Marc Thiessen says 'Salute to America' critics have 'egg on their face'

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," July 5, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

ED HENRY, HOST: Go, Rutgers, go team USA. Mike, have a good weekend.

Good evening, everybody. I'm Ed Henry, in for Martha MacCallum. And this is “The Story” tonight.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: We had great numbers this morning. I think it was 224,000 jobs. That's were really unexpectedly good. And our country continues to do really well -- really, really well.


HENRY: President Trump already on a roll with an economy that's put him in, at least, a solid position for reelection and that hand piece women strengthened today, by the way, this job numbers. Look at this. Over 220,000 jobs created last month alone that was far beyond all expectations blowing it out.

The current hiring pace along with a record low unemployment rate, more importantly, growing wages for your paycheck. That runs counter that narrative the mainstream media was pushing a couple of weeks ago about the president's internal poll numbers showing he could lose head to head in 2020 to basically every major Democrat in the race.

In reality, the economy is booming for president kicking it into high gear. Some of those top Democrats seem to be struck -- stuck in neutral. Thanks to some glaring flip-flops they've made just in the last 24 hours. They couldn't hunt them in the run-up to 2020. First up, Joe Biden, but to his credit, finally came out of virtual hiding today actually did an interview. Except on the downside, he caused some new problems such as when CNN asked if he thought crossing the border illegally should now be a civil offense instead of a crime.


CHRIS CUOMO, ANCHOR, CNN: Do you believe that should be decriminalized?

JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: No, no, I don't. No, I don't. I think people should have to get in line.


HENRY: Wait, what? How does that square with this moment on the debate stage of Miami about a week ago, when Biden half raised his hand to take the exact opposite position? And then, when asked in real time to clarify. Well, I don't know, you tell me what he said, what he meant, or whether he even clarified.


JOSE DIAZ-BALART, ANCHOR, NBC: I don't know if you raised your hand or were just asking to speak, but would you decriminalize crossing the border without documents?


BIDEN: The first thing -- the first thing I would do is unite families. I'd surge immediately billions of dollars' worth of help to the region immediately.


HENRY: OK, as for the rising Democrat who's challenging Biden's frontrunner status, Senator Kamala Harris, she has gotten in a little hot water too. Doing her own flip-flopping maybe saying never mind about that dramatic debate moment that first staggered Biden and helped to her break and out of the pack.


SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools, and she was bussed to school every day. And that little girl was me.

Do you agree today that you were wrong to oppose bussing in America then?


HARRIS: Do you agree?

BIDEN: I did not oppose bussing in America. What I opposed is bussing ordered by the Department of Education. That's what I opposed.


HENRY: Well, we just learned maybe she didn't really mean it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you support mandated busing?

HARRIS: Bussing is a tool among many that should be considered. When we address the issue, which is a very current issue as well as a past issue of desegregation in America's schools. So, I think of bussing as being in the toolbox of what is available and what can be used for the goal of desegregating America's schools.


HENRY: Wait. So, now she basically agrees with the former vice president. I'm confused. This shift for Harris not playing well within our own party. It comes amid some other not-so-great news that came for her today. The release of her second-quarter fundraising numbers, so what does all this mean for both Harris and Biden and their campaigns dating into 2020?

Joining me live, Richard Fowler, syndicated radio host, Fox News contributor. And Charlie Kirk, founder and president of Turning Point USA. Good evening, gentlemen.



HENRY: Charlie, I want to start with you. What happened to that girl in California with the pigtails?

KIRK: Well, I'm sort of confused too, Ed. I mean, we saw here that Kamala Harris really take kind of amoral high-ground position in the debate where she cross-examined Joe Biden. I thought it was a very good moment for her actually where she was contrasting Joe Biden's 40-plus years in politics and using his own words against him.

But it seems as if now she has the same policy position that he has. And it is a nuanced to position, it's one that the Department of Education shouldn't get involved in bussing. One that is a respectable and understandable position. But now, she actually holds that same position. One that she was trying to make it seem as if he was a villain. Seems to be a trend and a pattern amongst Biden and Kamala Harris that are on either side of every single issue.

HENRY: So, let's get Richard in here. Richard, I'm confused because we all talked about on all sides of this that the vice president, the former vice president looked a little discombobulated in Miami. And as Charlie said, he was on defense.

He had a nuanced position that she now sort of agrees with, and the vice president's office is saying, wait a second, what in the world happened here?

FOWLER: This is what makes for good primaries that is that we have debates about these issues affecting Democratic voters and the people of this country. Now, let's remember when Biden made his decision on busing, this was we were talking about the 60s and the 70s, which is a very different time than today. And where Senator Harris is right, is that it's a tool in our toolkit, but what you hear from parents all across this country. And especially, in urban areas.

They're not asking or crying out for busing or for school choice. They're crying out for smaller class sizes. They're crying out for school nurses.


HENRY: Yes. Hang on a second, though, Richard. I mean, I let you make --

FOWLER: They're crying up (INAUDIBLE). And that's the place of Democrats were going to fight for.

