Reps. Comstock, Dingell on exposing Hill harassment; Amb. Haley talks Mideast peace process, North Korea threat

This is a rush transcript from "Fox News Sunday," December 10, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: I’m Chris Wallace.

Roy Moore faces Alabama voters amid allegations of sexual misconduct while on Capitol Hill, members of Congress start resigning.


SEN. AL FRANKEN, D-MINN.: I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office.

WALLACE: Senator Al Franken takes a parting shot as he and two other members of Congress stepped down from the sexual harassment scandal. But President Trump doubles down on his support for Roy Moore.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: This guy is screaming, we want Roy Moore. He's right.

WALLACE: We’ll discuss whether this will be a political issue in 2018 and the effort to change how Congress handles allegations of harassment with Republican Congresswoman Barbara Comstock and Democrat Debbie Dingell.

Then, the president recognizes Jerusalem as Israel's capital, igniting protests across the Arab world.

REX TILLERSON, SECRETARY OF STATE: The president does want us to move in a very concrete, steadfast way to ensure the embassy is located in Jerusalem.

WALLACE: We’ll sit down with Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Plus, Republicans hammer Robert Mueller and the FBI as the Russia investigation closes in on the Trump inner circle. We’ll ask our Sunday panel about the GOP charges our top law enforcement agencies are pursuing a political agenda.

And our power player of the week: a conservative voice for the next generation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you’re a conservative millennial, I think that you tend to be a little idealistic just as younger people are generally.

WALLACE: All, right now, on “Fox News Sunday.”


WALLACE: And hello again from Fox News in Washington.

A reckoning over allegations of sexual harassment came this week on Capitol Hill. Over the course of three days, the political careers of three lawmakers ended. On Tuesday, the retirement of the longest-serving member of Congress, John Conyers. And Thursday, the resignations of Senator Al Franken and Congressman Trent Franks.

All this ahead of Tuesday's Senate contest in Alabama with a Republican candidate, Judge Roy Moore faces allegations of sexual misconduct with teenagers.

In a few minutes, we’ll talk with two leading congresswoman, Barbara Comstock and Debbie Dingell.

But first, let's bring in Peter Doocy live in Birmingham, Alabama, with the latest on the special election -- Peter.

PETER DOOCY, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Chris, the Senate candidate everybody has been talking about hasn't been seen in days. No events for Judge Roy Moore so far this weekend, but the Republican accused of sexual misconduct by multiple women is hoping to get by with a little help from President Trump and his friends.

Election eve in Alabama will feature a robocall from President Trump and a rally headlined by his former chief strategist Steve Bannon. In a statement to Fox, the deputy campaign manager for the campaign, Hannah Ford, says, quote, turnout is the key to victory and we have pulled all hands on deck to activate Judge Moore's conservative and evangelical base. Our volunteers are on fire and are determined to stop pro-abortion, pro-taxes and pro-amnesty liberals from stealing their Senate seat.

The Democrat Doug Jones is counting on heavy African-American turnout to flip the Senate seat Jeff Sessions held for 20 years and called into potential 2020 contenders on Saturday. Former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, to help him beat up Roy Moore with suggestions that he wouldn't represent every Alabamians who asked for help.


SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J.: Taking constituent calls, not caring if they are black or their way, don't let me get in trouble now, if they are gay or they’re straight. It's about representing all of the people.


DOOCY: Something that has been overlooked lately, the write-in candidate. Many voters here still plan to write in their preferred Republican even though nobody ever staged a formal right in campaign, which means there are countless wild cards in this race -- Chris.

WALLACE: Peter Doocy, reporting from Birmingham -- Peter, thanks for that.

Back here in Washington, we are joined now by Republican Congresswoman Barbara Comstock of Virginia and Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell of Michigan.

And welcome both of you to “Fox News Sunday.”

Let's start with Judge Moore and the Senate election in Alabama.

On Friday night, President Trump spoke in Pensacola and gave Moore his full endorsement. Here it is.


TRUMP: We can't afford to have a liberal Democrat who was completely controlled by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, we can't do it. So, get out and vote for Roy Moore.


WALLACE: Congresswoman Comstock, does that bother you as a Republican to see President Trump and the Republican National Committee both supporting Judge Moore, who faces several allegations of misconduct with teenage girls, one as young as 14?

REP. BARBARA COMSTOCK, R-VA.: Well, I was one of I think the first Republican woman for to call for him to step aside. I’m happy to see my friend like Senator Cory Gardner, who heads up the senatorial committee, Tim Scott and many others take the other side of that and say that we don't need to have him here.

Now, the voters are going to decide on Tuesday, but I think what they’re going to have is an ethics investigation and what we've been doing on my committee is we've been hearing the voices of the women and the victims, and that is where it’s going to happen, because every woman has a story. Jeff Sessions said he believed these women and I think if Roy Moore doesn't underperform like he has in the past and he's here, he’ll be facing the ethics committee.

WALLACE: But I want to ask you directly, does it work bother you as a Republican congresswoman to see President Trump and the Republican National Committee supporting Roy Moore?

