This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures," May 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TRISH REGAN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL ANCHOR: Good Sunday morning everyone. New fall out from a critical meeting between the Justice Department and Congressional leaders. Are we any closer to answers on potential spying on the Trump Campaign? Hello everyone. Good morning. I'm Trish Regan in for Maria Bartiromo today, and this is "Sunday Morning Futures." Critics lashing out at our President after he holds an event on combating criminal illegal immigrants and two major stories breaking on the world stage for President Trump as he welcomes home another American held overseas. And new talks give new life to hopes for historic summit between the U.S. and North Korea is it back on? House Foreign Affairs Committee Member Lee Zeldin is right here as we look ahead today, on "Sunday Morning Futures."
All right, a warm welcome from President Trump at the White House as a Utah native held for nearly two years, in a Venezuelan prison returns to U.S. soil. 26-year-old Joshua Holt and his wife arriving last night meeting with the president in the Oval Office, Holt thanking those who worked for his freedom including Tennessee Senator Bob Corker who after intense lobbying was able to hold a surprise meeting with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro a day before Holt's release. The President calling last two years a tough ordeal for the American missionary, watch.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Josh Holt and his wife Thamy, and they came back from a very tough ordeal in a Venezuelan prison almost two years, Josh. I just want to welcome you to the Oval Office, welcome you to the White House. It's really very special to have you both.
JOSHUA HOLT, PRISONER OF VENEZUELA: I'm just overwhelmed with gratitude for you guys for everything that you've done, for the support of my wife. Those two years, they were very, very, very difficult two years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: Let's bring in New York Congressman Lee Zeldin. He sits on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. It's good to have you here. It's good to see you.
REP. LEE ZELDIN, R—NEW YORK: Good to see you as well.
REGAN: Happy Memorial Day weekend.
ZELDIN: Thank you, you too.
REGAN: Certainly a nice weekend for that missionary's family. That's a big deal. He was held in Venezuela for two years. Who does the congratulations go to?
ZELDIN: First of all, to Josh Holt and his family. Congratulations and welcome home. The timing couldn't possibly be any better for him. I'm sure that he would have rather it been two years ago but he's here. For the whole state of Utah, you've seen how they've rallied behind Josh Holt for him to be here now with his wife. For our whole country, we get to celebrate. Again, we just had three Korean-Americans return home from their captivity in North Korea and now we have Josh Holt and his wife returning from Venezuela, and Americans feel good about it. But congratulations and thank you to the President, to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the State Department, Senator Corker, the Utah Congressional delegation. A lot of people really worked really hard for this.
REGAN: Yes. What does Venezuela doing taking Americans? I mean, I've traveled to Venezuela many times reporting stories there. Not during the Madura regime but back during Chavez's era. They're retaking Americans? I mean, this guy is just down there trying to do his missionary work and he winds up in jail?
ZELDIN: It's -- so other countries. They operate very differently than we do here in the U.S. and it is unfortunate that this happened. Unfortunately, we've got into the point where Josh Holt is released. Venezuela is in a world of hurt. I mean, they just came off of an election that was not a Democratic election. You have a presidency --
REGAN: Maduro won again, by the way, surprise, surprise.
ZELDIN: Surprise, surprise. The presidency actually is a dictatorship, their economy is in ruins. There is really no voice of opposition that allows them to take over with their ideas, to move their country in a better trajectory. So their nation doesn't really need to keep adding to that world of hurt by holding hostage and wrongfully imprisoning a United States citizen.
REGAN: OK. So speaking of all these sort of rogue nations or rogue regimes if you would, this brings us of course to North Korea. And the big question is whether or not this summit is actually going to happen or not. Maybe it's back on. Here's the President speaking about North Korea, watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're doing very well in terms of the summit with North Korea. It looks like it's going along very well. There -- as you know there are meetings going on as we speak in a certain location which I won't name but you'd like the location. It's not so far away from here. And I think there's a lot of goodwill. I think people want to see if we can get the meeting and get something done. If we got that done and if we can be successful in the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: Congressman Zeldin, let me just ask you about why is this been so touch-and-go? I've gotten word that perhaps the Chinese had something to do with this. General Keane telling me recently that his sources which are quite good are telling him that the Chinese have begun trading with the North Koreans again and that they are trying to bring the North Koreans back into the fold and they don't like the idea of us having this summit. So are they really mucking things up enough that the summit might actually be off?