HENRY: But pardon me. I was there in Miami. And I'm sure you saw it. I recall a Senator Harris saying, hang on, sometimes the federal government where is the 70s or now, you've -- get it's a different time, but the point was she said the federal government has to get involved for civil rights and other issues and mandate this federally. And now she's saying maybe not.

FOWLER: Well, the federal government -- Department of Education gets involved in various things because that is their job when it comes civil rights. They are there because for disable students, they're there to make sure that they have a high-quality public education.

They're also there to ensure that women and people of color have a high- quality public education that sort of failed under Betsy DeVos, but that is one of the mandates of the Department of Education when it was created.

HENRY: Right.

FOWLER: And before was even the department.

HENRY: Right.

FOWLER: But the idea that the department came around, its 1867.

HENRY: Sure.

FOWLER: That's why it was there for.

HENRY: But Charlie, and I want to talk about the fundraising numbers as well. We can put those on the screen. She raised about $12 million in the second quarter. That may seem like a lot of money but it's half of what Mayor Pete raised. It's obviously less than what Biden raised, and Bernie Sanders' raised. And meanwhile, as you know, the president, who you support raised over $100 million, he's the incumbent.

But was Harris just raising this to sort of takeout the former vice president without even really realizing where she was on it?

KIRK: It's a great point. And that's how I look at this. Because I think in the debate, she saw an opening and she took it. But if I remember correctly in the debate, she actually started with, I was offended that you praised to segregationist, and she kind of pivoted to bussing all of a sudden. And it kind of -- it really showed that she had that rehearsed. And she had this in her toolkit, to use her own word, as an attack against Biden.

And I think that's a really interesting point that she saw an opening to try to draw some of the money support and some of the enthusiasm away from Joe Biden. But I'm just blown away by Mayor Pete's fundraising numbers.

If you would have told me that he would have had the number one performance in this quarter, I would have been -- that's about when we farfetched me to believe. But for him to raise $24 million in this quarter, very, very impressive. I have to say that also --


KIRK: The President Trump raising $100 million more than even Barack Obama ran -- raised in this quarter --


HENRY: Richard, what about you? The mayor of South Bend doubles what Harris, who's from California, Silicon Valley, and all that raise. Now, I bet it's going to go up now that she did well in that debate. But this second quarter wasn't look so good for her. And meanwhile, Charlie's candidate, the incumbent, raised far, far more.

FOWLER: Well, it's the job -- I mean, that's the power of the incumbency. That everyone, Barack Obama, doing -- he raised those same type of numbers as well when he was running against a large -- Republican field. But what you have is a large Democratic field, and if you look at all the money that Democrats have raised, it does equal the president's raised.

It doesn't shock me that Mayor Pete has raised so much money. But I do still think that his campaign has some issues when it comes to issues of race that he is working on addressing, which some of the stuff starting with South -- in South Bend.

HENRY: Sure.

FOWLER: But, I think it's also very important to realize that we are running strong -- the fact that Kamala Harris were to raise $2 million alone of that $10 million just 24 hours after the debate shows that we have a strong Democratic field.


HENRY: OK, yes. Let me --

FOWLER: And all of our candidates were prepared to take on Donald Trump.

HENRY: I go want to (INAUDIBLE) and put something else on the table. Your party's also talked a lot about Russia, Russia, Russia. And Joe Biden talked about it to CNN. Listen on this bite.


BIDEN: Look at what's happening with Putin. While he -- while Putin is trying to undo our elections, he is undoing elections in Europe. Look what's happening in. Look what's happening in Poland. Look what's happening -- look what's happening. Do you think that would happen on my watch or Barack's watch? You can't answer that, but I promise it wouldn't have, and it didn't.


HENRY: Well, it won't happen on Biden's watch or Barack's watch. Charlie, it did happen when Barack Obama was president, didn't it?

KIRK: Not only that Putin took Crimea under Barack Obama, was a little no response from the Obama administration. Not to mention I remember President Barack Obama whispering to then-prime minister or Foreign Minister Dmitry Medvedev, oh, we'll have more flexibility after the election.

So, there -- the question -- this whole idea that Barack Obama was so strong on Russia, he was the one that pointed to then-candidate Mitt Romney and said, well you think Russia is our number one geopolitical foe, what you get -- you're getting your foreign policy from the 1980s, they want their foreign policy back. Remember that line?

HENRY: Sure.

KIRK: So, this whole revisionist history from Joe Biden that Barack Obama was strong on the Russians, I also questioning what wasn't the Russians they were hacking our elections when Barack Obama was president?

HENRY: Right.

KIRK: And he did little to nothing in response to it.


HENRY: So, Rich, I want to give you a fair crack at that. I don't understand what the vice president is saying. If your party's been saying for two years that Russia interfered, that not that they changed the outcome in election, but they interfered. He say, "It wouldn't happen on my watch." It did happen according to your own party on the Obama-Biden watch, right?

FOWLER: Right. And there's a couple of things that I think history matters here. One, there was a meeting of the Gang of Eight at which point in time Senate's -- the Senate --


HENRY: On the Hill.