COMSTOCK: Yes, I mean, it doesn't represent me. I don't think it represents most of the Republican women, as well as my colleagues like Senator Tim Scott and others, and Cory Gardner have made clear.

WALLACE: Congresswoman Dingell, Democrats move fast this week to push both John Conyers, your fellow congressman from Michigan, and Al Franken, senator from Minnesota, to step down. And there are signs that your party is trying to seize the moral high ground on this issue. Take a look.


SEN. MAZIE HIRONO, D-HAWAII: Where is their outrage? In fact, on the opposite end, they are coming forward to support Roy Moore. How’s that for totally inappropriate position?


WALLACE: Is there a difference in how the two parties are handling this issue of sexual harassment among members of Congress, and is that a legitimate issue in the 2018 campaign?

REP. DEBBIE DINGELL, D-MICH.: I think that the voters are going to hold everybody accountable, whether you’re Republican or Democrat, when 2018 campaign happen. This is probably was the most difficult week of my career, when you look at somebody like John Conyers, who had the legacy that he did have to step aside.

But this has been going on for a very long time, Chris. We know what our values are. I don't consider this a partisan issue. I find it -- I mean, Barbara and I totally agree on this issue.

I’ve also called that I think Congressman Farenthold should resign. Eighty-four thousand dollars is a lot of money, and it wasn't for nothing. We cannot have a double standard.

And we still have somebody running for office. We still have somebody in the White House that has acknowledged that they have done things that are not OK, or at least the president has. So, it's disturbing.

But we have to know who we are and I think we’re all going to be held accountable Republican or Democrat next November.

WALLACE: But do you see a difference in the president and Roy Moore on the one hand and pushing out Conyers and Franken on the other, and Democratic leaders demanding that they leave?

DINGELL: I think that everybody has got to be accountable. So, I think those that aren't -- there are two seat sitting at this table. Republicans are calling for this man to step down. And Republicans have even criticized the president for what he did.

I think we know what our values are. I think we know what we stand for and I think the American people are going to hold people accountable next November.

COMSTOCK: It has been clear from the past month, these issues aren’t partisan. They've been in the media. They've been in entertainment. And that's why we took a look in Congress.

I’m on the committee of jurisdiction. We were looking at this issue even before some of the stories came forward because we knew if we were seeing what we saw in media and entertainment industries and across all industries that it was going to be in Congress too and that's why we’re going to change the procedures.

We've already passed resolution, my bill, on having mandatory training. And we know there's a lot more that we need to do both in Congress, as well as the public at large. So, I think it's important that this not be seen as partisan because the watershed moment where men and women are coming together across the partisan divide to change the culture here, and that's why you are seeing people leaving, Democrat and Republican. There are still some Democrats and Republicans there who have been asked to leave who haven't left yet. But this is still going to be playing out.

But let's focus too on the women and their stories because we need to see what their stories are and how we can make them whole. And that's the real problem here, is that women have been denied their careers because of these men in power and it's a power abuse, not really about sex so much.

WALLACE: I’m going to talk about that. We’ll talk about reforms in a moment.

But let's review what we have seen on Capitol Hill just recently. Excuse me. Three members of Congress resigned this past week. Three more have either settled sexual harassment cases or face allegations.

Congresswoman Dingell, how widespread do you think this problem is?

I’ve heard reports that as many as 30 or 40 members of the House and Senate may face allegations of sexual harassment.

DINGELL: I’m hearing the same rumors. The numbers grow each week. I don't know what the truth is and I’m not going to deal in speculation.

I’m going to tell you what I’m the most worried about, which is -- and Barbara touched upon this. The only reason I wondered, I didn’t wonder into it -- I know this issue is very personal to me, but this isn’t real. Everybody says this is a watershed moment, is this really a watershed moment if it's not real for the tip waitress or the factory worker, or somebody in the law firm or a teacher nurse or a doctor?

And we need to look at the way that even those that have the courage to come forward in the last few weeks have been treated and then demonized. And that has been the people -- we are all trying to wrap my head around this. It's happening so fast. And there are names that nobody -- some had heard, some didn't know.

We need to make sure that we come out of this, men and women together, changing the culture, working together as we go forward. So, we got to make sure that women who do have the courage to come forward aren't hurt, that their careers are not hurt, they’re treated with respect. And knows and we have fair processes and we’re treating -- we are improving workplaces across the country.

WALLACE: People have been shocked to learn, excuse me, how Congress handles harassment cases. And let's put some of those on the screen. There's a 90-day process, including counseling and a cooling off period before a staffer can file a complaint. The Office of Compliance has paid out more than $17 million in taxpayer funds to secretly settle workplace complaints, not all of them, but certainly some of them about sex harassment.

Congresswoman Comstock, you’re working on legislation. What you want to see? How much do you want to streamline that process for women to file complaints? How much disclosure, transparency, do you want to see for people who have settled complaints in the past, and should we be naming past people, or should they somehow be protected?

COMSTOCK: No, I think we should be naming past people and that should be fully disclosed. I think we may need to have maybe an outside counsel come in to totally review any of these cases to make sure we get that all out there. So, I do fully support it. But also, the priority needs to be on the victims and fundamentally changing the system so that the victims feel they have a process that works for them and advocates for them.