ZELDIN: Well, it looks like if the answer -- that question was being asked a few days ago after the President made his announcement and looked off.
ZELDIN: Over the course of the last couple of days, it seems like North Korea's reaction has been one of saying hey, listen we want this summit to take place. They have sent signals that we're receiving overnight that they are in favor of a full denuclearization according to the South Korean President. China played an important role in 2017. You remember in August there was a unanimous U.N. Security Council resolution but where even China and Russia voted -- it was unanimous to effectively cut off over one-third North Korean exports. China played an important role in getting North Korea to the point where they wanted to summit realizing they need a different trajectory for their country, but then we heard that the Chinese leader met with the North Korean leader and then all of a sudden North Korea's rhetoric changed, their behavior changed which led to President Trump deciding to walk --
REGAN: OK, but now it's changed again. So why is it -- are they are they like figuring how maybe the Chinese aren't what we thought they were? I just -- yes, it's great that their language is changing again but you know, when you go into a negotiation, you need to do so in good faith. And I think them sort of bailing on this or seeming to bail on it and ratcheting up their rhetoric only to then get slapped down by us and now they're coming back to the table, I mean, goodness I mean, why can't they just you know, be an adult and have a normal negotiation process here.
ZELDIN: I think -- I think North Korea watched the way the United States approached our negotiation with Iran and there's no similarities. This isn't Barack Obama as the President of the United States. This isn't John Kerry as the -- as the Secretary of State. Why that -- why is that important? In Iran, they were using rhetoric during the negotiations illegally test-fire intercontinental ballistic missiles, calling us the Great Satan, pledging death to America on their holidays, doing a lot of bad things, the rhetoric was terrible. North Korea started doing that, and when North Korea did that President Trump said no summit.
REGAN: Yes, enough. Yes, and that's the way it should be. That said, you know what really bugged me, and I know it bugged you because I heard you this week and I heard you talking about how you know, look we need to remember that the President's success is all of our success as Americans.
What bugged me was that many members of the left and many members of the mainstream media almost rejoiced seriously, in the idea that the summit was off. Here's some of the Democrats on the withdrawal from the summit. Watch.
REP. NANCY PELOSI, D—CALIFORNIA: They were on a par with each other. He got global recognition and regard. He's the big winner. And when he got this letter from the President saying, OK, never mind, he must be having a giggle fit right there now in North Korea, in Pyongyang.
SEN. BOB MENENDEZ, D—NEW JERSEY: The art of diplomacy is a lot harder than the art of the deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: A giggle fit, the art of diplomacy a lot harder than -- you know what, we know diplomacy is hard. The President knows diplomacy is hard. But why act like I told you so. I told you so. I mean, isn't it good for the world? Isn't it good for our country? Isn't it good for the entire Peninsula that this summit happened?
ZELDIN: So Nancy Pelosi was wrong. Bob Menendez -- Bob Menendez' point is well-taken. The -- you know, the United States of America did not elect Nancy Pelosi President of United States. It is a certain way of diplomacy or approaching foreign policy that led to this issue in the first place.
It was a temporary shot. That actually was proven false within days. Clearly Kim Jong-un wants this summit. North Korea needs to pursue a different path for their nation. The current one's not working. Their country is in shambles. And if they take a step back and reflect on some of the words that they've used, this is some people in Congress, some of the media, some all throughout our country, people who wakeup in the morning, they're laying their hair on fire and taking whatever talking points they're being fed as far as how they're supposed to oppose this President on everything and anything today, and if they reflect on what they say, there have been times were they root for North Korea against the United States. They have they have rooted for Hamas against the United States and our allies. When the market has a bad day, I've seen them celebrate. I told you so. Celebrating our economy --
REGAN: Well, that is messed up because we are all Americans first. Before we are left, before we are right, before we are anything, we are Americans. Don't go anywhere, Congressman. Congressman Zeldin is going to stay right here because coming up, we're going to discuss President Trump's comments about the MS-13 gang. Why critics are slamming the President on his rhetoric? Is it justified? You can follow us on Twitter @SundayFutures, so stay with us here as we look ahead on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES. We'll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Crippling loopholes in our laws have enabled MS-13 gang members and other criminals to infiltrate our communities and Democrats in Congress refused to close these loopholes.