FOWLER: The Senate Leader Mitch McConnell indicated that he did not want a statement released about Russian interference. Since that happened, not only has Mueller put out in his report, but the Republican Senate Intelligence Committee, their report has a line that are indicating that the nefarious actors like Russia will continue to engage in our election. Yet, still, this White House has not had one meeting about how they ensure our election and our democracy was.


HENRY: OK, you still not answering. Let me -- I give you one last crack. But all of what you talked about with the Senate Intelligence Committee or whoever investigated, it happened in 2016 when Obama was in office, right?

FOWLER: And right after -- and right after it happened, as you remember, Ed, is that the first thing the president did was he put more sanction on the Russians. Addition to -- addition to that, the president shut down one of their buildings right here in our nation's capital.


HENRY: But it happened on his watch.

FOWLER: -- They expelled -- they expelled (INAUDIBLE)

HENRY: But Richard, it had happened on your watch.

FOWLER: They went go on and on about it doesn't did after it happened.

HENRY: It happened on your watch, right?

FOWLER: And right now, if going to happen again under Donald Trump's watch, then he plans to do nothing about it.

HENRY: All right. Richard Charlie, appreciate you both coming in.

KIRK: Thank you.

FOWLER: It's good to see you, Ed.

HENRY: Who could forget these dire predictions about the president's big 4th of July speech.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It remains unclear as to just how much partisanship the president plans to infuse.

Will he talk about Nike and the Betsy Ross flag? Will he talk about Justin Amash?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some call it a campaign event that politicizes the Armed Forces.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They say this event has already divided the nation.


HENRY: Well, the reviews are in for the president's 4th of July spectacular. And the media isn't just eating lots of hamburgers and hot dogs this holiday, maybe a little bit of crow that's nice.


HENRY: Well, the president ended up choosing patriotism over politics in a big speech celebrating our nation on Independence Day. But you wouldn't have thought it was possible if you listen to the 2020 Democrats out there on the campaign trail:


TRUMP: On this day, 243 years ago, our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to declare independence and defend our God-given rights.

BIDEN: Donald Trump I believe is incapable of celebrating what makes America great because I don't think he gets it.

TRUMP: On this July 4th, we pay special tribute to the military service members who laid down their lives for our nation.

REP. TULSI GABBARD, D-HI, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It's really all about Trump. It's not about our servicemembers, it's not about their sacrifices, it's not about my brothers and sisters who lost their lives.

TRUMP: As long as we stay true to our cause, as long as we remember our great history, as long as we never ever stop fighting for a better future, then there will be nothing that America cannot do.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D-N.Y., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You know, he's having a parade for himself, putting tanks out there for himself.


HENRY: Many in the media also predicting doom and gloom from the president salute to America ceremony before it even happened. Our next guest has a different perspective saying "the President made his critics look small during that salute to America."

Joining me now live Marc Thiessen, Fox News Contributor, of course, co-host of the American Enterprise Institute's new podcast What The Hell Is Going On and maybe I'll start right there, Marc. I'll change it a little bit. What the heck is going on here?

MARC THIESSEN, CONTRIBUTOR: What the heck is going on is there a lot of people with egg on their face today. I mean, look, this -- of all the stupid freak outs that we've had since Donald Trump was elected, this has got to be the stupidest of all time.

I mean, literally, the resistance told us that there though if we elected Donald Trump there'd be tanks on the streets and it was likely it was finally happening. The tanks were arriving. And I'm not kidding. I mean, Laurence Tribe actually tweeted out a picture of the tanks arriving in Washington saying it looks like before Tiananmen Square. It killed 10,000 people in Tiananmen Square.

HENRY: Leaving out -- leaving out that President Eisenhower in his inaugural had tanks, President Kennedy had tanks, rockets as I recall. We've seen pictures now, and historical footage of that. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has been tweeting I think even today, not beforehand now saying that this was an upholstery crowd when you look at the photos, it was a pretty big crowd. I didn't count every single person.

But when Tulsi Gabbard just flat out says -- she was running for president, you see the crowd a little bit in the picture. Tulsi Gabbard says, he won't be honoring the troops. He largely honored the troops throughout the speech.

Look at this. The self-serving politician that he is, Trump has succeeded in making July 4th about himself and in doing so further divided our country. This on a day when our nation's president should be uniting us -- hashtag Independence Day -- when she and other Democratic candidates seem to be dividing everybody.

THIESSEN: Well, I mean, first of all, he's the President of the United States. This is what presidents do on the 4th of July. I mean, this is -- this is another lie they said that he's inserting himself into the 4th of July celebrations. Tons of precedents have done that.

Harry Truman gave a speech on the mall in front of the Washington Monument. You had it Woodrow Wilson, John F. Kennedy, Gerald Ford, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, all gave speeches at Independence Hall. Ronald Reagan gave a speech from an aircraft carrier that they stationed in front of the -- of the Statue of Liberty for a perfect camera shot.

And how much did that cost? I mean, no one complained about that. It's the job of the President to give a speech on the 4th of July.