So, we've been advocating either having a counsel or some type of advocate that protects the victims so they feel there's a system that allows them to come forward. But I think first we have to know who in the past, those names should be disclosed. They’re going to come out one way or the other, and they should. As you mentioned, all about -- not at all for sexual harassment. So, whatever sexual harassment should come forward and I believe it will, and I support it.

I also support nondisclosure for them not having to honor those nondisclosure agreements. The woman in the Alcee Hastings case contacted my office. I spoke with her this weekend. She's already speaking out and we need to make sure that women like her will be protected to come forward and talk and I fully support protection for them.

WALLACE: I’ve got less than a minute left.

Congresswoman Dingell, is this going to change? I mean, it's pretty easy to pass this resolution that everybody has to get training. But are we going to see a real change in the way Congress handles these cases and the naming of people who have made -- settled of these at taxpayers’ expense in the past?


DINGELL: I think there is total concurrence that there must be transparency and that we should never use taxpayers money to pay for somebody's irresponsible, despicable, unacceptable behavior. So, I think everybody is trying to figure out how do you make sure that you take care of the survivor and that the survivor doesn't have consequences.

Too much of this has consequences. And going forward, Chris, we need a conversation in this country that needs to happen at dinner tables and churches, and barbershops, in every place across the country. Men and women and families have got to work together on this.

WALLACE: All right. Thank you. And we do need to point out that this is not just about members of Congress, although that certainly is egregious. It's an all businesses, including our own.

Congresswoman Dingell, Congresswoman Comstock, thank you both for coming in today.

COMSTOCK: Thank you.

DINGELL: Thank you.

WALLACE: Up next, we’ll bring in our Sunday group to discuss how big an issue the sex harassment scandal may turn out to be in the 2018 midterm elections.



FRANKEN: I of all people am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office and a man who was repeatedly prayed on young girls campaigns for the Senate with the full support of his party.


WALLACE: Al Franken taking a parting shot at President Trump and Roy Moore in his resignation speech on the seventh floor.

And it’s time now for our Sunday group: former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Charles Lane of The Washington Post, Rachael Bade, who covers Congress for Politico, and the head of Heritage Action for America, Michael Needham.

Well, Democratic women moved with stunning speed on Wednesday to demand that Al Franken stepped down. Here is a sample.


SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D-N.Y.: Enough is enough. I mean, this is a conversation we’ve been having for a very long time, and it's a conversation that this country needs to have.

HIRONO: It was really difficult for each of us to come to this point, what I would call a tipping point for each of us.


WALLACE: Speaker Gingrich, I think it's fair to say that you’re no fan of Al Franken, but you had an interesting reaction to him being pushed out. You said this, quote: This is a party which is losing its mind -- talking about the Democrats. They suddenly curled into this weird Puritanism which feels a compulsion to go out and lynch people without a trial.

Question: why was this a lynching?

NEWT GINGRICH, R-FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: He's never faced his accusers. He's never had to process. He's never had an opportunity to clear his name. Suddenly -- and then you saw in the way he described it. Suddenly, all -- the social pressure from the left and the Democratic Party came together, made it inappropriate for him to stay.

Now, a million people had elected him and 30 people decided he was inappropriate. That (INAUDIBLE) decided that Bob Menendez, by the way, was a much more interesting story to tell, is inappropriate. This is purely and simply hysteria.

WALLACE: Is it also politics? I mean, I -- it was interesting because I asked with a congresswoman they backed away from that. Do think the Democrats trying to make this an issue?

GINGRICH: Maybe between -- I was told by a reporter who really tries to pay attention to stuff that to some extent the blowback on Nancy Pelosi when she tried to defend John Conyers was so intense from the left that everybody else on the left said they got it, lynch mobs are in this week, let's go lynch somebody, Franken is available.

The party -- it’s amazing to me, especially that he wrote number one bestseller, "Giant of the Senate", supposedly a very funny book. He's a comedian. We all know he’s a comedian. He was a comedian before he ran.

And he just crumbles under the social pressure. There's no objective force to kick them out. He wasn't going to be expelled. He just couldn’t take the social ostracism.

WALLACE: Chuck, Democratic Senator Tim Kaine said that we’ve got a new standard here and that people who were elected to office will be judged, among other things, on their behavior before they took office. Do you have any problem with the pressure on Franken to resign, was this, as the speaker says, a lynching?

CHARLES LANE, THE WASHINGTON POST: I think it's highly inappropriate to call anything like this a lynching when you think about the history of what actual lynchings really were in this country.

Having said that, I would add that I think for a lot of women they may feel like, well, you know, in the past when these things came up, there wasn't so much speed about addressing the complaints, that they got swept under the rug. What we’re into right now, though, as these sort of extreme points of view show, is a situation where contrary to Senator Kaine, there isn't a new standard. There is a shifting standard. There is not an established rule here either about what a fireable offense is, or what the procedure should be and at the end of the procedure, what the punishments should be.

