Scalise is back on baseball diamond, one year after shooting

This is a rushed version of 'The Story' from June 14, 2018. This copy may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, FOX NEWS CHANNEL HOST: Yes we're not going to miss that moment, it's going to be really extraordinary. Bret, thank you so much.  So, a live look once again at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C. where the ballgame is bringing people together right now which is definitely what we need.

The Congressional Game about to get underway, and as Bret was just saying Congressman Steve Scalise, who one year ago was shot and nearly bled to death on a baseball field. Will be standing at second base and here he is as he comes out. We're taking you live as it happens, let's watch this for a moment.

Look at -- look at Steve Scalise, here. Walking with one cane on one arm, walking down the line and hugging everybody. I mean, this is a man who went through so much, and as you, you know you have to take yourself back to that moment. We were all literally day by day wondering if he was going to survive what happened.

This gunman opening fire on a baseball field on a beautiful morning in Washington, D.C. It was freakish, bizarre, and brutal, and so devastating for Steve Scalise and his family, who I guarantee are in tears right now watching him out here on this baseball field as he walks around and gets ready to take second base. So, our best to him, it is wonderful to see this tradition continuing tonight. And we will keep an eye on this really special moment at Nationals Park tonight as we watch the game.

But first, there is another game to discuss tonight and that is the future of the FBI.


CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: We need to hold ourselves accountable for the choices we make and the work we do.

Your I.G. report makes clear that we've got some work to do.

MACCALLUM: A stinging I.G. report today doubles down on the president's criticism of James Comey. Calling him insubordinate and saying that he usurped power while he was at the agency. But remember this.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Aren't you concerned that, that public trust has taken a hit because of the decisions you made?

JAMES COMEY, FORMER DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: I think given what I knew at the time, these were the decisions that were best calculated to preserve the values of the institutions --

It's a lie that the FBI was in tatters. It's a lie that I was estranged from that workforce. One of the proudest parts of my life was I loved those people, and I think in the main they felt it back.


MACCALLUM: Tough report for James Comey and also for Loretta Lynch, who was called week by the Inspector General and found that the agency was plagued with leaks. Trey Gowdy, says the descriptions in this report, he says this is not the FBI I know, this is not the FBI that our country needs.

Congressman Eric Swalwell, with his reaction in moments. But first, former FBI Deputy Assistant Director Danny Coulson. Danny, good to see you this evening.


MACCALLUM: I know that the men and women of the FBI you hold near and dear to your heart.


MACCALLUM: Your thoughts as you listen to the fallout here.

COULSON: Well, I think we have to understand, Meghan, this never was an FBI investigation. This is James Comey's investigation. He hijacked that investigation, took it away from FBI agents in the field who are not influenced by pressure, or fear, or politics, took him to his own office and never let the FBI do it.

It's very disturbing to me that he did that. The FBI is intact, Christopher Wray, did a magnificent job, they put this thing in perspective. This what an FBI deal, this was a James Comey deal with his minions that start to influence an investigation and end up not doing one.

MACCALLUM: Yes, what goes to your mind when you look at an exchange like this between Lisa Strzok and both -- Peter Strzok, excuse me, and Lisa Page.

Page, says in a text message, "Trump is not ever going to become president, right? Right?" And Strzok, says, "No, no. He is not. We'll stop it.

COULSON: Well, I think they did stop it. If you -- if you look at the animus in those e-mails, and the -- and the bias, and then, see what they didn't do how they conducted this week ineffective sophomoric investigation that did not use a grand jury, that didn't do hard-hitting investigations, and was conducted by people at a much too high level. And they should have allowed FBI field agents to do that. They're tougher, they're harder, and they don't care about politics.

MACCALLUM: Danny, let me ask you a question. This is in the report that came out today, and this is what they say about the grand jury. It says, we found that one of the reasons for not using a grand jury for testimony involved concerns about exposing grand jurors to classified information.
How does that wash with you?

COULSON: We -- It's laughable, I did Iran-Contra that involved a lot of classified material.

MACCALLUM: It's amazing.

COULSON: We indict spies and we expose the grand jury to it. That's a specious argument, I have a hard time with that, I've talked to other agents today and the former agents, they all laughed at it too. A grand juries, there is a process, Meghan, to do that.

MACCALLUM: It's Martha, but that's OK, Danny.

COULSON: I'm sorry. Martha, I apologize.

MACCALLUM: I know, that's OK. That's all right.

COULSON: I'm sorry. But there is a process and they didn't do it.