HENRY: Now, to be fair, the president was not without error and I see a lot of people criticizing that at one point he said something about the Revolutionary Army taken over the airports when apparently he meant the ports because there were not airports back then of course.

He says today it's a teleprompter error but it seems to me -- I was obviously joking about this being a huge error that all of a sudden we got him, we got him. He said airports instead of ports. Is that really what it's come through?

THIESSEN: Yes. And Barack Obama said we had 57 states. I mean, people misspeak, you know. It's not the end of the world. But look, what these people just don't seem to understand when you -- the first rule of holes is when you're in one stop digging right. So they were wrong about this speech.

They said it's going to be a partisan speech and a millions of Americans tuned in and we're wondering what the heck they were talking about. It was a great speech. It was moving to see all these fighter jets flying, the B- 2 bomber flying over the nation -- our nation's capital was amazing.

And these are in the hole and they keep digging and they keep taking shots at him. And Americans look at that they said there's something wrong with these people.

HENRY: Well, to your point, Ari Fleischer tweeted out that maybe they are so blinded by hatred that they're leaving -- they haven't learned from 2016 that there are Americans who love the flag, love the military displays, and they attacked the president and miss out on what real Americans want.

Marc Thiessen, we really appreciate you coming in.

THIESSEN: Always happy to be on.

HENRY: All right, what was the secret Russian submarine doing at the bottom of the ocean? It's a big mystery before it blew up. This story just got even more interesting today. Stay tuned.


HENRY: Breaking tonight. California is still on edge after getting jolted first by the strongest earthquake in 25 years, then by at least 1,200 aftershocks. Now there are questions about whether an even more powerful quake might be on the horizon. Our Chief Correspondent Jonathan Hunt is live in L.A. monitoring the latest. Good evening, Jonathan.

JONATHAN HUNT, CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Ed. earthquake experts say what we've experienced here in Southern California over the last 36 hours doesn't make the big one any more likely, equally it doesn't make it any less likely.

So millions of people remain nervous tonight especially after their rude awakening this morning with a 5.4 aftershock around 4 a.m. local time. That followed yesterday 6.4 magnitude quake about 150 miles northeast of L.A., near the town of Ridgecrest.

It sparked fires, cracked roads, left many stores across the area with a lot of cleaning up to do including the one where Benjamin Reynolds was working.


BENJAMIN REYNOLDS, EXPERIENCED EARTHQUAKE: I just got under that table so I didn't know what could have collapsed on me or anything. I didn't know what was going on. I mean, I've been here for 23 years and never had ever earthquake -- I've never felt that before.


HUNT: And given that this was the strongest quake in two decades, it's left a lot of people wondering what's next.


JED MCLAUGHLIN, CHIEF, RIDGECREST, CALIFORNIA POLICE: It's uneasy because we don't know what's going to happen and we don't know that we can't predict what's going to happen. So it is uneasy.


HUNT: Scientists say there is the possibility of more and bigger quakes to come in the aftermath of this one.


ZACHARY ROSS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, CALTECH: And we can estimate you know, how likely it might be that a given earth way can trigger a larger one. And so we found that as time goes on after a large event that likelihood decreases. So we estimate something like a six percent chance as of now that there could be a larger event that occurs.


HUNT: Now we always talk here in California about the big one but that refers specifically to a quake along the huge San Andreas Fault. This one took place along a different fault line and that's why scientists say it doesn't really affect the likelihood of the big one happening.

But this has reminded us all that it will happen at some point so like a lot of people I'll be checking my earthquake preparedness kit tonight.

HENRY: You better be. And we like to call you the big one, the chief correspondent out there in L.A. Jonathan Hunt, happy Fourth Weekend to you, sir. Meanwhile, the deadly fire onboard a Russian nuclear sub this week raising plenty of questions. Clearly, what the spy sub was doing when the flames broke out.

Several news outlets including The Washington Times now speculating the sub may have been on a secret Russian mission. Looking to tap into or cut underwater fiber-optic or internet cables that span the Atlantic and Arctic ceilings, big deal.

The incident coming amid several major outages this week affecting the likes of Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and yes Verizon. Joining me now live is Florida Congressman Michael Waltz, former counterterrorism advisor to then-Vice President Dick Cheney and a former Green Beret commander. Good evening, congressman.

REP. MICHAEL WALTZ, R-FLA.: Hi, Ed. How are you?

HENRY: I'm doing fantastic but I'm scratching my head wondering what were the Russians really up to here?

WALTZ: Well, you know, just to take a step back for a moment. I think most people think the Internet's in the cloud, it's really under the ocean. There are almost 400 of these cables, they're about the size of a really large garden hose that run several hundred thousand miles and our entire modern economy is dependent on these fiber-optic cables, from banking to insurance, to financial markets, and it's not just communicating it with each other it is how they actually access their data and data centers all over the world.

So both the Russians and the Chinese have made it clear in their national security strategy that they are not going to take the United States on tank to tank or aircraft carrier to aircraft carrier, they are going to attack us asymmetrically.