So, I think, you know, what the Democrats politically are trying to do by ousting Franken is established we are consistent. We are the party that, you know, means what it says and says what it means. I would suspect that's going to be very difficult actually to sustain a consistent view of this because every case is going to be a little different and the politics are going to change constantly, and I think that was the wisdom of your two guests when they said this isn't a partisan matter, because truthfully as cases come along, you were going to see it's very hard to be consistent about this.

WALLACE: Let me just pick up with Rachael, because you covered Congress. As you watched what was unfolding in the Senate on Wednesday when all of the Democratic women senators called for him to leave and a lot of the men followed, how much of this was genuine outrage, and how much of it was -- whatever, whether it was because of the Nancy Pelosi or whatever, a decision, we’re going to distinguish ourselves from the Republicans and Trump and Roy Moore and make this an issue for 2018?

RACHEL BADE, POLITICO: I think it was both. From what we were hearing, these women in the Senate have been talking and texting about Franken. They were uncomfortable with what the stories they were hearing and there were sort of this agreement that if one more credible accuser came forward, they would all jump together and ask him to resign, and that's what you saw happen.

However, I do think politics is seeping into this. Democrats have longed sort of fashion themselves as a party of women. And right now, they are trying to show their base that they not only spouse this verbally, but they act on this as well, and they’re going to try to claim they have the moral high ground when 2018 comes and say, we pushed our members out who had this issue.

However, I do not think this is just Democrats, right? We have a president who is embracing a candidate in Alabama who has been accused of child molestation, right? I know there's a bunch of Republicans on the Hill who are very uncomfortable with this and think that he's only doing this because of politics. I think that's why you saw Speaker Paul Ryan today pushed out one of his own members, Trent Franks of Arizona over allegations that he also had sexually harassed women.

WALLACE: Well, let's talk about Roy Moore. Here's an ad that an outside group is running against Moore in Alabama right now.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I want decent people in office. That’s why I can't vote for Roy Moore. What he's done and what he stands for. It makes us Republicans and us Christians look bad.


WALLACE: Michael, talk about the politics of the Roy Moore thing in terms of the sexual harassment issue. Also, does Moore win? And if he wins, will the Republicans in the Senate refuse to seat him or vote to expel him? Which we heard a lot of talk about in the beginning. We’re not hearing so much about now.

MICHAEL NEEDHAM, CEO, HERITAGE ACTION FOR AMERICA: Yes, I think it looks like Roy Moore will win and I think it looks they will have a Senate ethics investigation if he comes there. I think Roy Moore should welcome that. He will be a more effective legislator if these allegations can be investigated, if the truth can come out. If that's not something that hangs over him and the entire Senate can be more effective at legislating rather than every time he walked down the hall, you have to talk about this, that or the other end, and instead can point to an investigation.

It relates to Al Franken. And the other thing that didn't come out in this conversation about Al Franken is that Al Franken had absolutely no interest in being a serious legislator. He introduced 141 pieces of legislation amendments, not a single one in his entire career, including time with the Democrat president, was ever signed into law. Al Franken was a mean-spirited bulldog who had no purpose in the United States Senate if he couldn't be a mean-spirited bulldog, which he couldn't do with these allegations out there.

He wasn't interested in being a legislator before. He isn't interested in being a legislator now. I think that's part of why he stepped down. And he stepped down without even having the grace to say that he’s sorry or apologize for any of us.

WALLACE: So, let me just point out. Not an Al Franken fan.

NEEDHAM: That’s, in fact, right.

WALLACE: We have to take a break here. We’ll see you all a little later.

Coming up, tensions flare over President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. We’ll report on the latest.

And we’ll talk with the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, about the fallout. That's next.


WALLACE: Coming up, President Trump keeps a major campaign promise that fuels tension across the Arab world.


TRUMP: Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital.


WALLACE: We’ll ask U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley about the move, next on “Fox News Sunday.”


WALLACE: President Trump broke with decades of U.S. policy this week and set off protests around the world by declaring the United States now recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. In a moment, we’ll discuss the move with Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

But, first, let's get the latest from Conor Powell in Jerusalem.


CONOR POWELL, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: The violence so many predicted was likely to occur following President Trump's unilateral decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital continued for a fifth straight day, as demonstrators in Beirut, in Jakarta, marched on the U.S. embassy early Sunday morning. In the Palestinian territories, protesters clashed with security forces at Israeli checkpoints in Bethlehem and other Palestinian cities. Two Palestinians have been killed and more than a thousand injured, while the Israeli air force wants air strikes in Gaza following the launch of rockets by Hamas. Two militants were killed.

But it's not just Muslim and Arab countries protesting President Trump's decision. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson faced a barrage of criticism in Europe this week. From France to Great Britain to Turkey, some of America's closest allies demanding answers why the White House made this decision now, receiving nothing in return that would move the peace process forward.

POWELL (on camera): Vice President Pence will arrive here in the Holy Land for a visit next week and already Palestinian leaders are saying they won't meet with him, believing the U.S. has crossed a red line with this decision that undermines past American efforts to act as an honest broker of peace here.


WALLACE: Conor Powell reporting from Jerusalem.

Conor, thank you.

