you can get it from radon, you can get it from the environment in the air. Everyone can get it if they have lungs. It's hard. It's hard.

MACCALLUM: How are you doing, how are you doing now?

MANNIEL: In October, I had my upper left lobe removed. I did a couple of cycles of chemo. I had 35 treatments of radiation. Right now, I'm feeling good. I'm feeling good right now. It's a different -- it's a different normal for me.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I'm sure it is. And you are very brave.

MANNIEL: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: And I think it's so important to talk about it, because it is - - you know, we do hear a lot about breast cancer and prostate cancer but not a enough about lung cancer. So, Deb, talk to us about, you know, what people need to know? I mean, are there signs that people can look for? Because it is so -- it's so invisible.

DEB BROWN, CHIEF MISSION OFFICER, AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION: Well, I think the most important thing is, what Christine said is anyone who has lungs can get lung cancer. And so, we were having 50 lung force heroes such as Christine rally on Capitol Hill today to educate Congress about this hidden killer lung cancer.

And they have three -- or two asks today. The first was to increase lung cancer research funding so that we can have better early diagnosis. And better treatments and better most cures for lung cancer.

The second was we wanted to make sure people like Christine and other lung cancer patients who have pre-existing conditions are protected so that they can have quality, affordable healthcare. And so, it's really important for everyone to know that anyone can get lung cancer.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Well, thank you for bringing attention to it and thank you for your strength, Christine, in speaking out. Hopefully you can save lives by bringing more attention to all of this. Christine and Deb, thank you very much. I wish you well.

MANNIEL: Thank you.

BROWN: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: I wish you continued good health. Take care.

MANNIEL: Thank you.

BROWN: Thanks.

MACCALLUM: Coming up next.


JASON MOMOA, ACTOR: I freaked out because it was beautiful. I told Gene it would be pretty bad to make a suit like that.


MACCALLUM: Scrunchies for men and Jesse Watters. How could you not stick around for that?



SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS.: And year by year, bit by bit, more of the wealth and opportunity went to the people at the very top.

Let's just admit it, when you have got a government that works for the rich, and it's not working nearly as well for anyone else, that's corruption.

How we make this country work better not just for a thin slice at the top, how we make it work for everyone.


MACCALLUM: That of course is 2020 Democratic hopeful Elizabeth Warren, she has long railed against income inequality. Often touting the wealth tax that she says she would impose 70 percent wealth tax; I believe and some have talked as high as 90 percent if she becomes president.

Today we did get a glimpse into her finances. Tax returns showing that her family income exceeds $900,000, she and her husband.

Here now for Wednesdays with Watters, Jesse Watters, co-host of The Five and host of Watters World. So, I mean, she is wealthy woman.

JESSE WATTERS, HOST: Yes. Trump economy is hot. She made almost a million dollars last year. It's pretty good. Some of that income was from Powwow Chow, the Cherokee Indian cookbook that she allegedly features --


MACCALLUM: From her book sales.

WATTERS: -- of the recipes --

MACCALLUM: Is it called that?

WATTERS: Yes, Powwow chow recipes by a Native American. It's actually there. And that's why people accuse her of, you know, capitalizing on her fake ancestry but she is worth between three and $10 million. And the problem is she has been demonizing capitalism and financial success for all this success for years. So, she looks like a total hypocrite.

This is what I'd like to call a self-inflicted class warfare wound and Democrats do. Because you know, you rail against successful people but they are very successful.

MACCALLUM: Yes, I don't know. But she never said, you know, so because I think that -- I would imagine she would say that she would be happy to pay 70 percent of that income to taxes.

WATTERS: Well there is a thing in Massachusetts, isn't there a little box.

MACCALLUM: She should voluntarily give it away.

WATTERS: Yes. There's a box that you can check off --


WATTERS: -- so can give more of your money to the IRS.

MACCALLUM: If you feel like you want to give more.

WATTERS: I don't believe she checked that box.

MACCALLUM: She also gave about, and you know, this is one of the things when you get a look at people's taxes you get to see also how much they gave to charity. She gave about 7 percent --


WATTERS: It's pretty good.

MACCALLUM: -- of her income to charity.

WATTERS: More than I gave.


WATTERS: Yes. So, I should not be talking.

MACCALLUM: Can we look at your tax returns on Wednesday with Watters?

WATTERS: Absolutely. No. They're under audit.

MACCALLUM: Of course, they're under audit.

WATTERS: They're under audit.

MACCALLUM: They're under audit.

WATTERS: No one would do that.

MACCALLUM: Bernie also turns out to have done fairly well. Here is what he had to say about -- it's like a confession. He said "I wrote a bestselling book. If you write a bestselling book, you can be a millionaire, too." Do you like my Bernie imitation?

WATTERS: That's pretty good. Almost nailed it. And you look a lot like Bernie. I just can't --


MACCALLUM: We do kind of lookalike, I think on Monday night in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania people are going to confuse us.

WATTERS: Well, so ask him about that on Monday. You should say Bernie, you know, you are making millions of dollars, you have a few homes. Why does it seem like you feel ashamed of your wealth? Because they do. They feel ashamed.

MACCALLUM: It's a pretty good advertisement for capitalism and it sounds like is he embracing the American dream.


MACCALLUM: Saying if you write a book --


MACCALLUM: -- you can also be a millionaire.

WATTERS: Anybody. Anybody, Martha. I can write a book now since anybody can do it.

MACCALLUM: You should write a book. Have you written a book? It must that you and I must the only people here that haven't written a book.


WATTERS: But the only one at Fox News --

MACCALLUM: I am writing a book --

WATTERS: That's true.