That's attacking us in space, cyber, undermining our confidence in our elections or in this case and what this sub was doing very likely was tapping into these cables to collect the data, to gather intel, and to put in place the ability to drop portions of the Internet and to -- and to pull the rug out from under our modern economy if we ever have to go to any type of --

HENRY: Well, let's pic that apart. That's big stuff. First of all, when you say, we believe that the Russians may have been trying to suck up some of this data and get information, what kind of intelligence gathering when you're talking about thousands and thousands of lines and cables, it could be a lot of our e-mails, text, or whatever, all kinds of info.

WALTZ: Right. Well, right. So one thing to understand is that you know, artificial intelligence which are these powerful algorithms that can basically at some point in the near future outthink humans, outsmart us and do it you know, faster and quicker, and fuel their militaries, they rely on data.

Data as that fuel. It's the new coal that power -- that power the kind of the A.I. industry particularly on the military side. So that's one piece but the other piece is to be able to attack us or to undermine us economically. So, you can imagine a Russian incursion into Ukraine, into Lithuania, we respond with additional sanctions.


WALTZ: And the Russians then respond by dropping a portion of the European internet or the global banking system I think from my perspective in Congress twofold.


WALTZ: One, this is why the defense budget that we're fighting now with the Democrats is so important. They want to drop the budget. We want to continue to fund the military, including submarines that can track and monitor and take down these Russian submarines.

HENRY: Right.

WALTZ: And two, this is, you know, this is why I think sending a strong signal to the Russians --


WALTZ -- is so important of what we can consider critical infrastructure.


HENRY: So, Congressman, I got 30 seconds.

WALTZ: Our elections.


WALTZ: And our elections and our global internet will be met with force if they go after.

HENRY: So you suggested they could have been sucking of data but the second part, and then the last part of the question I want to ask, how certain does it seem that the Russians may have been trying to attack these lines, bring down an Apple, bring down a Verizon, or at least impacted and hurt our economy?

WALTZ: Well, we know, you know, we know they have the ability and we know they are further developing the capability. They are actually converting old missile submarines into the type of submarines that can get down into the depths that they need. And send out drones to take these cables down.

So, whether that's exactly what they were doing in this case, I cannot get into the intelligence, but we know they have the capability as part of their strategy.


HENRY: I suspect there is --

WALTZ And we have to be prepared to counter it.

HENRY: We need to be prepared. I suspect there is a lot more coming on this. Congressman Michael Waltz, we appreciate you coming in here, sir.

WALTZ: Yes. Thanks, Ed.

HENRY: All right. Next up, a new investigation revealing a stunning conflict of interest inside the Mueller investigation, Key evidence provided by the DNC? You heard that right. Coming up.



ROBERT MUELLER, SPECIAL COUNSEL, RUSSIA PROBE: There were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.


HENRY: Yes. That's what Robert Mueller said, but the question now is, you know, when he said the, quote, "central allegation" of the Mueller report is right there. But tonight, the Real Clear Politics investigation's team seriously questioning that statement by the former special counsel. Writing that those findings are, quote, "undercut by investigator's shortcomings and conflict of interest, specifically the Mueller team relied on a, quote, "private contractor for the Democratic National Committee."

So, what could this mean for Robert Mueller who 12 days from now will appear live before and the American people testifying to explain his report? Here now live, Jon Sale, he is an assistant special prosecutor back from Watergate. Right now, a private counsel down in Miami. Jon, good to have you tonight.


HENRY: Let's start with this Real Clear investigation, what does this tell us that a contractor for the DNC help determine for Robert Mueller who was behind the hacking and all of that?

SALE: Well, I think that's called CrowdStrike. And that was a private vendor subsidized by the DNC. But Ed, the Mueller report is not although in two volumes is not like Moses coming down with the two tablets. It is not sacred. It is not -- it's something that can be challenged. It's a one- sided document like any prosecutor's report.

And this investigation is showing the shortcomings, and I think the Mueller testimony will be an opportunity for the Congress to try to demonstrate the shortcoming and the bias in the report.

I have a prediction. Excuse me. My prediction is they are going to be very frustrated. They are going to find that Mueller is not going to answer questions. He'll probably invoke a privilege that Eric Holder invoked called the deliberate of process privilege.


SALE: And I just don't think we're going to get any answers.

HENRY: Well, in fact, when he had that news conference a couple of months back, Robert Mueller, we played a key clip from there on the way in, he specifically said this is it. This is as far as I am going to go. Was that a signal to those very lawmakers, particularly the Democrats who want to push him, maybe into saying bad things about the president? He's not going to go further than what he actually put into writing.

SALE: It sounds more than a signal, he explicitly said it. However, there is something else that he said which very few people are replaying in clips. He said, even people who he charged who have not pled guilty are presumed innocent. That presumption of innocence should prevent him from talking about any third party because they are not there to respond when their reputations are at stake. And --


HENRY: So, would that include the president?

SALE: -- there is another reason.

HENRY: Get to that reason in a minute.

SALE: Absolutely.