MACCALLUM: Let me ask you one other here. Because this also really stuck out to me. In terms of the interview that they did with Hillary Clinton at the very end. That we know that the report was basically written before they even sat down with her, and the Inspector General says, "We found that by the date of her interview, the midyear team and Comey had concluded that the evidence did not support criminal charges." And that in parentheses, absent a confession or false statement by Clinton, during the interview.
"And that the interview had little effect on the outcome of the investigation." How can that be?

COULSON: It can't be. It shouldn't be. And I think that's why we have to look at bias here. They were biased to come up with a conclusion whether the director didn't have the courage to go forward with a proper investigation, or at a biased -- I don't know the answer to that. But I know that, that it's not our job to make a prosecuted opinion, we do a complete full investigation given to somebody else. They decide not us.

And you don't formulate your investigation based on a preconceived notion of innocence or guilt. That's where the FBI operates, but not in this case.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, I think it's interesting. There's all the headlines coming out of this or many of them are well, there was no bias in the investigation. When I -- when I actually started reading it, I couldn't understand where that takeaway really came from?

But one other thing because Christopher Wray, spoke about this today.
Let's put up this chart that is part of the report that shows the pattern of leaks coming out of the FBI.

So, just you know, obviously, at home you can't really grasp this completely. But the little red circles in the middle are reporters. And then, there are numbers that extend out showing the number of exchanges between the reporter and people like. For example, the Deputy Assistant Director, the staff operations specialist, the senior special agent, the general attorney. All going to this reporter person in the middle. And there are three different circles that show all of the myriad of contacts that were had. Is this the FBI that you know sir?

COULSON: No, no, no, Martha, that is not. We have media people, and if you want something go to the media, you go to them. They're the ones that have your relationship with the media, with the networks or whoever. It's not -- it's not a job of a thousand people in the FBI to talk to the media that's why we have leaks.

Now, I think, Christopher Wray, addressed that today. He's -- they're going to do a study to see what they should do, and what they should do is go back to what we did, don't talk to him.

MACCALLUM: Yes, don't talk to me. I mean, you know, I mean, I know FBI agents that I try to get stuff out of, and they don't talk to me. So there are a lot of good ones out there, and we all know it. Danny, thank you very much. It's good to -- good to speak with you tonight. The former agents will give you a little bit more about.

COULSON: Thank you, Martha. I appreciate it. Thanks.

MACCALLUM: Good to see you tonight. So earlier this evening, I spoke to Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, who sits on the House Intel Committee, and I got his take.


MACCALLUM: You know given what we know now from the I.G. report which calls -- which calls Director Comey, insubordinate. It says that "We found that it was extremely -- extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions to his superiors." It goes on to say that "He usurped the authority of the Attorney General, and did not accurately describe the legal position of the department prosecutors." Which is pretty strong language there.

So -- you know, given all this, do you think now looking back that the president was right to fire James Comey.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA), HOUSE INTELLIGENCE SELECT COMMITTEE: No, absolutely not, Martha. And remember, this president just weeks before the election wanted to throw a parade for James Comey. He agreed with James Comey reopening the Clinton investigation. So, he has no credibility on this as report found that there were no crimes by Clinton, no bias at the FBI and something that we all know that James Comey is an imperfect man just like we are all imperfect people. And that he could have done his job better. This is good for Democracy.


MACCALLUM: If when you look back at it Congressman -- wait, but when you look back at it, you know, you sort of take a step back from all of this and you look at the memo, and I know that it became complicated but the memo that Rod Rosenstein wrote said that this investigation of Hillary Clinton was mishandled and that, that was the reason that James Comey needed to be fired.

So, you know, we, looking back of that, this is now sort of doubles down on James Comey's actions and why it would make say -- I mean, I would imagine if he was still in place now. There would be a lot of questions about whether or not he needed to be fired.

SWALWELL: Yes. But that's a fair question, Martha. But do you think that President Trump was lying to Lester Holt? Because he told Lester Holt that he fired James Comey because of the Russia investigation. So, if you think he was lying to Lester Holt, then, maybe that is the case. I think he was telling the truth to Lester Holt, don't you?

MACCALLUM: You know what, he has cited a number of reasons. And you know, we're all very aware of that sound bite, and I agree with you that he absolutely said that. But when you look at Rod Rosenstein's memo, and the all that reasons that he outlined, it just looks like -- you know, the broader government would have to ask that question now regardless of whether or not James Comey was still on office.

Now, with regard to the fact that the five FBI agents have now been referred for investigation for bias as a result of this, your thoughts on that.

SWALWELL: Yes, well, I hate reading the Strzok and Page exchange. That is not how FBI agents should conduct themselves, and I think that they should be referred for an internal investigation, you know, as it relates to their jobs. But there was a finding that it did not affect any investigation actions that they took nor should it.