MACCALLUM: -- but it's going to take 10 years for it to come out. All right. So, there's another story came out today and the president is getting some heat for it. He went to see Mt. Vernon. And this is year ago. (Inaudible) don't get about this.

So, this happened a year ago when the Macrons were visiting, Mr. And Mrs. Macron, the leader of France. And the guy who gave them the tour, the historian for some reason a year later decided to spill the beans about what he says President Trump said that day --


MACCALLUM: -- when he was there. This is what he says the president said. He said if he -- about George Washington. You know, because it's his place.


MACCALLUM: "If he was smart, he would have put his name on it. You got to put your name on stuff or no one remembers you" to which the historian pointed out that the entire city of Washington, D.C. is named after George Washington, of course, as our probably -- there is probably a middle school or high school in --


MACCALLUM: -- almost every town in America named after him. So, we decided to show you what Mt. Vernon would look like if he had taken President Trump's.

WATTERS: Boom. In gold.

MACCALLUM: The Washington, the Washington hotel.

WATTERS: There it is. Look, you got to name everything after yourself. He knows he is the real estate tycoon. I don't know if this is fake news or not. But there is a whiff of truth in some of these tales. One of my -- some of the favorite parts of the story was he was walking along and inspecting the floor boards and noticed that they were uneven --


MACCALLUM: He does not like that kind of stuff.

WATTERS: -- then he perked up when he found out how rich George Washington used to be because he was a big real estate tycoon. And then at one point the tour guide told the president that Washington had died in that bed and the president went over, grabbed the side of the head board shook it and said seems like a good bed to die in.

MACCALLUM: I can kind of hear him say it.

WATTERS: I can kind of see it, too.

MACCALLUM: You know, yes, well, the historian giving him a hard time for not really being up on his history. And I'm just glad that President Trump is not in charge the historical commission because he probably would have ripped out all the floors and redone them.


WATTERS: Yes. It's got to be marble.

MACCALLUM: Which is really not much you want to do in that place. I just want to show this video.


MACCALLUM: Because who doesn't want to see this video of Jason Momoa getting ready for the Oscars.



WATTERS: Let's see it. It's coming, there he is.


MOMOA: One of our hairstylists at work on my Apple show she gave it to me and I freaked out because it was beautiful. I told Gene it would be pretty bad to make a suit like that. This is pretty on point.


MACCALLUM: Sorry. Was he talking about something?

WATTERS: Yes. Martha, I know why you played this, you wanted to see him topless.

MACCALLUM: He is very handsome.


MACCALLUM: He's a handsome young man.

WATTERS: He is very handsome.

MACCALLUM: He is married to Lisa Bonet.

WATTERS: From The Cosby Show.

MACCALLUM: From The Cosby Show. He says he watched when he was growing up and was like in love with her. She is just a little older than him. They were really handsome couple.

WATTERS: Married a crush.

MACCALLUM: But a lot of guys wear -- he is wearing a scrunchie --


MACCALLUM: -- in his hair which is in 80s hair thing for those of you who don't know. And a lot of guys are wearing them. Who is going to give him a hard time for wearing a scrunchie?

WATTERS: Right. So, my rule of thumb is, Martha, if you are bigger than me and you can beat me up --


WATTERS: -- I say wear whatever you want. Scrunchie no problem. But if you can't and I can beat you up then I would call you a sissy.

MACCALLUM: So long hair is really in. I guess you didn't get that message.


MACCALLUM: Look at the wall. All these Hollywood guys --


MACCALLUM: -- are all have long hair and probably wearing scrunchies.


WATTERS: Should I grow it now?

MACCALLUM: So, we want you to try this scrunchie on. We brought you two scrunchies to pick from.

WATTERS: You want me to try it on.

MACCALLUM: Jason Momoa picked the one that he likes the best. He loves that one and it was beautiful.

WATTERS: OK. I think I like this one. Hold on, here we go. You really want me to do this?

MACCALLUM: Yes. I don't think your hair --


WATTERS: I don't know if my hair is long enough. I don't know how to do a scrunchie. Hold on.

MACCALLUM: No. All right. That's pretty good.

WATTERS: How about that. I couldn't do the twist. I can only do it on someone else.

MACCALLUM: All right. We got to leave it there.

WATTERS: Thanks for having me on, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Sorry you all had to see that. Don't forget our Fox News town hall with 2020 contender Bernie Sanders. The aforementioned is this Monday night at 6.30. Next Monday night. More of The Story coming up next.


MACCALLUM: So just moments ago, Vice President Mike Pence has now responded to 2020 Democratic hopeful and Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg who said this earlier this week.


MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG, D-IN, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: That's the thing I wish the Mike Pence's of the world would understand. That if you've got a problem with who I am, your problem is not with me. Your quarrel, sir, is with my creator.


MACCALLUM: Here is how the vice president just responded. Watch this.


MICHAEL PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT: He said some things that are critical of my Christian faith and about me personally. And he knows better. He knows me.


MACCALLUM: Also, tonight, the Pentagon identifying three marine reservist who were killed in Afghanistan this week. Forty-three-year-old Staff Sergeant Christopher Slutman of Newark, Delaware, a father of three. He was also a New York City firefighter, awarded a medal for saving a woman's life in 2013.

Thirty-one-year-old Sergeant Benjamin Hines of York, Pennsylvania, a marine since 2006. He'd been deployed overseas multiple times including to Iraq. And 25-year-old Corporal Robert Hendriks of Locust Valley, New York. He joined the Marines right after high school and was set to come home this month. His mother notes that he loved what he did and was more than willing to die for his country.

We thank them for their service. The three were hit with an improvised explosive device while conducting combat operations north of Kabul. That is our “Story” for tonight. Tucker Carlson is up next.

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.