HENRY: But would that include the president? People in his inner circle they're not there at this hearing to defend themselves.

SALE: That's my point. That that's why he should not talk about them. And in addition to that, the shortcoming of his investigations, he's not going to want to talk about publicly.

HENRY: So, let's go back to the crowdsourcing and CrowdStrike. Why in the world would Robert Mueller a special counsel, who as I recall has a special clearance, he can talk to anybody he wanted in the government, outside the government they had all those many hundreds of subpoenas and all the rest, why would he rely on a contractor for the DNC which obviously was also behind the anti-Trump dossier? Why would they be used as a key source here in determining what the Russians do?

SALE: Well, not only did they do the forensics, but they also provided redacted materials which they decided what could be redacted. These are questions that just demonstrate his report has not been challenged. There has not been any cross examination.

The president supplied over a million documents. Let's take Don McGahn. They include certain things, McGahn said, but McGahn was interviewed for 30 hours.

HENRY: Right

SALE: What about all the things that they did not include in the report?

HENRY: Absolutely. Last question then. The Democrats, we know where they are going at this hearing with Mueller that's coming up in a few days. The Republicans, will they finally have a chance to basically cross-examine Mueller?

SALE: They are going to have that chance but I don't think he's going to answer. I just don't think -- it's going to be a big disappointment, but I do think that the big bombshell is not going to come from the Mueller, it's going to come eventually when the attorney general and Durham complete their investigation and find --


HENRY: That's the U.S. attorney from Connecticut they brought in. Yes.

SALE: That's right, who is a total straight shooter, has been appointed by various attorney generals to do investigations. And then we are going to get some answers. It’s not going be a privilege, it's going to be just some straight talk.

HENRY: Well, we've been waiting for accountability on that. We'll see how it plays out in the days ahead. Jon Sale, we appreciate you coming in tonight.

SALE: Thanks for having me.

HENRY: Bye-bye, George Washington. The mural depicting his life is about to get painted over. Cabot Phillips on that next.


HENRY: Well, a piece of historical artwork painted during the Depression is about to get a raise. You heard that right. San Francisco said to spend more than half a million bucks to paint over a mural of George Washington after some have criticized this as racist.

The mural depicts our founding father's life but it also shows slaves working and white pioneer standing over the body of a Native American.

Here with more on this is Campus Reform's Cabot Phillips. Good evening, Cabot.


HENRY: Isn't this what President Trump alluded to a couple of years ago when he was under fire over Charlottesville, that they are coming for George Washington, they're coming from Thomas Jefferson. You're going to see statues go down, now you're going to see paintings are raised.

PHILLIPS: It's exactly what's going to happen in the coming years, I think we will continue to see this with every founding father. We've already seen it with Thomas Jefferson on numerous college campuses. Now we're seeing it with this mural.

And I always tell people, don't give into the outreach mob. You can never do enough to earn their approval. You are never going to appease them. They're going to find something to be mad about. And in this case, if the mural had not depicted slaves and not depicted Native Americans in any form, the same outrage mob would be saying, well, we need more representation. This is not an accurate depiction of George Washington's life.


PHILLIPS: But now they do have those things, people say well, it's not how we wanted it. The fact is history is full of people that were just that, they were people. They were flawed, they weren't perfect. We don't honor people because they are perfect, we honor them because of the aspirational vision they set out and we didn't always achieve it, but it's important. If you have a problem with something not to try and censor it, pretend like it didn't happen --

HENRY: Right.

PHILLIPS: -- to keep it up, to learn from it, to get conversations started so we can improve.

HENRY: But Cabot, is there a distinction we made, though, about not taking down say, a statue of George Washington himself, even if you think he was flawed, even if you think he made mistakes, versus painting over or taking down a mural, a piece of art, or statue that depict something that people believe to be racist? Is there not a distinction between the two?

PHILLIPS: I think there is a line certainly to be drawn. I think if it going to be drawn it should be done by voters deciding on what they want or patrons or business owners, whoever it is wherever those murals are.

But ultimately, again, it comes down to what standard are we setting? Are we saying we can only have murals up, only have statues up of people that are perfect? By that logic, you're not going to have anyone.

This mural was put up during FDR's new deal. Are we going to remove anything involving FDR because of his internment camps that he did, something we can all agree was evil? And I think that again, we need to keep in mind the broader context of learning our history, not trying to hide the parts that are painful but instead learning from those things so we can avoid them in the future.

HENRY: Cabot, we normally see you out on college campuses asking students some of the issues of the day. There's a lot of surveys about patriotism or lack thereof around the Fourth of July holiday. Here you are asking some students about whether they think America is the greatest country on earth? Watch.


PHILLIPS: Do you think we are the greatest country in the world?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't. I don't think we are the greatest country in the world.



PHILLIPS: And do you think America is the greatest country in the world?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's not the greatest country in the world.


HENRY: What reasons did they spell out when you press them? Because here they are the young people, the next generation and they don't America is a great country?