Joining me now, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley.

Let's start with President Trump's reasoning in making this move. Here he is.


TRUMP: This is a long, overdue step to advance the peace process and to work towards a lasting agreement.


WALLACE: Ambassador, how does recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and starting to move our embassy there, specifically, how does that advance the peace process?

NIKKI HALEY, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: Well, it -- first of all, you have to, you know, just say what's realistic. I mean Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. That's why the parliament's there, the Supreme Court’s there, the president and the prime minister are there. So we have always -- the United States has always had its embassy in the capital city. And so Israel should be no different. There have been presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle that have all said that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

And so what we have said is, enough talking about it, let's do it. This is the will of the American people. The president wanted to follow through. Presidents Bush, Clinton and Obama all said they were for it but never did anything about it. And this president said it's time. And we think this is actually going to help us fast-ball the peace process going forward.

WALLACE: But I've got to tell you, I don't -- actually, I don't have to tell you that President Trump's decision is being criticized from all corners. Let's just take a quick rundown.

Palestinian Leader Abbas calls it a declaration of the withdrawal for the peace process. British Prime Minister May calls it unhelpful in terms of prospects for peace in the region. Pope Francis expressed profound concern.

Question, what are Abbas and May and even the Pope missing?

HALEY: You know, I mean leaders understand that courage is important and we don't do things just to please every other country in the world. We do things to advance the ball. And that's what the president did with this. He said, this is time that we acknowledge reality. It's been 22 years in the making. It was time.

And not only that, Chris, it's the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do. Israel should be no different. We didn't set any parameters. We didn't say this was the final status. What we said is, we're going to do like we do in every other country and we're going to put the embassy in its capital and we're going to continue and are going to continue the fact that we are as committed to the peace process as we've ever been before. And we're going to keep going until we get it.

WALLACE: I want to pick up on something you said in that last answer. Are you suggesting that this -- this fight, President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital, to begin to move the embassy there, that the final status of Jerusalem is still up for negotiation, that in a negotiation East Jerusalem could still end up as the capital of the Palestinian state? And, again, if so, why make this move mow?

HALEY: Well, I think the president, if you notice in his speech, he made a point not to talk about borders or boundaries. What he did was say that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and that we're moving our embassy there, because he strongly believes that those final status issues should be decided between the Palestinians and the Israelis. No outside group should decide what the final status looks like. And we're leaving it up to them to do that. At the end of the day, they have to be comfortable with the peace process and the resolution that we come up with. We just want to support them in that process.

WALLACE: So, again, specifically, East Jerusalem, if that's the result of the negotiation, East Jerusalem could still be the capital of a Palestinian state?

HALEY: We will respect anything that the two parties come together on.

WALLACE: I want to talk about something else that happened this week. You spoke before the U.N. Security Council when they met on this subject and you called out some of your fellow ambassadors. Here you are.


HALEY: Over many years, the United Nations has outrageously been at the world's foremost centers of hostility towards Israel. The U.N. has done much more damage to the prospects for Middle East peace than to advance them.


WALLACE: Why, ambassador, why was that helpful?

HALEY: Because it's the -- it's the facts. I mean ever since I have gotten to the United Nations, there have been repeated attempts to hit Israel for no reason whatsoever. Israel bashing sessions, constantly trying to find ways to pick at them and -- and we've seen that start to diminish. But I want the Security Council and all of the international community to understand, when you bully Israel, you are not helping the peace process. And we see Israel as one of our best allies. We're not going to put up with it any more. So when we see it, we call them out on it.

It's time for them to realize that all of these things they've done to Israel have only hurt the process. We need to treat Palestinians and Israelis fairly. We need to hope that they both come together for a peaceful solution and we need to support both of them. That has not happened for years in the United Nations, but it's started to happen now.

WALLACE: Now, there has been a suggestion of a resolution to criticize or condemn the president's move in the Security Council. Of course you would veto that. So the suggestion is perhaps it would the U.N. General Assembly that would pass a resolution. What would the U.S. reaction be to that?

HALEY: Oh, I would have a strong reaction to that. We have the right to do whatever we want in terms of where we put our embassies. We don't need other countries telling us what's right and wrong.

And, you know, what I have always said is, if we are honest, if we tell the truth, that's when peace comes. And this was the president telling the world the truth. And this was him going through with the will of the American people who had asked for 22 years to get this done. And he had the courage to show it and I think a lot of Americans are -- having a huge sigh of relief because of it. And now, hopefully, we can see the peace process really come together.

WALLACE: I want to change trouble spots of the world on you, which is part of your job, because, at the same time, the United States is calling on the rest of the world, the United Nations, to impose and force sanctions against North Korea. You say that the world has cut of 90 percent of trade with North Korea, but only 30 percent of oil to North Korea.

And I guess my question is, after all the efforts President Trump has made to cajole China, to pressure China, why is it that Chinese President Xi is not doing more?

HALEY: Well, I think what we are seeing is that China is actually following through with the sanctions. They are, as is the international community. And I'll tell you, when we talked about leadership earlier, the United States is the one that led the entire international community to basically out North Korea and say that they had to denuclearize and cut everything off. So we've done a great job at doing that. China has followed through on the sanctions.