ZELDIN: This issue should transcend partisan politics. And unfortunately, it's not right now in Congress. They need to protect our constituents here. They need to protect their own -- they need to work with you because you're putting your neck out there on the line. They need to do it as well even if they're taking a tough vote from their constituents.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: That's New York Congressman Lee Zeldin reacting to President Trump speech last week in Bethpage, Long Island on illegal immigration and the violent Ms-13 gang. But critics are saying that the President is unfairly conflating the crimes committed by the ruthless gang and I mean ruthless, with all illegal immigrants. Mr. Zeldin, you were there at the event, I don't -- I think it's pretty clear when he's talking about animals that he's referring to the gang members because he was talking about MS-13 and some of the horrible things that they have done, and you know you've probably given animals too much credit to call those people that do these horrible, horrible, horrible -- we don't even need to go into it but you know what I'm talking about -- to do that and then they're saying, well no he's referring to all immigrants when he says that. That seems like kind of a leap, right, if you would. I mean, taking things out of context and I think this is partly why Americans are so frustrated with the media and so frustrated with those that are trying to pull him down. What do you think he meant, sir, with those comments?
ZELDIN: That is a leap. That's a leap off the side of a cliff and falling on your face because the California Sheriff was clearly asking at the White House about MS-13 and the President directly, immediately responded to that comment referring to them as animals. And then you have members of Congress and the media and others who are trying to conflate that to him talking about all immigrants. I mean, they weren't big. They went broad. Now, what's important, and you pointed out being at -- the calling of animals is a nice way of putting it. You could actually call them much, much worse. What's very interesting was while we were at this roundtable, you had two parents, two sets of parents there for the childhood best friends were murdered by MS-13. And the animals remark came up a few times and describing an MS-13's behavior and their lack of humanity, their lack of character. The reaction from these parents are all the confirmation that the victims, their families, the people most impacted by MS-13, they're the ones who can absolutely validate that that MS-13 are in fact made up of animals. They -- we hear about the high profile crimes, we had those two best friends, you had four people also just before that murdered with machetes and centralized of ball field --
REGAN: And ripping the hearts out and the horrendous gang rape, it's -- I mean, it's really bad and this is an extremely violent group. I had one guest tell me, you know, they look make the Mafia look. You know like Disney or something because it is that bad. And they are extraordinarily ruthless, unlike anything we have ever seen historically. And so, with that in mind and also knowing as some of the people there on that panel pointed out that a lot of people are coming into this country as youths and they haven't been properly vetted and they're here illegally. And if you're trying to actually control crime in certain neighborhoods and throughout the U.S., if you're trying to control drug trafficking, why wouldn't you control your borders? Why would you allow people in and give them the potential to do this enormous harm and join a gang like MS-13?
ZELDIN: The right policy will be better border security, better interior enforcement, ending catch and release, to end the visa lottery, to -- also with the UAC, the Unaccompanied Alien Children, that program, we have these individuals who are set up for failure the entire time. The Obama Administration actually was encouraging parents of the Central American countries to turn their kids over to these coyotes for this dangerous mission in the United States. The UACs, they end up coming to -- buy the way, some of them are held at gunpoint in order to be able to cross the border. I have to do bad things, carry narcotics to get across the border. But then they come into communities where the gangs are targeting UACs for recruitment. So for that parent, the right thing for United States to be doing, the right policy would be to tell that parent not to turn their kid over.
The Trump Administration recognizes that, the U.S. Attorney, the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, other local levels of government, everyone realizes that there are flaws in UACs and other programs. We need to fix it, we want to fix it. We're up against some opposition, some obstructionism in Congress but we have to fight through it and we just need to shame these Democrats if they're not willing to do the right thing on their own. All right, let me get to another hot topic right now, and that's whether or not there's going to be a second special counsel to look into what may have happened with the FBI, how on earth that FISA warrant was issued based on a dossier that nobody had bothered to even check and see who had financed it. You are calling for a second special Council. I actually applaud that because you know what, as a journalist I want answers. As an American, I want answers. I think the world deserves answers. The United States of America, everybody who votes deserves an answer. Are you going to get it?
ZELDIN: We have gotten a lot of transparency. What we've seen in this resolution, the House Resolution 907 calling for a second special council,25 original co-sponsors. It details a lot of facts with regards to misconduct to the highest levels of the DOJ and FBI with regards to the FISA abuse, how and why the Hillary Clinton e-mail probe ended? How and why the Trump Russia probe began? And what's amazing, I was on with you a few days back and over the course of the last few days in the entire country, no one has been able to poke a single hole in a single word of this resolution. So this is filled up with facts. Now, what's very telling is Congressional Democrats and others don't want the American public to have more information. Congressional Republicans, the White House, others want the American public to have as much information as possible so they can form their own independent judgment.
