Rep. Gaetz: Nothing in the Manafort case implicates Trump

close

Video

Rep. Gaetz: Nothing in the Manafort case implicates Trump

What's at stake in the Paul Manafort trial and how might it impact the Russia investigation? Rep. Matt Gaetz weighs in on 'The Story.'

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," August 16, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SANDRA SMITH, GUEST HOST: Breaking tonight, we hear from the jury for the first time in the trial of Paul Manafort, President Trump's former campaign manager. Late this evening, the 12 men and women deciding his faith breaking from deliberations to ask four questions. Manafort's attorneys staying positive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think it's a good sign they're asking about reasonable doubt?

KEVIN DOWNING, ATTORNEY TO PAUL MANAFORT: I think it's all a good sign, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: Good evening, everybody. I'm Sandra Smith, in for Martha MacCallum tonight. It is the calm before the storm. Because this verdict will likely have a profound effect on the Russia probe no matter what the outcome.

An acquittal for Paul Manafort would only fuel the president's assertions that the probe is nothing more than a waste of time and money. But a conviction along with several guilty pleas, Mueller has already secured in the Russia investigation, with bolster the argument that the probe should continue.

And it could also put Mueller in a better spot as he negotiates that coveted sit-down with the president. But keep in mind, the charges involve Manafort's tax and banking fraud, not Russian collusion. So, while some headlines scream that this trial should scare the president. Others insist this really has nothing to do with him.

So, where does that leave us tonight? Peter Doocy is live outside the courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia with the latest developments. Hey Peter.

PETER DOOCY, FOX NEWS GENERAL ASSIGNMENT REPORTER: Sandra, a closest -- source close to the Manafort defense team told Fox News tonight, and this is a quote, "We are back in the game." And that is because the first thing that the Mueller team learned from the jury after their first day of deliberations was that the Mueller team does not have an open-and-shut case.

After more than seven hours of deliberations up on the 9th floor, the jury sent a letter to Judge T.S. Ellis, asking him to redefine reasonable doubt. So, the judge brought everybody in, and he told them this. "The government is not required to prove the defendant guilty beyond all possible doubt, but beyond all reasonable doubt."

So, two additional questions were asked by the jury tonight. And they suggest at least some on the jury did not fully understand some terminology that was central to the Mueller team's argument. Because the Mueller team frequently used terms like shelf company and FBAR, short for Foreign Bank Account Report.

And the jury wants to know more tonight about the rules governing both. But the judge told them they've got to rely on their memory of the testimony to figure that out. The judge also told the jury tonight that the court is not going to help them organize evidence or exhibits to more clearly mark which evidence relates to which of the 18 counts which is something that the jury asked him to do.

The day-long deliberations today happened in the break room in the courthouse because the jury room was apparently too small for 12 people and piles upon piles of evidence. The judge actually apologized for the tight quarters saying, he helped design the courthouse and was more concerned at the time with his own quarters.

There was a big stir in court today after the jury left for the first time to start deliberating because the judge asked everybody in the court, "Is Mr. Trump, here?" And people gasped and craned their necks, but as it turns out, there is a prosecutor named Mr. Trump who was in the House for a totally unrelated case.

Now, the last thing today before sending jurors home, the judge gave them their normal instruction to try to put the case out of their minds, at least, for tonight and he said, but that's going to be easier for him because he has a boring dinner to go to. Sandra.

SMITH: Peter Doocy outside the courthouse there for us tonight. Thank you very much, Peter.

Here now, Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee. Congressman, thanks for your time tonight. So, as we await what is next in this trial, what's at stake?

REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA. HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, I think that you've got a situation here where the campaign is not implicated, the president is not implicated. I'm far more focused on the work we're doing in the Congress to interview Bruce Ohr in the coming weeks.

Bruce and Nellie Ohr were like the Bonnie and Clyde of collusion. You had the spouse of a senior government official who was in collusion with a foreign spy, with the purpose of disrupting a U.S. election.

So, to me, that's the far more significant story getting to the bottom of who at the Department of Justice knew that the spouse of a senior official was working with fusion and GPS.