But to be clear, China can do more. And we're putting as much pressure on them as we can. The last time they completely cut off the oil, North Korea came to the table. And so we've told China they've got to do more. If they don't do more, we're going to take it into our own hands and then we'll start to deal with secondary sanctions.

WALLACE: Well, I was going to ask you, why is it because certainly you'd -- President Trump has launched a charm offensive and also a threatening offensive towards China. Why is it that President Xi refuses to do more?

HALEY: Well, I think, you know, President Xi has his reasons to have red lines. But President Trump and President Xi have a very good relationship. And for that I think that's why we've gotten as far as we have in getting what we've gotten done. But President Trump is really starting to put the pressure on, saying that they've got to do more. Now it's time for China to respond.

WALLACE: Let's continue in the region.

The U.S. Olympic Committee says it intends to send a full U.S. team to the Winter Olympics in South Korea in February, but this week you said that that is still an open question. Here you are.


HALEY: I think it depends on what's going on at the time in the -- in the country. We have to watch this closely and it's changing by the day.


WALLACE: Changing every day. So what is the status on this Sunday? Is the U.S. going to send a full Olympic U.S. Olympic team to South Korea or not?

HALEY: Yes, we are. The only thing is, we're doing in this Olympics what we've done in every single Olympics. If you look back, we have always talked about security in the Olympics. We've always talked about keeping our athletes safe.

This is no different. And we are looking at the circumstances just to make sure we're doing everything we can. We're at the location. We're starting to secure the process. But we always look out for the best interests of the United States citizens.

But, yes, there will be a delegation that goes and we will do everything we can to make sure they're safe.

WALLACE: Now, you say a delegation, the full U .S. Olympic team?

HALEY: Yes, the full U.S. Olympic team.

WALLACE: During your time at the U.N., ambassador, I think it's fair to say you have stood out for your blunt, sometimes undiplomatic talk for a diplomat. Just the other day you said, if there's war, that North Korea -- the regime there will be utterly destroyed. Why such tough talk?

HALEY: It's the truth. I mean the reality is, if North Korea even attempts to try and threaten the United States or any one of our allies, they will be utterly destroyed. You know, diplomacy is great in some respects, but you have to also be honest. And this was something that North Korea needed to hear and the international community needed to hear.

North Korea has pushed the envelope to an extreme level. The United States isn't going to put up with it. And the international community has also rallied around saying that North Korea has to denuclearize. But that's just the honest facts. If North Korea attempts to threaten or do anything to destabilize us or our -- or our allies, we absolutely will utterly destroy them.

WALLACE: So given how well you reflect President Trump's approach, whether you call it diplomatic or undiplomatic, there's been a lot of speculation that if Secretary of State Tillerson were to leave this job sometime early next year, that the president might ask you to talk the job. And you said this week that you would, quote, not take it. And I guess my question is, why on earth not?

HALEY: I have said for months that I am not interested in the secretary of state position and it's because I know that I am valuable here at the United Nations. I am able to negotiate. I'm able to move the ball. I'm able to really diplomatically do what I need to and then sometimes not diplomatically do what I need to. And so I think I'm effective and I -- and I try and do the best I can for the president, as well as the American people. And so that's why I choose to stay in New York.

WALLACE: I just want to follow up quickly because I can understand why, given the fact that Tillerson hasn't left, you can say that. But, I mean, are you making a Sherman-esque (ph) -- as a southerner you'd understand what that means, a Sherman-esque comment, absolutely not, you would not take the secretary of state job?

HALEY: I would not take it. I am perfectly happy in New York and trying to be as effective as I can. And will continue to do so as long as the president will allow me.

WALLACE: Ambassador Haley, thank you. Thanks for your time this weekend. Always good to talk with you.

HALEY: Thank you so much, Chris.

WALLACE: Next, we'll bring back the panel to discuss the troubled state of Robert Mueller's Russia probe.

Plus, what would you like to ask the panel about GOP allegations of bias in the investigation? Just go to Facebook or Twitter @foxnewssunday, and we may use your question on the air.



REP. BOB GOODLATTE, R-VA. , HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIR: It is absolutely unacceptable for FBI employees to permit their own political predilections to contaminate any investigation.

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI DIRECTOR: There is no finer institution than the FBI and no finer people than the men and women who work there and are it's very beating heart.


WALLACE: The chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Goodlatte, questioning the impartiality of the FBI, why new -- while new director, Christopher Wray, defended his agency.

And we're back now with the panel.

Well, there were several allegations this week about Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe. First, that lead agent, FBI Agent Peter Strzok was taken off the case in July after Mueller learned he was sending anti-Trump messages to a colleague. Second, that top Justice Department Official Bruce Ohr had undisclosed meetings with two people involved with the so-called Russia dossier.

Michael, how seriously does this compromise the Mueller investigation?

NEEDHAM: Well, I think it certainly raises issues that need to be addressed. I mean the entire purpose of the Mueller investigation, and the reason many of us embraced it, was that the American people deserve to know the truth, they deserve to have a quick and thorough investigation so that we can move on from these innuendos and claims of things that have gone on.