And you know, look, I have brothers who are police officers, boy do they have strong political opinions. And I just hope and I see in their work that it never affects what they do on the streets, and there's no evidence that any haze was affected by what Strzok and Page were doing.

MACCALLUM: Yes. It's very interesting. Just going back to what I mentioned before from the report that James Comey usurped the authority of the Attorney General, and did not accurately describe the legal position of the department prosecutors.

And when you go through that the language that was changed, and it's believed that it was likely changed by Peter Strzok. You know, when you look at the things that were altered, changing reasonably likely that hostile actors gained access to the e-mail server that was changed to possible. They also changed that she used private e-mail to communicate with President Obama in hostile territory to that, that was a senior official.

You know, so when you look at all the softening of that language as it goes through, and then, you look at that at the Strzok-Page text message that says, you know, we will find a way to stop it when it comes to a Trump presidency. It doesn't look good.

SWALWELL: No, it certainly doesn't look good. But Martha, if they were out to hurt Donald Trump, why was there never a leak about the intensity of the Russia investigation or the serious contacts that Donald Trump's team had? If they really wanted to destroy Donald Trump, they would not have reopened the Hillary Clinton investigation.

MACCALLUM: Well, it seems like they were -- it seems like, in fact, they wanted to keep that unrest. I just want to bring up one more thing. This is from Peter Strzok -- a statement from Peter Strzok through his attorney.
And it asked the question about the Hillary Clinton investigation which -- you know, I know Democrats criticized the fact that hers was so public, and that the Trump investigation was under wrap. So he said, "There is simply no equivalence between an investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, and credible evidence suggesting that the presidential campaign of a major party candidate was actively colluding with a hostile foreign power in a way that could undermine the integrity of an American presidential election."

I mean, he's citing that as if it's fact, at this point we still haven't -- we have no evidence that would support that but that's why he claims -- Peters Strzok claims that he had to move his attention so firmly over to this other campaign that he clearly did not want to succeed.

SWALWELL: Well, Martha, I would disagree. I would say that there is evidence to support what Peters Strzok is saying. There has not been a conclusion, though evidence, you know is not a conclusion. Evidence has to be weighed and tested and that will bear out through -- you know, any future charges that are in addition to the 20 people who already charged, and the guilty pleas we've seen in the investigation.

But there's a lot of evidence of collusion, and we'll see you know, what Bob Mueller, brings.

MACCALLUM: Yes, we sure will. Thank you very much, good to see you tonight.

SWALWELL: My pleasure. Me, too.

MACCALLUM: Congressman Swalwell, thank you.


MACCALLUM: Here now Marc Thiessen, American Enterprise Institute scholar, former chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush, and Fox News contributor. And Philippe Reines, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton. Gentlemen welcome. A lot watched you over today. Marc, what stands out?

MARC THIESSEN, RESIDENT FELLOW, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Actually what I think and it's good that Philippe is with us today because I think the person that has been overlooked as the loser in this whole thing is Hillary Clinton.

So, Hillary Clinton, we -- before go -- before today we had heard from Comey statement that they were probably her e-mails were compromised. In fact, the report today on page 144 says that "They successfully determined classified information was improperly stored and transmitted on Clinton's e-mail server and classified information was compromised by unauthorized individuals to include foreign governments and intelligence services via cyber intrusion and other means." That is a huge, huge breaking news.

We have now -- have confirmation that Hillary Clinton's recklessness in handling classified information led to foreign intelligence services getting a hold of classified information that's enormously big news.

MACCALLUM: Yes, there's another line to add to that before Philippe response which is that they also revealed that she was using her phone to speak to President Obama by e-mail in hostile territory and that they removed the name President Obama from it in the final report and called it a senior official. Philippe.

PHILIPPE REINES, MANAGING DIRECTOR, BEACON GLOBAL STRATEGIES: Well a couple of things. First, Hillary Clinton lost 18 months ago. I don't have to keep throwing e-mail at her, it was very effective, it worked, she's not president. Our current president uses his phone unsecured all the time.
So, I -- we can set that aside too. So, I would say that --

MACCALLUM: As does James Comey -- James Comey apparently. I am not going to defend James Comey at all over the next seven minutes. He did not use good judgment but the news of this report is twofold. One, it's that there was no bias, that everyone on Fox and otherwise including Mark and you Martha, with all due respect, who says that there was bias, that this was done to help Hillary Clinton. It's nonsense. It just flies in the face of any kind of logic. Second, what's interesting about this is that everyone
-- this is like Groundhog Day. Every month we're on we're talking about the Nunez memo, we're talking about this. Everyone weaponized these reports for their own good and in this case, everyone on the right is saying look at this report, look at this report. Whenever Bob Mueller comes out with his report, it's going to be well this report is deep state, ignored.