REGAN: I mean, I think we deserve it. We need the information. There's still a lot of questions out there. No matter how it shakes out if we get the information and I get it, you got to redact certain things to protect certain people but at least let people make their own conclusion.
ZELDIN: The White House should declassify the FISA application. If you need to redact some of the sources and methods, that's fine. The fact is, as you read through this resolution, we now have a lot of answers. And now--
REGAN: Oh, we're getting there.
ZELDIN: And now we need accountability.
REGAN: Congressman, it's good to see you.
ZELDIN: It's great to see you as well.
REGAN: It's great to have you here.
ZELDIN: It's great to be here.
REGAN: Thank you. All right, the President continuing to call the Russia investigation a witch hunt on Twitter this morning. A senior intelligence and law enforcement officials shared classified information about the probe with Congressional leaders this past Thursday. I'm going to tell you what they had to say about it as we look ahead today on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES.
REGAN: Congressional leaders meeting with senior intelligence and law enforcement officials this past Thursday about the Russia investigation. President Trump claims the so-called government spy was placed in his campaign. One day after that meeting, the President tweeting can anyone even imagine having spies placed in a competing campaign by the people and party in absolute power for the sole purpose of political advantage and gain? And to think that the party in question even with the expenditure of far more money lost, exclamation point. Now here's the other side. Democrat Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, watch.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D—CALIFORNIA: Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence to support any allegation that the FBI or any intelligence agency placed a spy in the Trump Campaign or otherwise failed to follow appropriate procedures and protocols.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: Joining me right now, Bud Cummins. He's a former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas and Partner at Avenue Strategies. Good to see you, Bud.
BUD CUMMINS, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Good morning.
REGAN: What do you think really happened here?
CUMMINS: Well, you know, they're playing word games and it's intended to be a distraction and I think if you look at the overall landscape, there's a lot of concern among the Democrats and the left about the political implications of these latest revelations. They don't want to concede that a spy was put in the campaign. OK, what about a confidential human resource paid to approach members of the campaign to try and elicit damning information? I mean, you can call it whatever you want, but they -- during the course of an ongoing presidential campaign, the FBI targeted people in the campaign and went on a fishing expedition --
REGAN: OK, what's the difference between a spy and an informant?
CUMMINS: You got me. What's the difference between a murdering MS-13 gang member and an animal? You know, what's the difference between they eavesdropped on my campaign, whatever the President said, you know, they eavesdropped on me in Trump Tower. Well, they put taps on members of his -
- of his team that talked to him. You know, it's a word game but the talking points is really what it is.
REGAN: So I guess the question then, Bud, is were they doing this for political reasons or were they doing this because they somehow thought there was a legit a legit fear that the Russians had infiltrated the Trump campaign? The President says, political leaders.
CUMMINS: Actually look in the (INAUDIBLE) of all the decision makers but it's gross incompetence and at best it was a bunch of career bureaucrats within DOJ and FBI trying to somehow get involved in something they absolutely had no understanding of which is politics and they completely gummed it up. That's the best scenario.
REGAN: So why would they do that?
CUMMINS: Well, they might have convinced themselves they were trying to do good and they had some legitimate concern about Russian interference and elections. I mean, we can give them that. But now, let's fast forward and I ask you, what are they investigating now? What are they -- what is Mueller team -- and I ascribe no misdeeds to Rosenstein or Mueller, what are they investigating? And in this polarized country, shouldn't you and I know that? I mean you and I probably have eight or twelve years of college between us and we have no idea what they're doing.
REGAN: Well, they're -- OK, they're allegedly investigating collusion. They want to know whether the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign. I mean, I think you and I have -- and the rest of America right now has already seen that there is no evidence of collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians.
CUMMINS: That's right. So what are they investigating at?
REGAN: But that's what -- they're claiming that they could wrap it up shortly. I mean, I guess it's a question of whether or not the President is willing to sit down for an interview. Should he?