And I hope the Congress led to those questions soon because it seems far more relevant to foreign interference in the election than whether or not Paul Manafort paid his taxes in the 80s and 90s.

SMITH: What will be implications of whatever the outcome here is? What will the implications be ultimately on the Mueller probe, Congressman?

GAETZ: I don't think there'll be that significant, because you don't have anything here that implicates the President and or any element of the campaign. You've got -- you know, tax questions and involvement with foreign entities that far predate. Donald Trump even contemplating running for president.

And so, I'm not too focused on how this will impact the questions about collusion or obstruction of justice. I'm more focused on the important work we've got to do to make sure that never again do we have a political opposition research file that is then able to be used by an intelligence community to go spy on a political opponent.

SMITH: But you know that if there is a guilty verdict herein the case of Paul Manafort, you know there will be a celebration by some, particularly, on the left. If he is ultimately found guilty, how does the GOP spin that? What would the messaging be from your party?

GAETZ: People should pay their taxes. And if they don't, they're going to get caught. I mean, I think that that's really the story of Paul Manafort. It doesn't have much to do with this involvement with the Trump campaign or political activity.

I think that the strategy that Bob Mueller's using is to try to create as much pressure around people like Roger Stone, like Paul Manafort, like Rick Gates. Perhaps, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. with the hopes that somebody will lie and say that there was something that implicated Donald Trump.

But there's no evidence that, that occurred whatsoever. So, here with the Manafort trial, you see an attempt to build leverage but no real evidence connecting the President to any type of Russian collusion or any type of Russian interference in the U.S. election.

SMITH: I want to talk to Andy McCarthy more about that in just a minute about the documents that are involved in as evidence there and what those could eventually mean. But does and it -- does a conviction here, does that boost the chances or boost the momentum behind a Mueller sit down, as far as an interview with the president? Do you see that happening?

GAETZ: If this jury comes back guilty, not guilty, or hung in any of those circumstances, it would be a very bad decision for the president to sit down with Bob Mueller. That is a perjury trap. The president hasn't done anything wrong, but he should not himself in a position to be in some sort of circumstance we're just remembering something incorrectly, could create a destabilizing event.

While the country is doing so well, let's focus on economic growth and jobs, and let's not have our president distracted with these things. The conduct of the sitting president is the purview of the Congress, and that's why I think Rudy Giuliani is right to be fighting against any potential subpoena by Mueller for a presidential interview.

SMITH: You've got a law background, right? Congressman?

GAETZ: Yes. I do, I was an attorney.

SMITH: What did you think about those -- what did you think about those questions from the jurors, did that tell you anything? Asking a question about reasonable doubt.

GAETZ: Yes. Boy, if I was a prosecutor, I have to be really nervous about that because if a jury has questions about what reasonable doubt is, then certainly, they're asking those questions because they're wondering whether or not there may be a reasonable doubt which is their job.

So, I think it's really good news for the defense. Bad news for the prosecution. But again, juries are unpredictable, the one thing I've learned involving myself with juries is that no two are the same. And here, I wouldn't read too much into the questions, but I also wouldn't read too much into the verdict.

SMITH: Good stuff. All right, Congressman Gaetz, thanks for your time tonight.

GAETZ: Thank you.

SMITH: Good to see you. Here now, Andy McCarthy, as promised. Former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and a Fox News contributor. You know, those documents are key and this Washington Post opinion piece, Jennifer Rubin writing the mound of financial documents in the Manafort case is staggering.

That evidence was confirmed by more witnesses who are not household names. Keep that in mind she writes when Trump sycophants say there is no evidence of anything. How important is that?

ANDREW MCCARTHY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, the documents are crucially important. What we need to remember is the sequence of events here, right? Mueller indicted this case based on the documents. He indicted both Gates and Manafort. So, it's not like -- you know, Gates came in, and suddenly there was a case against Manafort. It was the documents that pushed Gates into pleading guilty.

So, what they've tried to -- the way they've tried to approach this, the prosecutors is to say the documents of the star witness. Because they know that the accomplice witness, Gates is a very problematic witness for them. And you know, its deception ran rife.

The problem they have is the plea deal that they gave Gates to come in was really a sweetheart deal. And it's tough for the prosecutors to look the jury in the eye and say, "We don't really need this guy, we only brought him in because he tightens up our proof on intent of it, but he's not all that important."