Now you look at this. The very best thing that can be said about Peter Strzok is he's completely unprofessional, for someone in that role to be sending anti-Trump pro-Hillary tweets. The FBI refuses -- the Justice Department refuses to talk about what role did this Russian dossier, that now we find out a top Justice Department official was involved in, in talking with the person who put it together, what role did that play in getting a FISA warrant to be able to investigate members of the Trump campaign?

You have investigators on Mueller's team who have spent over $60,000 supporting Hillary Clinton and Democrats, defending the Clinton Foundation, defending Ben Rhodes, Barack Obama's national security advisor.

WALLACE: And we should (INAUDIBLE) -- that was all before.

NEEDHAM: All before that. All of these are things -- are things that cause anybody, who looks at this situation, and say, is it possible for this team to put forward a fair investigation? I think Bob Mueller needs to come forward and regain the trust of the American people. Give us confidence that this is all just coincidence and that that can be a fair investigation.

WALLACE: Rachael, clearly, as Michael lays them out, there are some legitimate issues and questions here. On the other hand, do you -- do you believe, from your reporting, that there was a concerted effort by Republicans, both in the White House and in the Senate and House, to discredit the Mueller investigation as it begins to get closer to the Trump inner circle?

BADE: Yes, I definitely say there are some Republicans, namely Trump allies, in the House who are ripping up the campaign to discredit the investigation. We saw that this week with the clip you played with Goodlatte talking about tainted agents that the FBI needs to rid itself of. They also accuse the FBI, of course, of botching the Clinton email investigation.

However I think there's sort of a split right now in the Republican Party and we're going to see that -- evidence of that going forward. There are some, like Devin Nunes, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee that is investigating the investigator, who are calling for the FBI to be held in contempt of Congress. But you have people like Speaker Paul Ryan, Lindsey Graham, Trey Gowdy, the oversight chairman, you don't hear a lot of that coming from them. And so I think there are some Republicans who want to let Mueller do his job and don't want to sort of make this a partisan mudslinging.

WALLACE: We asked you for questions for the panel and we got this on Facebook from Michael P. Mulhall. He writes, have the revelations of Special Counsel Muller's investigations met the threshold for dismissal yet? Was it an egregious mistake by Special Counsel Mueller to stack his team with such highly partisan lawyers?

And that's referring to what you said, Michael, about folks who had a history of supporting Democrats.

Speaker Gingrich, how do you answer, Michael?

GINGRICH: Well, look, I think it's been a great disappointment. When Mueller was first picked, I tweeted that I thought he had a great reputation that should stabilize the situation. Then they hired somebody at Weisman, who both has a terrible record of prosecutorial overreach and now we know was at the Clinton election night party --

WALLACE: This is Andrew Weisman, the senior prosecutor.

GINGRICH: Andrew Weisman.

And you start going down the list here. I think the number of pro-Clinton, anti-Trump people he's hired makes you wonder what he's doing.

The other thing is to look at, you know, Hillary gets discussion I think for four hours, never under oath, so she can't possibly have committed perjury. Meanwhile, you get General Flynn, after 35 years in service. Now, he did something bad. Of course Hillary's top two aides clearly committed perjury, but they don't get attacked.

I mean the imbalance in the Justice Department's entire process between the Clinton investigation and going -- the way they've gone after the president is just, I think, staggeringly corrupt. I think it is -- I don't think any word short of corrupt explains the gap between the way these two things have been handled.

WALLACE: I know you want to talk about that, but I am going to switch and I'm going to talk about us, because we, the media, has become part of the story. And I want to turn to the reporting on the Russia investigation in the last couple of weeks because there have been at least three cases of media reporting damaging the stories about Donald Trump putting them up and then having to take them down. Perhaps the most damaging, and as it turned out the worst mistake, was ABC's Brian Ross who reported on General Michael Flynn after he pleaded guilty. Here he is.


BRIAN ROSS, ABC CORRESPONDENT: He is prepared to testify that President Trump, as a candidate, Donald Trump, ordered him, directed him to make contact with the Russians, which contradicts all of that Trump has said at this point.


WALLACE: But it turned out that that reporting was wrong. He said that candidate Trump had urged Flynn to reach out to the Russians. No, he later had to clarify it was President-elect Trump urging Flynn to reach out to the Russians after the election, which is a very different thing.

I guess the question is, Chuck, particularly at a time when Donald Trump is bashing us as the fake -- as fake news, this isn't helpful.

LANE: It is not. What is helpful is that Brian Ross appears to have been disciplined. I think he was suspended for a month. And that will be at least a beginning toward correcting any of these flaws that come up.

I think, as the speaker's comments about Bob Mueller and this situation, what they have in common is that this situation calls for an honest broker, right, whether it's a Justice Department or the media or whatever, the public would be best served by institutions that everyone accepted as impartial and factual. And the whole idea of honest brokers, though, is breaking down in our country across the board. And people don't trust institutions. They don't trust the federal government. They don't trust the media, et cetera, et cetera.