CUMMINS: I don't think he should because it's a trap and until he and his team and the American public even know what crime they're investigating. You know, they -- you've talked about a young man being released in Venezuela, you've talked about North Korea, our justice system is supposed to be different than that. You know, there's a -- there's a DOJ motto, it's in Latin and there's kind of a little mystery about it because apparently, the people who understand Latin say it doesn't really mean anything. It's grammatically incorrect. So -- but I'll tell you one thing it doesn't mean, show me the man and we'll find you the crime. That's a Russian -- that's about as American as Russian caviar and that's what we're doing right now.
REGAN: So Lee Zeldin, Congressman Zeldin was just here on set and he's calling for a second special counsel. I've talked to some people say they don't like special counsels period because they think it sends us down a dangerous path and a slippery slope. That said, I think what you're getting at is you know, they've got this investigation going on. So far they've come up with no collusion but is there something else there? Is there a deep state at work that really wants to basically change the will of the American people? And if so, does that deserve a special counsel investigation?
CUMMINS: I -- count me among the people that don't like the special counsel statute. Congress created the Independent Counsel. They tried to fix it here. It obviously doesn't work. They've allowed a special counsel to be launched like the bomber at the end of Dr. Strangelove on fraudulent pretense and now they don't know how to recall it. It's just going. And so I don't -- I don't like that. I think it's, in this case, it's the weaponization of politics. But the American people deserve the truth. So whether it's through the independent or through the OIG reports or through a special committee that Congress sets up for this purpose to have hearings like an Iran-Contra and find out -- but they need to do it soon because the American people -- there's so many important things going on and nobody deserves to have this distraction where there is questions about the President about Russia when we've got all these important things going on.
REGAN: Bud, before I let you go, I mean, isn't this exactly what Russia might wanted? I mean, isn't this what Vladimir Putin wanted all along, I mean this discord that we now have?
CUMMINS: Of course it is. Of course, it is. Their interests merged with the Democrat Party's interests and they were able to con the country into going down this path and we don't know how to stop it.
REGAN: All right, Bud Cummings, it's so good to see you. Thank you very much for all your insight. Be sure everyone --
CUMMINS: Thank you.
REGAN: You got to catch next Sunday's show because Maria is going to be interviewing the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunez. It's starting at 10:00 a.m. Eastern right here on the Fox News Channel. You know there's a chance that the summit with Kim Jong-un might actually still happen. Coming up why analysts say North Korea may need a deal as we look ahead today on "Sunday Morning Futures."
REGAN: Good morning everyone. Today we are following two major developments at this hour for the President happening on the world stage. First, Venezuelan prisoner Joshua Holt, he's back home in the USA. President Trump helping to secure his release after he spent two years behind bars in Venezuela. The President also making an announcement about the North Korean summit last night. The June 12th meeting, hey, it might be back on. The White House is reportedly sending a team to Singapore to prepare for potential talks with Kim Jong-un. All this coming after a surprise meeting between Kim and South Korea's President Moon Jae-in yesterday. So here's what the President had to say about the release of Josh Holt and the possible June 12th summit. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're looking at June 12th in Singapore that hasn't changed and it's moving along pretty well so we'll see what happens. We've had 17 prisoners released during the Trump Administration. You were a tough one, I have to tell you. That was a tough -- that was a tough situation. But we've had 17 released and we're very proud of that record, very proud. And we have others coming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: Joining me right now, Gordon Chang. He's the Author of Nuclear Showdown and the Coming Collapse of China. Boy, we've got a lot to talk about here today. But let me start actually with Venezuela and the significance of Josh Holt being back home in America right now. What does that tell you?
GORDON CHANG, AUTHOR, NUCLEAR SHOWDOWN: Well this is the second time this month that President Trump has secured the release of Americans and I don't think that's a coincidence. I think the bad actors around the world have taken one look at this President and said he's really regained his footing and now is not the time to mess with the United States of America.
REGAN: So that's a big deal. I mean, everything that he's doing right now may be in fact a little bit calculated for that world stage given that we've got these negotiations going on with North Korea. Do you think the summit is going to happen?
CHANG: Yes, I think so. The North Koreans need this summit. They need sanctions relief, they certainly don't want the United States to take out their nuke in their missile facilities. And Kim wants legitimization of course meeting President Trump. And also he needs a counterweight to the Chinese. The United States has no territorial designs on the Korean Peninsula and the Chinese you know, they've had a really rough relationship with the Koreans for two millennia. So, I think Kim really wants to meet Trump. And we saw that on Thursday when you know, the President cancels the summit and within hours the North Koreans come out with this string of unusually conciliatory messages and saying we even will go for the Trump formula on denuclearization. This is really quite stunning.