If he's not all that important, then why did you pay so much to get his plead.

SMITH: So -- but bottom line this trial, and to be very clear, and as you just heard Congressman Gaetz was very clear on this, as well. It is not touched on Russia, it is not touched on in 26 election. So, what is this really all about?

MCCARTHY: Well, I think that Mueller is trying to ratchet up the pressure as Congressman Gaetz said on Manafort to cooperate with the investigation. I've never been one who was convinced that Mueller is hell-bent on trying to make a case on President Trump. But I do think he is hell-bent on trying to get to the bottom of all the questions about Russian interference in the election.

And from his perspective, Manafort's an important person in that regard. He is somebody who has a history of contacts with Kremlin connected people. And if the thing that you're interested in is what was -- what is the role, what is the threat that Russia poses to us, he'd be an important person to get information.

SMITH: Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani, the president's attorney telling The Washington Post, he would fight a Trump subpoena from Mueller all the way to the Supreme Court. Watch. Oh, this is the statement, I'm sorry.

"Even if we responded in 10 days to a subpoena, it would have to be decided by a district court judge, and you could appeal it in a circuit court. And then, you argue it before the Supreme Court, if it ever got there."

I know there are a lot of differing opinions here, Andy, on whether or not a president can be subpoenaed. Your view on that is what?

MCCARTHY: I think there's two questions here. First, the president's this chief executive, Mueller's an inferior officer in the executive branch. If the president doesn't want to be subpoenaed, I don't know what the inferior officer's authority is to issue the subpoena.

If they get past that, I think still that Mueller needs to show that there's a serious crime that the president is implicated in. And that the president is the source of information that Mueller can't get from anybody else that he needs to make his case. If he can't answer those two questions, Sandra, we shouldn't even be talking about whether he gets to issue a subpoena.

SMITH: That's fascinating because -- I mean, that's really ultimately where we're all looking to see where this goes, and where this ends up. Before this winds up, what would you like to see happen here as far as hearing from the president in this probe?

MCCARTHY: I would like to see at this point two years almost down the road. I -- I'm a big believer in investigative secrecy, it's usually the most important thing in the public interest, here it's not. The most important thing in the public interest is, is there a reason to suspect the president of wrongdoing?

So, I think, it's incumbent on Mueller at this point to come forward and explain. Here is why I need to interview the president. And if he doesn't have a serious crime that the president's implicated in, I really don't know why we're talking about this.

SMITH: So, does the president have a point then, with all the tweets that he is tweeting about this being a witch-hunt, and saying that this should end now?

MCCARTHY: Well, and you know, I think if Mueller doesn't have a serious crime that the president's implicated in. But he has -- you know, some public interest reason connected to the investigation where he wants to interview the president and the president thinks it's important enough.

Maybe he should say, I'm closing the part of the investigation where there's any suspicions about the President or the president is a subject. And maybe the president would be delighted to sit down with them at that point and have a conversation.

But I think, as long as this criminal jeopardy potentially on the table, and Mueller won't tell him and tell the rest of us what the investigations about, why would you sit down in the blind like that? It doesn't make any sense to me.

SMITH: Lot of questions still about that potential sit down. Andy McCarthy thank you.

MCCARTHY: Thanks, Sandra.

SMITH: Nice to you tonight. Meanwhile, up next how did a suspected member of Isis make it into the U.S. by signing up as a refugee?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: In the United States courts, right now we have investigations going on all over. Hundreds of refugees are under federal investigation for terrorism and related reasons. We have entire regions of the world destabilized by terrorism and ISIS. For this reason, I issued an executive order to temporarily suspend immigration from places where it cannot safely occur.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: President Trump's push for extreme vetting back in the spotlight tonight as we learn that this man Omar Ameen who was just arrested in California is believed to be a high-ranking member of ISIS who came to the U.S. posing as a refugee. Trace Gallagher is live in our West Coast Newsroom with this story. Trace?