And so when mistakes are made, people will accept them if they're perceived to be made in good faith. What we have now is a situation where people believe these mistakes are being made in bad faith and the president is encouraging that belief. He is --

WALLACE: Right. Some would argue that the reporters are encouraging that also.

NEEDHAM: The New York Times took out a full-page ad saying that the truth matters now more than ever. I would love to know why the truth matters more now than it did three years ago. The media acts like Donald Trump is doing something wrong because he likes to --

LANE: Well, Brian Ross -- Brian Ross still -- Brian Ross doesn't work for The New York Times. And what I -- I might add that it was -- it was the Washington --

NEEDHAM: Why does The New York Times think the truth matters now more than ever?

LANE: Excuse me. It was The Washington Post, OK, it was The Washington Post that corrected a mistake on CNN that was damaging to Donald Trump. The media is also, right now, at least one newspaper I work for, targeted by groups trying to feed it fake news and we skillfully rejected it.

NEEDHAM: If I read one more story in the press about the fact that the president of the United States likes Big Mac and Filet-o-fish sandwiches rather than Jose Andres' restaurants, I don't know what I'm going to do.

LANE: Well, is that true or -- I mean that might be true.

NEEDHAM: Who cares? Who cares? And the fact that they are -- act like it's a big deal --

WALLACE: Well, all right. All right. I will point out, that was included in the book that has just been written by two Trump supporters, Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie. I've got to say, that's a lot of calories.

Thank you, panel. See you next Sunday.

Up next, our "Power Player of the Week." A leading voice for conservative millennials.


WALLACE: If you've ever wondered who will eventually succeed Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity as the voice of conservative opinion, it may just me Ben Shapiro. Who's that? Here's our "Power Player of the Week."


BEN SHAPIRO: In a free country, it is up to you to succeed or fail on your own merits, so get off your ass and do it.

WALLACE (voice-over): Yes, Ben Shapiro talks fast. But then for most of his 33 years, he's been a man in a hurry.

SHAPIRO: And I'm Ben Shapiro. This is "The Ben Shapiro Show."

WALLACE: He's the host of the most listened to conservative podcast in the country.

SHAPIRO: Yes, I do love that Trump does have a rotating series of about ten insults that he just keeps going around and around.

WALLACE: Is the editor of The Daily Wire, which gets 100 million page views a month. And he's a big presence on college campuses where his militant conservative views spur protests.


SHAPIRO: You're not a man if you think you're a man.

WALLACE: This exchange with a 22-year-old college student over transgender identity has attracted 47 million views on Facebook.

SHAPIRO: Why can't you identify a 60? Why -- what -- what is the problem with you identifying as 60?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well (INAUDIBLE) as gender. You can't just --

SHAPIRO: You're right, age is significantly less important than gender. You can't magically change her gender. You can't magically change your sex. You can't magically change your age.

WALLACE: At the University of Utah, he listed what he calls the hierarchy of victimhood in America.

SHAPIRO: So it goes LGBTQ, and then black folks, and then Hispanic folks, and then women, and then Jews, and then Asians, and then way down at the bottom, white, straight males, right? Those are the people who are at the very bottom. And their opinions do not matter at all.

WALLACE: Shapiro has been called the voice of conservative millennials.

WALLACE (on camera): How are conservative millennials different from conservative baby boomers?

SHAPIRO: By the time a lot of conservators hit baby boomer age, there's a -- there's a mentality that's set in that they're always losing and that every choice, every political choice particularly, is the lesser of two evils choice. If you're a conservative millennial, I think that you tend to be a little bit more idealistic, just as younger people are generally.

WALLACE (voice-over): While he applauds some of President Trump's policies, he says the tweets are needlessly divisive and turn off his generation.

SHAPIRO: Young people in the United States dramatically dislike this administration and they dramatically dislike the Republican Party. And it is President Trump's responsibility, for conservatives anyway, to fix that. And sitting there and -- on Twitter and retweeting Britain First is not going to do that.

WALLACE: Shapiro worked for Breitbart in the campaign, but quit when he says it was turning into a Trump propaganda arm.

As for Steve Bannon?

SHAPIRO: I think that Steve is very interested in being perceived as powerful, as being perceived as a mover and shaker. I don't think he's nearly as much of a mover and shaker as he wants to be seen as.

WALLACE: As we said, Shapiro has always moved fast. At age five, he dressed for hollowing as John Adams. By age 17, he wrote a nationally syndicated political column.

SHAPIRO: I skipped a couple of grades. I was a virtuosic violinist.

I actually, when I went to college, thought that I was going to double major in genetic science and music. So I was always pretty driven.

Things that I hate --

WALLACE: And his only plan now is to keep pushing his special brand of combative conservatism.

SHAPIRO: Sometimes the best way to get a message across is to just speak bluntly. And so I'm not going there to deliberately offend people. I'm saying things that I think are true with precisely the amount of verve I think necessary to convey the message.


WALLACE: After our interview I had one piece of advice for Shapiro, try talking a little slower so some of us can keep up with him.

And that's it for today. Have a great week and we'll see you next “Fox News Sunday.”

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 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.