REGAN: So why did they pull what they did? I mean, why did they have so many aggressive statements in the days before that led us to have to say, OK guys, enough.
CHANG: Well, I think there are a number of factors but the most important one is that the Chinese were really starting to say to the Koreans especially after that second summit on the 7th and 8th of this month where Kim went to China two times in a row, I think the Chinese basically said, look pull back. You don't have to deal with the Americans because we Chinese are going to support your economy. And we saw in the first two weeks of this month, the price of gas and diesel in the northern part of North Korea fell dramatically. And the only reason that could have happened is because the Chinese are pumping much more oil through the friendship pipeline.
REGAN: And I also heard that coal may actually -- the coal trade may have been resumed as well where the North Koreans aren't able to send the Chinese coal. In that case, they're in violation of the sanctions that they signed up to with us.
CHANG: For about three months now, maybe two and a half, there's been really blatant Chinese sanctions busting and it's a number of things. It's North Korean workers are now back in China. It's Chinese investment into North Korea. There's all those gifts that Xi Jinping gave this to Kim at the end of the March at their summit. That's a violation of U.N. sanctions. And the worst thing about this Trish, is not only that the Chinese violated the sanctions by giving all those luxury items, they photographed it and they were saying look, we're violating sanctions, U.S., what are you going to do about it?
REGAN: Yes. Well, we can do something. Believe me, we could do a whole lot about it. You know, and don't forget and I know you've talked about this a lot and I appreciate this because you and I are simpatico on this one, we have economic leverage. So before we start you know, sending troops, we ought to be doing everything economically we possibly can with China to influence what they're doing with North Korea. And by that I mean--
CHANG: We held all the high cards for instance. We can, for instance, declared four of the biggest Chinese banks to be primary money-laundering concerns. It used to be just Bank of China. Now there's evidence coming out that the three others of the big four have also been handling North Korea's money.
REGAN: By the way, wait, it's in operation right down there. I mean, it's closed today because it's Sunday but it's in operation right over there on Madison.
CHANG: Yes, at 40th and Sixth Avenue, eight blocks from here. So we can do that. We also -- you know, we got ZTE that Chinese embattled telecom manufacturer. It's got a death sentence right now from the Trump Administration and the Chinese need relief from that. There's all sort of things --
REGAN: But we're letting it exist, Gordon. I was a little surprised by that because it feels like a little-mixed signal.
CHANG: Yes. And I wouldn't do that because you know, people are saying we'll look, the ZTE deal that the President has negotiated is a good one. But the point is this is not an issue of whether it's a good deal or not for us or them. The point is the Chinese have made this an issue of political will by saying you have to give relief to ZTE and so any deal, so no deal no matter how good is a good deal. We need to show China that we have political will and that we will not allow them to mess with Iran sanctions, North Korea sanctions, you name it.
REGAN: OK, so maybe not trade so much or maybe you know --
CHANG: Not trade so much and --
REGAN: I mean, the whole trade thing is a whole other conversation because the idea that they're like, OK, we're going to knock our 25 percent tariffs down to fifteen percent on cars.
CHANG: That makes no difference. Tariff has to go down to what our tariff is on Chinese cars coming into the U.S. --
REGAN: 2.5 percent.
CHANG: 2.5 percent.
REGAN: Or how about zero for everyone. I'll take that.
CHANG: Zero for everyone
REGAN: All right, Gordon, it's good to see. Thank you.
CHANG: Thank you.
REGAN: There's a lot we can do and we should do but it's going in the right direction.
REGAN: All right, good. Gordon Chang. Ten progressive candidates winning in the Democratic Party's carry the momentum over into midterms. We're going to debate that with our panel as we look ahead today right here on "Sunday Morning Futures.'
REGAN: New concerns for the Democratic Party as they struggle to find their way ahead of midterms. Last week we saw several progressives winning Democratic primaries in many red states, take Georgia's Governor's race where Democrat Stacey Abrams is now running for an office in a state that hasn't elected a Democrat for Governor since 1998. But then in New York, Democrat Party heavyweights overwhelmingly getting behind incumbent Governor Andrew Cuomo over his progressive challenger Cynthia Nixon. Here with me Ed Rollins, Republican Strategist and former Campaign Manager for the Reagan-Bush ticket 1984 and Democratic Strategist Jessica Tarlov. She's a Senior Director of Research at Bustle.com, both are Fox News Contributors. It's good to see you both.