PHILLIPS: Well, I think a lot of that reason is because they haven't been taught American exceptionalism in class. And when you're ignorant to the history, when you're ignorant to what we've done for good around the world and continue to do, of course you are going to think that.

And also, it's interesting. I've been around over hundred college campuses with leadership institute at Campus Reform, I've seen firsthand how anti- American sentiment has taken root and you're almost considered highbrow if you come out against America.


PHILLIPS: And the main reason people said that they weren't proud of America because they said, well with everything going on at the border, with the border crisis, how many people are trying to come here and aren't let in.

And in a way, the fact that so many people are risking their lives to come to America whatever it cost shows how special we are. You don't see people flooding the shores of Norway, and Sweden, and Canada. They come to America because they know that America is the true --


PHILLIPS: -- home of opportunity and freedom and I wish these students will recognize that.

HENRY: Yes. There's a lot of professors telling them just the opposite.


HENRY: We appreciate you coming in, Cabot Phillips.

PHILLIPS: Thanks, Ed.

HENRY: Meantime, it's summer. Ice scream, you scream. Would anyone eat this ice cream? I hope not. We'll ask the ladies when we come back. And I may have a surprise or two for them.


HENRY: Time now for our Friday ladies' night panel. Our first topic, former Vice President Joe Biden under fire for his latest comments into President Trump. Watch.


BIDEN: The idea that I'd be intimated by Donald Trump, he's the bully that I knew my whole life. He's the bully that I've always stood up to. He's the bully who used to make fun when I was a kid in a stutter and I smacked him in the mouth.


HENRY: Boy, but in this anti-bullying era the communications head for the pro-female Democratic group EMILY's list tweeting, "count me as a voter who would prefer someone who handles a menacing bully calmly while continuing to make her point over someone who announces he will pop someone in the mouth."

Here now, tonight's ladies' panel, Carley Shimkus, Fox News Headlines 24/7 reporter, Susan Li, Fox Business correspondent, and Kat Timpf, National Review reporter and Fox News contributor. Good evening, ladies.




HENRY: So, it's clear that Joe Biden is making this reference to Hillary Clinton when President Trump sort of went around her during the debate and that may be Democrats felt she should have been tougher? Is this a shot at her?

SHIMKUS: Is it a shot at Hillary Clinton?

HENRY: Yes. Not pushing back hard enough?

SHIMKUS: I didn't take it like that because he said things about beating up President Trump before. I think he's trying to feel something like --


HENRY: Meet him out in the school yard.

SHIMKUS: -- look like the hero.

LI: Yes.

SHIMKUS: And, you know, trying to show that President Trump can be perceived as a bully. The problem with this is that the progressive wing of the Democrat Party wants to take Joe Biden down. If it's not the hugging, it's his record on race. And if it's not that, it's something smaller like this.

His strategy has been to go after the moderate voter, the only issue with that though, is who shows up to vote in Democratic primaries, and it is the progressive wing of the party. So, his poll numbers --


HENRY: Kat, you want to jump in?

TIMPF: Yes. I'm not a psychic, OK, so just everybody knows. But I am predicting that these men will not fight. I don't think he was being serious. I think he was making a joke.

LI: Yes.

TIMPF: I wrote a joke about his joke that's so bad that if I say it on air, I'll bring shame to my entire family. Which I can never resist doing, so I'm going to do it. Maybe he misunderstood what punch line meant. Am I fired? Am I fired?

HENRY: We'll let you stick around.


HENRY: Susan, did --


TIMPF: hope I'm not fired.

HENRY: Cristina Reynolds, though, at EMILY's List have a point, that women are sort of turned off with the idea well, the guys going to come in --

LI: Yes.

HENRY: -- and punch somebody in the mouth?

LI: So, this is one of the few times I will quote Kamala Harris, OK? On this network. So basically, Kamala said what, we do not want to see a food fight. We want to know how you put food on the table. I think this is kind of a generational thing.

SHIMKUS: That's good.

LI: Don't you think?

HENRY: Well --

LI: I mean, boys that want to play in the playground take it to the president's office.

TIMP: It does have sort of old-school vibe.

SHIMKUS: To the principal.

LI: I agree.

SHIMKUS: But EMILY's List is a political action committee that helps elect pro-choice women.

HENRY: Right.

SHIMKUS: So, it's not like Joe Biden --


HENRY: Well, Susan, mentioned putting food on the table, so let's talk about chicken dinner row which I understand --

LI: Good segue.

HENRY: -- is in Caldwell, Idaho. And apparently PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are upset. They sent this letter out to the mayor of Caldwell, Idaho. "We're not trying to ruffle any feathers but words matter and have the power to change lives. Both human and nonhuman. Chickens are intelligent, sensitive animals who feel pain and empathy and form strong bonds with one another. And they shouldn't be considered dinner."

LI: How do they know that? Do they talk to chickens?

HENRY: Chickens are sensitive, they say.

LI: This is offensive to me. Because some people, warm weather, they like to swim, they like to golf. I like to sit outside with a bottle of champagne and a bucket of Popeyes. That is my favorite summer -- and just lift.

SHIMKUS: It sounds fabulous.