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CHANNEL ANCHOR: Sandra, when the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force converged on an apartment complex in Sacramento, they knew they had a high-level target. Prosecutors say not only was 45-year- old Omar Ameen a hitman for ISIS and al-Qaeda he was also a founding member of al-Qaeda in Iraq and a high-ranking ISIS terrorist.

Court records showed that back in 2012 Ameen fled Iraq to Turkey where he applied to be accepted as a U.S. refugee. He was granted that status in June of 2014 the very same time that Isis had taken over the on bar province of Iraq. So instead of going directly to the United States, a Baghdad federal court says he came back to Iraq and shot and killed an Iraqi police officer who was lying on the ground. ISIS later boasted about the killing on social media. Five months after that attack Omar Ameen was living in the U.S.

Resettlement agencies certainly try to thoroughly vet refugees including medical exams and biometric checks but because many countries don't have extensive documents on their citizens, a complete background check is nearly impossible. The U.S. often relies on the refugees' own story, in other words, the honor system. Experts say Omar Ameen is a prime example of why President Trump implemented the travel ban. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MACGREGOR SCOTT, U.S. ATTORNEY: That refugee application was replete with lies and misrepresentations as to his background character and past actions with respect to terrorism in the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: The FBI has interviewed at least eight witnesses who identify Omar Ameen and his father, brother, and cousins as being affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS and who are believed to have planted numerous improvised bombs in an effort to kill coalition troops in Iraq. Because he's a flight risk, Ameen is being held in Sacramento without bail. He will likely be extradited to Iraq in the next few weeks to stand trial for murder. He could face the death penalty. Sandra?

SMITH: Trace Gallagher, thank you. Here now with more on this as David Bossie, a former Trump Deputy Campaign Manager, President of Citizens United and a Fox News Contributor. Good evening to you.

DAVID BOSSIE, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks.

SMITH: A suspected ISIS killer comes to the U.S. as a refugee. Does this further make the President's case in pushing for a more secured system?

BOSSIE: This is exactly the reason that this president has decided that border security is a national security issue. It is one of the reasons that he got elected in the first place was to stop this. BARACK Obama failed the American people throughout his presidency on this one issue.

They had what was called rigorous vetting. It was ridiculous they let all of these refugees in, they had no idea who they were or what their backgrounds were. This is a cop killer in Iraq that we led in this country claiming to be a vegetable salesman or a trader. This is outrageous conduct by the Obama Administration that's why this president got elected and that's why in the midterms the American people have to understand the very stark differences we have here.

We have open borders, we have sanctuary cities, we have a you know, weak vetting by the Democrats and on the other side you have a border wall, you have border security, you have ending sanctuary cities and border security. That's what this president and that's what the Republican stands for.

SMITH: And we've time and time again from the President that Democrats are weak on border security. We will probably continue to hear that message.

BOSSIE: We will, and just thankfully that the FBI and the police were able to catch this animal before he was able to do any further damage.

SMITH: So does this give the President more momentum and you suggested --

BOSSIE: It certainly does. Look, this is a very good example that we need to talk about between now and the midterm elections in November. The American people have to understand the very real differences for the security of our children and our families about what it means to allow these folks in here without a proper procedure and from these countries that are -- that are bringing forward these violent hitman. This guy is a hitman.

SMITH: Meantime, having worked on the President's campaign team David Bossie, I've got to ask you about the latest from Omarosa. She has now made more headlines as she has released this new recording of Lara Trump. She is the president's daughter-in-law married to his son Eric Trump of her, a voice recording of her offering Omarosa a job in the 2020 campaign shortly after she was fired from the White House that include talk of her pay, etcetera.

Omarosa claims that this was an attempt to buy her silence to censor her and I know that we had the -- we had the quote of Lara firing back. She did not mince words in her response to all this. I've reached out to her to offer her a position with the 2020 Trump campaign before we knew anything about the gross violations of ethics and integrity during her White House tenure.

She goes on to say woman to woman I shared a connection with Omarosa as a friend and a campaign sister and I am absolutely shocked and saddened by her betrayal and violation on a deeply personal level.

BOSSIE: And Lara just said it exactly right. They were campaign sisters. They traveled the country together on a women's tour, a bus tour in Florida, in North Carolina, and many other places. They spent a lot of time together. So this is Lara Trump simply reaching out to somebody who she knows very well from the campaign. Omarosa transitioned from the campaign to the White House.