MACCALLUM: I think you're probably right. I said the same thing to Mark, you know. I think that that's one of the things that's unfortunate about this. You look at the report and you know that people are going to take away from it what works for them. You know, I really believe that I read through this today with -- as clear an eye as I possibly could and I kept looking up at the T.V. and all across the television sets in my in my office, it was saying you know, no bias, no bias. And then I'm reading these things about everything they change in the report just soften the language I'm thinking, OK for what reason that would they have done that?
So you know, it is -- I think it's difficult Philippe, to read through it and not to raise questions about what reason would they possibly have other than to try to make it easier for her in terms of changing all this language.

REINES: He cost her the election I mean switch it for a minute. Switch it for a minute. If on October 28th -- well let's actually go back. If on October 26th, Martha, I came on your show and I said oh there's something big coming, wink and nod. And then two days later Jim Comey said there's an investigation that the Russians are working in cahoots with Donald Trump. You guys would go crazy legitimately so because that is not his role and that's what the report said. I mean, I come on fair amount as a talking head. This is a little different for me. I've -- next month is 16 years since I started for Hillary Clinton and this is just -- what happened was not right the FBI -- no one conducted themselves well. And your chart on the wall is missing Rudy. I mean, how could it not be your interview with Rudy?

MACCALLUM: My interview with Rudy, I didn't interview Rudy. But --

REINES: You did. No, no, two days before the election -- two days before the 28th when he said there was a surprise coming.

MACCALLUM: He did believe there was a surprise coming. He just said it.
Here's a tweet from Hillary Clinton. She's looking at the fact that -- it says in here that Comey used his personal Gmail account to conduct official FBI business according to -- and Hillary said but my e-mails? So, Philippe, we love having you and I'm glad you're here. And no, I really appreciate your input and I understand where you're coming from as you take a look at this in hindsight. And I got to leave it there. Mark, Philippe, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight.

REINES: Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So coming up next, it is the President's birthday today. Did you know that? And the Attorney General of New York gave him a lawsuit against him and his children accusing them of illegal conduct with the Trump Foundation. Corey Lewandowski's going to respond to that from the Trump camp, but first back to our Nationals Park and our National Anthem.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light. What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight, over the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming? And the rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that our flag was still there. Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner yet wave over the land of the free and the home of the brave?


MACCALLUM: So today while Rod Rosenstein was delivering the I.G. report on the Clinton case to the White House, at that same moment pretty much, back here in New York the Attorney General's Office who has said that they will "use every available legal tool to fight Trump's dangerous agenda" filed a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation. The suit which specifically names the President's children along with the President, Don Jr., Eric, and Ivanka, accuses the Foundation of illegal conduct and alleges unlawful coordination with the Trump Presidential Campaign.

New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood who took over that position after Eric Schneiderman resigned in disgrace amid reports that he had abused women, she says this. "The Trump Foundation was little more than a checkbook where payments from Mr. Trump or his businesses to nonprofits regardless of their purpose or legality." Underwood seeking 2.8 million in restitution plus penalties and wants the Foundation dissolved which by the way the President wanted to do a long time ago when he ran for office but they said they had to keep it open so that they could keep the investigation open. The President now says he will not settle this case.
Corey Lewandowski is President Trump's former Campaign Manager and his Co- Author of let Trump be Trump. Good to see you this evening, Cory. Thanks for being here. Well, what do you think about this suit?

COREY LEWANDOWSKI, FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: Well, I think this is politics at its very worst. What we've seen is Eric Schneiderman thought he was going to make his political career going after Donald Trump and his family and the Foundation. At the same time, he was asking them for donations when he was running for office so that's the hypocrisy of New York politics. And now you look at what the Attorney General has said recently about this administration. Let me read a to you, it's very important. Battling the White House is the most important work I have ever done. That's what the Attorney General of New York has said. So if you don't think that her attacks on the Trump Foundation are political vendetta, then nothing is. She is abusing her power as the Attorney General to go after a Foundation which has donated tens of millions of dollars to charitable causes and specifically those to help veterans.