LI: And that's my favorite summer activity. And also, they are not killing any chickens by having the sign up. Putting the word dinner after a word doesn't mean that things are getting murdered. It's just worse.

SHIMKUS: Yes. I feel like this is where PETA is their own worst enemy. Like some P.R. manager needs to sit them down and be, like, you don't have to go after every fight.


SHIMKUS: You can just pick the big ones.


HENRY: Susan, you want to weigh on the big chicken debate?

LI: Well, this is just like a super woke society that we live in right after the Nike-Kaepernick Betsy Ross controversy this week. Now chicken road dinner or chicken dinner road? It's like unacceptable. It's not even by the way on the Caldwell City maps. So, it's not even in the right county that they sent them letter to.

HENRY: Right. We'll see --

SHIMKUS: How do they find out about it?

HENRY: Let's get to desert.


HENRY: Because everybody is talking about this picture. This woman on the internet, you see her there, licking -- she was at a store, she decided to lick Blue Bell ice cream. people are up and arms. The police are now saying that identifying --


SHIMKUS: That's so gross.

HENRY: -- this Texas teen. And I love Walmart jumping down in Corpus Christi, I believe and they have this wonderful picture online of this man with a water gun who they say, Kat, is guarding the ice cream.

TIMPF: Good. Because that was one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen in my life. And I've seen a lot of gross stuff. But at the same time, she could face up to 20 years in prison?

LI: Yes.

TIMPF: OK. That's like more time than some people spent behind bars for murdering someone. And I actually did some analysis. OK, I crunched some numbers, Susan. I know that's your job.

LI: OK. great. Great. Yes.

TIMPF: But it is approximately 37 bajillian times worse to be murdered than to eat ice cream.


LI: Yes.

TIMPF: So, based on the math.

LI: Yes.

TIMPF: The math --


SHIMKUS: I don't think they're going to charge her like --

HENRY: Susan, your thoughts?

LI: Well, I feel bad for Blue Bell. Who is going to eat another type of Blue Bell creamery? Because it's one -- it's a very small little creamery. It supposed to be the freshest and finest ingredients. But it's been around for 100 years.

SHIMKUS: Stop it.

HENRY: Well, just so you know.

SHIMKUS: No way.

HENRY: Well, I want Carley to weigh in too, but I decided to bring some ice cream.

SHIMKUS: I'm not weighing in anymore. We are eating.

HENRY: We're going to talk. Carley, what do you think about lock her up? Lock her up.

SHIMKUS: Well --


HENRY: You see this ice cream. It's friendly.

SHIMKUS: I'm so distracted. I had something like really good things to say.


HENRY: We, honestly, we went to a local store and they said there's been a run on Blue Bell here in New York.

SHIMKUS: Really?

HENRY: Because of this story. This is a true story. Our special ice cream producer Mike Garrity was told by a cashier. So, we got friend which is really good.


LI: Mike Garrity --

HENRY: I'm just kidding. I'm not going to lick it.

SHIMKUS: You know what, I thought what's interesting, the great lengths that Blue Bell and police in Texas went to find this woman.


SHIMKUS: They originally thought that she lives in San Antonio so they went to all the Walmarts in San Antonio to see if the ice cream display matched that of the video --


HENRY: There is actual surveillance video, by the way.

SHIMKUS: Yes. Then they went to Houston and then they finally found that she was --


HENRY: It's pretty intense.

LI: But wait, why was there no plastic cover over the ice cream? I don't get that.


SHIMKUS: That --

LI: That is sold in supermarkets?

SHIMKUS: That is the key. Blue Bell says that it's the way that they freeze the ice cream to create this natural seal.

LI: Right.

SHIMKUS: But I think that the plastic cover would have solve everything.

HENRY: Who like strawberry? I got strawberry down there. Do you like strawberry?



SHIMKUS: That's a good --

LI: And sprinkles, too?


HENRY: Because we could do this the right way, right?

TIMPF: You know, Ed.

HENRY: We could share it. It's summertime.

TIMPF: Where is the whipped cream?

HENRY: I'm sorry, I couldn't go that far. I got sprinkles.


SHIMKUS: This is amazing.

HENRY: All right, here we go.

LI: It's getting messy.

SHIMKUS: I'm going with the big spoon too.

HENRY: See, you guys the last time complained last time I didn't bring food.

SHIMKUS: No. You --


HENRY: Once I brought McDonald's.

SHIMKUS: -- first bring drinks the last time too.

HENRY: Now I brought some dessert. Some drinks.

SHIMKUS: We enjoy that.

HENRY: It's summertime. Ladies, I appreciate you coming in.

SHIMKUS: You're my favorite person.

HENRY: Thanks, Carley.

TIMPF: Thank you.

LI: Thanks, Ed.

HENRY: That is “The Story” for this Friday night. Ice cream and all. Martha will be back here Monday night at seven to restore some order. I will see you this week on "Fox & Friends." Have a great weekend. Please tune in Sunday. I'm going to have a special announcement. Tucker, meanwhile, 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.