At this time because of the deal that General Kelly made with Omarosa in the sense of if you leave quietly, we won't talk about your unethical behavior, Lara Trump did not know that. So she's reaching out to say we'll give you a soft landing. Come back to the campaign. We want you to be part of -- continued to be part of the family and this is what you get in return.

You get stabbed in the back by somebody who is simply out to sell a book and destroy the man who made her.

SMITH: You know, this is the first time we've caught up in in a bit, David. And I mean, her headlines have been out there what is your thinking been the entire way through? This is just the latest.

BOSSIE: I share -- I share the family's you know, disgust, I share their disappointment. This is a person who I got to know a little bit on the campaign. I thought she was an honorable person, there for the right reason. And all of the things that I've heard about her are simply fabricated. There's no evidence.

You know, the President is a warm kind, generous man. I've known him for a long time. For her to go out and attack him and release the tape of him saying Omarosa I didn't know, that that's ridiculous on its face and of course the President is going to try to let her down gently that's it that's what human beings do. And we don't want to have a fight again. I'm sorry you're leaving. I heard you're leaving and I'm sorry. That's it that's a natural thing to do what happens across --

SMITH: Well, a very firm response from Lara Trump and on a professional and a personal level clearly. David Bossie --

BOSSIE: And if I could just -- it's hard to say this money was going to be hush money when it's fully disclosed on FEC records. I mean, saying you're going to be paid $15,000 a month when it's going to be on the first, your paycheck is going to be publicly disclosed is ridiculous.

SMITH: David Bossie, good to see you.

BOSSIE: Thank you.

SMITH: Thank you. Up next, nearly 100 people collapse in the same park in a span of 24 hours. What happened?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Seeing something that they're really not used to seeing. I mean, 76 overdoses in such a short period of time. This is not something that we're used to do.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a nationwide core problem, an issue it's not going away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: A park in Connecticut looking like a scene out of a horror movie but this is real life. In the last 36 hours, nearly 100 people have overdosed in New Haven Green. Police believe a bad batch of synthetic marijuana known as K2 is to blame. It's actually illegal in many states but still sold at convenience stores. Synthetic marijuana is popular among teens because there's no age limit to buy it and it's highly addictive.

Here now is Dr. Anita Gupta, an Anesthesiologist, and FDA Adviser. Doctor, thank you for your time tonight. First of all, we're all wondering what is -- what is K2?

ANITA GUPTA, FDA ADVISOR: So K-2 is a synthetic marijuana derivative. It's an analog that binds much more strongly to the cannabinoid the receptor in the brain. And that is why it is a concern to federal agencies and that's why we're here today to talk about what happened in Connecticut.

SMITH: What did happen in Connecticut? People dying in this park?

GUPTA: Yes, very, very concerning. Alarming and something that brings national attention to a very, very serious issue. A public health issue and something very alarming.

You know, what did happen in Connecticut is exactly what is happening across the country in the United States. This public health issue is evolving very rapidly. And as you know, what happened in Connecticut happened in broad daylight, it among amongst family, it happened right next to Yale University.

And first responders we need to applaud what they did. They responded very quickly, the doctors, the anesthesiologists, the individuals that came there took care of these individuals very rapidly.

But this is not the only time this has happened. This is happening everywhere. These individuals are suffering, they need help.

SMITH: Why is so easily available, doctor?

GUPTA: Correct, it is available. And as you have mentioned it is available around the country. Only a few states have banned it. And we need policies to address this. And we need urgent, you know, urgent policies to address what K-2 is and also synthetic products and how it's hurting many people around the United States.

SMITH: Obviously this is going to be getting the attention of people all over this country seeing the images that we've seen coming out of that New Haven Park in Connecticut.

What do you parents need to know about this? There is no where it is legal to purchase it, there is no age limit to who can purchase it. Obviously that leads to a bigger problem in certain areas in this country.

GUPTA: Absolutely. Number one, I mean, families need to know, you know, what K-2 is. I think that is, you know, the first thing any parent should understand. And it is a synthetic marijuana but it doesn't work the same way.