ED ROLLINS, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CONTRIBUTOR: Thank you.
JESSICA TARLOV, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, BUSTLE DIGITAL GROUP: Thank you for having us.
REGAN: Ed, starting with you, where are the weaknesses right now as you see it? What is -- what is the problem with the Democrats message -- that's a big question -- but what is the problem with it and will Republicans be successful as a result?
ROLLINS: Well, it's five months to go. We don't know what's going to happen. A lot can happen in the next couple months. Here's what is happening. There's a lot of enthusiasm among particularly women candidates who are turning out. There's a lot of people on the Democratic side, there's a lot of people who basically thought OK, we've got to go out and fight Trump. There's been some intensity the voter turnout now. And when that happens sometimes the establishment types and as you look across the line just at side your side. If you're an incumbent, sometimes you're not doing very well. There's a real anti-movement out there. Now, how does that -- how does that get -- when you get to November you've got two candidates but I would say at this point in time Democrats are struggling to find a message. The Nancy Pelosi message is not exactly what they're adhering to and I think the reality is you're a party about Trump, he's the leader of our party and so candidates and our side go out and say I'm going to support the President's programs. That's much easier to determine.
REGAN: But it's one of the things that gets so challenging here Jessica, the fact that some of the President's programs actually are very in line with -- historically what a lot of Democrats have wanted. And I look to Pennsylvania for example --
TARLOV: And Ohio, Sherrod Brown who backs the President's trade policies, Connor Lamb did in the Pennsylvania special election where he took that seat. So there's a delicate line that Democrats have to walk especially in the middle of the country and we have ten Democrat Senators up for reelection in states that President Trump took by a lot. But I would say pointing to the Georgia primary for instance, Stacey Abrams won the support of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton so that wasn't really about the division between the moderate wing and the progressive wing. And if you look at Amy McGrath for instance, she was a fighter pilot. She has an amazing story. Yes she has progressive values but this isn't your typical Bernie Sanders candidate. Here she talked a lot about national security. She talked a lot about patriotism. Topics that Republicans have tried to co-opt and make their own and I think that's really when you look at the odds and we've talked about this a lot before, you see a lot more Democrats featuring their service to this country and leading with that which I think is a great trend line.
REGAN: We have a lot of women running --
TARLOV: So many that are on our side.
ROLLINS: Which is -- which is positive and a lot of -- a lot of -- a lot of people in the primers and it's not just an established candidate. Equally as important though, I think, is that there's an intensity out there and I think we had an intensity in the -- in the general. That's how Trump got elected. And a lot of the -- a lot of Democratic voters voted for Trump so some Democrats have to go try and get some of those voters back. Hopefully, we get our voters turnout and historically and the drop off of the election there's a 30 percent drop off. And so as whose voters are going to vote, that's easy for us to predict who's going to win if you tell us who is going to vote. Right now we don't know who was going to vote.
REGAN: When we think about all the female candidates that are out there, you know, it's in some ways a little surprising that others haven't gotten behind say like the Cynthia Nixon versus Andrew Cuomo. We all remember this quote from Madeleine Alberta, I'm going to play it for you and I want to get your reaction, Jessica. Here she is back in 2016 telling why -- telling people why women should support Hillary Clinton.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MADELEINE ALBRIGHT, FORMER UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: Just remember there's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
REGAN: That kind of backfired if you'll recall, Jessica.
TARLOV: It did, unfortunately.
REGAN: And you're not seeing you know, Cynthia Nixon say get the support just because she's a woman.
TARLOV: But that's not what Madeleine Albright was saying.
ROLLINS: And she shouldn't -- she shouldn't get the vote just because she's a woman. The critical thing here and having been around this game a long time. I have never seen a primary that's continued. The Sanders- Hillary battle is still going on even back in when Bush lost to Reagan in 1980, three weeks later was back to Republican Party. There's still Sanders people out there who never going to vote for the Hillary people and vice versa. In the case of Governor Cuomo, this is the largest -- second largest state in the country, overwhelming Democrat state. Cuomo is a major player. You can't basically walk away from him. She is the outlier. She's basically the challenger and I don't think she ends up winning, but it's not like you don't like women because you're voting for Cuomo.