And if you believe that your family member or friend or child has K-2, you should talk to them about it. And understand the risk benefits of what it is and get that message out there.

And number two, if your family member has a substance abuse disorder. Get help. There are resources out there and there are a lot that is being done by a lot of different agencies and a lot of public health coalitions are working to help individuals. So I think those are two first things.

And number three, we have to understand how this public health issue is evolving. What happened in Connecticut is not just one issue. And this public health issue is moving from in Connecticut Park right outside of a major university, but it can happen anywhere.

SMITH: As you mentioned, there was just a short walk away, a short drive away from Yale University there in New Haven.

Dr. Gupta, thank you for your time tonight. And something that we all need to know about and be on the look up for.

GUPTA: Absolutely.

SMITH: Thank you very much.

GUPTA: Thank you.

SMITH: Well, up next the massive effort by newspapers across the country to launch a coordinated attack on President Trump. Well, it did not go exactly as planned.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Fake news. Fake news.

They are fake!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMITH: This is a Fox News alert. The Vatican breaking its silence just a short time ago over that bombshell grand jury report out of Pennsylvania detailing decades of sexual abuse by hundreds of priests and the stunning cover-ups from church higher ups.

Here's the Vatican spokesman.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREG BURKE, VATICAN SPOKESMAN: We can express our feelings about this horrible crime in two words. Those are shame and sorrow. The Holy See is taking very seriously the grand jury report from Pennsylvania. Clearly the Holy See condemns sexual abuse of minors.

The abuses described in the report are criminal. They are morally reprehensible. These are acts which robbed the victims of their dignity, and in many cases, also robbed them of their faith in Jesus Christ, in God.

The church has to learn some hard lessons from the past. There has to be accountability. Not only for the abusers but also for those who permitted the abuse.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMITH: Those remarks coming after the pope received quite a bit of backlash for not immediately speaking out about that stunning report released Tuesday detailing the horrific actions of 300 predator priests accused of sexually abusing more than 1,000 child victims.

More than 300 news outlets publishing editorials today, blasting President Trump claim that the media is the enemy of the people.

The New York Times writing, quote, "In 2018, some of the most damaging attacks are coming from government officials and calling journalist the enemy of the period is dangerous, period."

Joining me now is Bill McGurn, member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, Juan Williams, co-hosts The Five and a Fox News political analyst. Good evening to both of you.

JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS CO-HOST & POLITICAL ANALYST: Thanks, Sandra.

SMITH: Bill, what did you make of this coordinated effort to attack the president?

WILLIAM MCGURN, EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yes, well, our paper didn't participate in it. I mean, I think we are pretty strong supporters of the First Amendment at the Wall Street Journal. I make my living off of it.

I'm not sure this really advances the game. I don't believe the president is the enemy or I have to believe I was the enemy of the people. I don't believe that.

But I think it would have a more credible case if a lot of these papers, I'd like to know where they were on Citizens United about the attempt to suppress the tape on Mrs. Clinton. On union members who don't like their money spent for political messages, they don't like a pro-life clinics that people try to compel them to offer, you know, pro-choice advice.

So, I think a lot of them I'd to know where were they on those issues?

SMITH: Well, it would be hard to keep track.

MCGURN: Right.

SMITH: Because it was estimated by the Boston Globe, Juan, that some 350 newspapers would participate. Does this make them look any better?

WILLIAMS: Well, remember, I mean the power this is that the president has the bully pulpit. He is the president of the United States and right now it's something 51 percent of Republicans agree with the president that the press is out there trying to get him and is an enemy. And to me that's deeply troubling.

I don't care if you're Republican or Democrat, to me, what Bill just spoke of, the constitutional provision for protections of a free and vigorous and partisan press is absolute in a democracy in order to produce informed citizens.

SMITH: So incredibly important. And as Bill, you said mentioned the Wall Street Journal did not participate and neither did the Los Angeles Times. They wrote this. Quote, "The Los Angeles Times as decided not to participate. There will be no free press editorial on our page today."

It writes, "This is not because e don't believe that President Trump has been engaged in a cynical demagogic and unfair assault on our industry, he has," it writes.

"We wouldn't want to leave the impression that we take our lead from others, or that we engage in groupthink."

Bill?

MCGURN: Yes. I think the Times has made an excellent point on that. I think it's a big yawn in a couple of days it will be gone as an issue. Again, I don't agree with them.

I think President Trump would have been on firmer ground if he said the press may be the enemy of Donald Trump and the presidency in this but not the American people. And like with Juan and I have, we have different -- I mean, I would say I'm sort of like the public doesn't like the press. I'm the good witch. That's the boss.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

MCGURN: And there are other ones. People don't always believe that. But I don't know. I think it's kind of a stunt. What I'm more interested in is the vigorous defense of the First Amendment rights for everyone.

SMITH: As for the president and his thought and his words on this. He tweeted this, Juan. "There is nothing that I would want more for our country than true freedom of the press. The fact is that the press is free to write and say anything it wants, but much of what it says is fake news, pushing political agenda or just plain trying to hurt people. Honesty wins!"

WILLIAMS: Well, I think there's -- I mean, honesty coming from this president. One of the challenges that President Trump his angst for the press is, he will say things that just aren't true. And then when the press calls him on, he'll say let's move on. That's not what I was talking, whatever.

That's very difficult. But the key point here is you are hearing today, it's from the editor pages of newspapers, not the news side of newspapers. These are two separate--

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Still a conscious decision on the part of the newspapers to do this.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

SMITH: Do you think it was a stunt, like Bill said, or do you think it's going to have any sway?

WILLIAMS: No. I don't think it has much in the way of persuasion. I think Bill is right. In a couple of days no one will even remember this. But remember, you have papers that endorse President Trump--

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Remember, you and Bill McGurn talking about it on the Story and the Fox News, Juan.

MCGURN: Yes.

WILLIAMS: But I'm saying you have papers that endorsed President Trump who today came out and said it's because, you know what, journalism is important. And we should not diminish it and we should not let any president, Donald Trump or Obama or anybody else deny reporter's access and threaten to change the libel laws. Not good.

MCGURN: Yes. I'll just say, again, I think this would be a lot more credible. President Trump singled out the Supreme Court justices in that state of the union on the Citizens United case, probably the most important Supreme Court decision on the First Amendment in many, many years.

I think a lot of these papers would have had much more credibility if they had weighed in on that. Because, you know, we had under the Obama administration the IRS targeting people whose speech they didn't like.

SMITH: You know, obviously what's coming up in this conversation and Juan, I may have caught a few words of this exchange on The Five earlier today. And that was the treatment by the press of the previous president, Barack Obama.

MCGURN: Right.

SMITH: Wouldn't you agree that it was much different?

WILLIAMS: No! You know, this is so interesting to me. Because as I said, the number one paper in the country is Bill's paper, the Wall Street Journal. I think they had lots of criticism of Barack Obama including on the use of money for as evidence of free speech. You know--

(CROSSTALK)

MCGURN: There weren't 300 editorials coordinating.

WILLIAMS: Right. But I'm saying there's lots -- well, the number one paper is your paper, the number one radio show is Rush Limbaugh, you know, and number one in so many ways in terms of cable news is Fox News, right?

MCGURN: Three outlets. That's three outlets.

WILLIAMS: OK. But I'm saying that's number one. So it's not like you would say nobody was critical of Obama. But I hear this response as if, because some papers were not critical of Obama and the opinion of the far of right wing people. Well, therefore--

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Or what about the criticism of Hillary Clinton. How about the endorsements? I mean, you look back at the 2016 election, 57 for Clinton, total circulation over 13 million. For Trump, two, total circulation 300,000.

WILLIAMS: Don't forget the New York Times is the one that broke the story about Hillary Clinton's e-mail server.

MCGURN: Yes. Look, I think in general the press is better off when we actually assert our First Amendment rights and report and don't back down then we prim about them. I think we're very unsympathetic one.

SMITH: You made your point very clear on all of this, as did the Wall Street Journal. Thank you to both of you, gentlemen for coming in tonight.

WILLIAMS: Thank you, Sandra.

MCGURN: Thank you.