TARLOV: Yes, that's not the argument and I think this is something that Republicans try to do to spin this argument where they say you were playing identity politics, you should just back Hillary because she's a woman. It was you should back Hillary because she's the most qualified person for this job.
REGAN: The quote was there's a special place in hell for women who don't back other women and it was this sense that you know, how dare you if you are a woman not vote for the first woman that's running for president.
TARLOV: That is a tiny piece of what Madeleine Albright was saying and it's also a tiny piece of understanding Madeleine Albright's history in this country. That's the first female Secretary of State.
REGAN: I'd like to see us get away from some of this identity politics and a little bit more back to the issues.
TARLOV: But Cynthia Nixon is not --
REGAN: We'll get a quick break. Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back.
REGAN: The firestorm of debate continues after the Justice Department briefing on the alleged spying on the Trump presidential campaign. Congressional Democrats saying they have not seen any evidence to support the claim. Let's bring our panel back. Republican Strategist Ed Rollins and Democratic Strategist Jessica Tarlov, both Fox News Contributors. And I'm starting with you on this because you use some questions. Fill us in.
ROLLINS: I have some -- I have real questions. I mean, this guy help or whatever his name is, whoever had him in that campaign, he wasn't -- he wasn't a Trump supporter so he's wandering around being paid at one point in his life by the CIA and by the -- by the FBI. Someone are basically -- and if I was the president, I'd say -- I'd bring somebody in from the Justice Department and I say you tell me what's going on my own campaign. This is outrageous. This isn't about criminal activity, this is about me.
The idea that you're paying it for somebody to be in my campaign spying on me or whatever you want to call it is outrageous and we want to stop it. We never want to happen again.
REGAN: I think he ought to know, right? Like he deserves -- we all deserve to know, by the way. And this is why I'd love to see some of the stuff be declassified within reason and we want to protect people of course, but Jessica everybody has a lot of questions. Shouldn't the President United States know what happened and why this particular person was there inside his campaign as an informant?
TARLOV: Well, I think that we do know because we know that the Intelligence Community warned the Trump Campaign that there were attempts oppression and infiltration. That's something the President denied on Twitter yesterday but we know that to be the case that was widely reported and NBC broke that news. So we do know the reason that had happened in the first place. Following up on that, I understand his desire to understand -- to know everything that he possibly can about this but then he turned it into a partisan issue and didn't want Democrats to be there for the briefings by the DOJ. That seems completely wrong to me. Then he marched his Chief of Staff and his personal attorney or the White House Attorney into that briefing, had them just give opening comments about how the President wants transparency when he really just wants politicization.
REGAN: Well, I don't think there's a politicization. I mean, I think the other side
ROLLINS: Why didn't the CIA, if they knew about this, why didn't the FBI, if they knew about this say to the President, not as a president but as a candidate, you've got problems in your campaign. There's Russians basically in there --
REGAN: That's a valid question.
TARLOV: But the reports indicate that they did warn them and they didn't heed this warning.
ROLLINS: Who did they warned? There's nobody stepped forward and said I told Trump, I told Manafort, I told anybody, I told Cory, no one has said that. What they have said is that basically after the fact, and you know there were partisans. Brennan and those guys were partisans. They're as partisan as anybody I've seen in my 50 years in politics. And the CIA guy basically was -- this was an old CIA guy Halperin. And at the end of the day, they were doing things they should have been doing.
REGAN: All right, so what does that tell you about our system? If that is allowed to happen, and Jessica, I mean, if that's allowed to happen,
REGAN: If we -- if we assume the DOJ sent a spy informant, whatever you want to call him, into the Trump campaign, Ed, I mean --
ROLLINS: If I was running a campaign and the FBI knew there was somebody in my campaign who was doing something un-American, I would want to know immediately and fire him. I cut it off. And I think it's just ridiculous they didn't do that.
TARLOV: But what if there were people in your campaign who are doing things that are un-American like George Papadopoulos --
REGAN: All right, I got to leave --
TARLOV: -- who is communicating with Russia?
REGAN: I'll see you next week.
REGAN: Good to see you both. Thank you so much and as we mentioned earlier, be sure to catch next Sunday show. Yes, our thanks to all of our troops and everyone that made such a tremendous sacrifice with their own life for this great country. Maria is going to be interviewing the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes, starts 10:00 a.m. Eastern. I'll see you right back here -- oh, well on Fox Business, on Tuesday.
<Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.>