SMITH: Good to see you. Up next, remembering the queen of soul! The legendary Aretha Franklin losing her battle with cancer today. TMZ's Harvey Levin looks back at her incredible life and lasting legacy, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMITH: Tonight, we remember a music icon. Aretha Franklin, the queen of soul passing away today at the age of 76. A live look right now at the Hollywood Walk of Fame where there is a growing memorial of flowers and cards, photos and balloons all in her honor.

The music legend winner 18 Grammy Awards and 112 billboard singles including hits like "Respect" and "I Say a Little Prayer" lost her battle with pancreatic cancer, surrounded by family at her home in Detroit.

The daughter of Baptist a preacher left her indelible mark on the world as a voice that transcended generations.

Earlier this evening, I spoke to Harvey Levin, executive producer of TMZ about the legacy Franklin leaves behind.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SMITH: Harvey, good evening. As we look back at Aretha Franklin's life, 76 years old is just too soon to say goodbye to the queen of soul. How will she be remembered?

HARVEY LEVIN, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER, TMZ: Well, Sandra, I think that is a great question. Because I think there are at least two transformative elements to Aretha Franklin. And the legacy she leaves. And one is obviously singing. I mean, she is arguably the greatest singer we've ever had on so many levels.

Aretha Franklin could sing anything from opera to soul, RNB, anything. But, you know, and people know that.

The thing that people really need to remember, appreciate and understand is that Aretha Franklin was a civil rights trailblazer. And you know, if you go back to the '60s, black entertainers were shutout of mainstream radio, they were shutout of night clubs. And it was very difficult for them to break through not in all cases but in a lot of cases. And people had trouble, you know, making it in show business.

It was Aretha Franklin and the Supremes that broke that barrier and started performing in various clubs and you now, Respect. I remember Respect. I mean, you're not going to remember this radio station. But back then it was KFWB. And Bill Balance and I was listening to it as a kid, and I hear Respect for the first time.

I will never forget it. And it's just like I couldn't believe what I was listening to. You know, she made a huge impact on people who hadn't been exposed to black singers, to performers and with meaning. And it had a big impact on civil rights in this country at a critical time in the '60s. She has to be remembered in part for that.

SMITH: And born in Memphis. Raised in Detroit. Started singing at such a young age at church. Daughter of a preacher. Fourteen years old. He releases her first album. And off she goes to New York City and signs with Columbia Records, and the rest is history.

Eighteen Grammys. The first female inducted into the rock 'n roll hall-of- fame, Harvey. It takes a lot of talent, but also a lot of hard work. As we have heard from those who played with her and performed with her, she was incredibly dedicated to her profession.

LEVIN: So dedicated, Sandra. And a lot of introspection. And I'm glad you said that because we talked today to the producer of a biopic that's being done on Aretha Franklin. And the star of the biopic is Jennifer Hudson who will play her which makes a lot of sense.

And Aretha picked Jennifer Hudson. But the producer was telling me that he spoke with Aretha as late as last week. And she was so involved in this project. Never told him that she was dying.

But what she wanted to get out and the point of this documentary is what you said, that it wasn't just Aretha just walked out and sang "Respect." She had to find her voice. And she had to figure out who she was as a performer and a person and then make that work, and that doesn't happen accidentally.

And this biopic is about precisely that. It's Aretha Franklin finding her voice. Finding who she was and then making the impact she had. It sounds just incredible, but she was actively involved. And getting that message out has been really an important thing for her, maybe one of the most important things over the last six, seven, eight months as she was working on this biopic.

It's going to come out. And from what I'm told this is going to be a real tribute to Aretha Franklin.

SMITH: And obviously known for her beautiful voice but also an amazing musician and amazing pianist. Aretha Franklin and that quiet battle she had here in the last few months last year of her life with pancreatic cancer. Her family saying good-bye to her. We all say good-bye to her today.

Harvey Levin, great to have you on the program tonight.

LEVIN: Thank you, Sandra.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SMITH: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMITH: That's our Story on this Thursday evening. Thank you for joining us. I will see you back here tomorrow morning on "America's Newsroom" from 9 a.m. until noon.

And here's another look at the Hollywood Walk of Fame tonight as we say good-bye to the queen of soul, we will let us play her out. Tucker Carlson is up next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.