MACCALLUM: And Eric Schneiderman didn't really use his office at all to investigate the Clinton Foundation. He was a supporter of Hillary Clinton but did not choose to use the office's resources to look into that at all.
But in terms of the campaign and what they are accusing the campaign of, Corey, it does point to you directly with regard to the Iowa caucuses and the e-mail that you wrote to Allan Weisselberg, and the subject is veterans charities, and it says is there any way we can make some disbursements this week while in Iowa specifically on Saturday. Now they're claiming that they -- that the Foundation was used to funnel cash to certain organizations in order to I guess, curry favor ahead of the caucuses. What do you say about that, Corey?

LEWANDOWSKI: Look, let me be very clear. I've never spoken to anyone from the New York Attorney General's Office. They've never contacted me. I've always made myself available. So you know, again, this was politically motivated and if people were really concerned about a foundation, Hillary Clinton's Foundation raised $500 million dollars from countries like Qatar, and Algeria, and Kuwait, and gave 15 percent of their money for programmatic requests. 15 percent of the $500 million dollars they gave away. The Trump Foundation, by contrast, raised $18.8 million over 30 years and gave away 19.2 million. Meaning, they gave way more money than they actually ever raised they had zero overhead. You know, if you look at what the Trump Foundation has been giving, they gave $1,100,000 to the Marine Corps and Law Enforcement Association.

That is the Association has tasked with. If you died in the line of duty as the United States Marine or is a law enforcement officer, this is the foundation that funds your kid's education. The Trump Foundation gave them a $1.1 million. The Green Beret Foundation, the Navy SEALs Foundation, these are the premier foundation, the 22Kill Foundation which is designed to prevent the 22 individuals who kill themselves every day after they come back from suicide. This is where the Trump family gave their money. So I don't understand why there's any question that Mr. Trump and his companies that he controlled personally donated over $8 million to this foundation over the last 30 years because that's the charitable individual that he is and he should be praised for the work that he's done.

MACCALLUM: All right, so in terms of any suggestion that the campaign was using that money in any way other than a charitable donation to that you say?

LEWANDOWSKI: Look, Martha, to the best of my knowledge and I'm sure of this, all of the money that Foundation gave, the Trump Foundation gave, gave to recognize 501(c)(3) charities in accordance with the law and nobody's ever accused us of doing anything otherwise.

MACCALLUM: And the president says he will fight this which is basically his MO when these kinds of things come up, correct?

LEWANDOWSKI: Well, you do have to fight because when you are politically targeted, this is you know, this is politics that's worse. This is someone using their office. In this case the, Attorney General of New York using her office to go after the Trump Foundation which is, Martha, you said at the beginning, they offered to close the Foundation a year and a half ago and settle any potential problems and they said no we need to keep it open.
And the New York Attorney General's Office right now is holding almost $2 million of foundation money that they can't disperse to those charitable causes.

MACCALLUM: Corey Lewandowski, thank you very much. We'll see where it goes. Good to see you tonight, sir. Thank you.


MACCALLUM: Coming up next, Constitutional Law Attorney Jonathan Turley takes on the legal ramifications of today's two very big stories. The one we were just talking about, the Trump Foundation lawsuit and the incrimination -- the report -- the I.G. report on the Clinton Probe with Jonathan Turley next, don't go away.



CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FBI: We need to hold ourselves accountable for the choices we make and the work we do. The OIG report makes clear that we've got some work to do.


MACCALLUM: That was the FBI director a short time ago, Christopher Wray acknowledging that the agency's work on the Hillary Clinton probe was flawed after the DOJ watchdog report slammed the former director is insubordinate, among other things. The report caused quite a stir in Washington as you would imagine.

And back here in New York, the attorney general filed a lawsuit. They chose today to do that against the Trump foundation.

Jonathan Turley, constitutional attorney and law professor at George Washington University joins me. Always good to see you, Jonathan. Thank you very much for being here tonight.


MACCALLUM: You know, you look through these text messages between these members of the FBI and there's a whole other set that came out as part of this report, whether talking about how upset they are, about the outcome and they are so concerned that they had something to do with it and how they can live with themselves as the result. So the suggestion that there wasn't a bias, it seems very difficult to swallow given this, all these conversations.

TURLEY: And notably, the inspector general is not saying that. The inspector general did not say that there was an absence of evidence of bias, he said the contrary. He said particularly, he was struck that they were not confident that his decisions were not made on the basis of political bias.

It's ridiculous to say they didn't find evidence of political bias. The reports filled with statements of bias. The inspector general was saying is that, he can't say conclusively that though, that whatever bias they found influence the outcome of these actions. So, and that's a very difficult thing because there are many people involved and the people involved said look, I wasn't influenced by political considerations.

And so the inspector general said, yes, there was some problematic troubling cases of bias but I did not find evidence that they really were outcome determinative. That's a very different

MACCALLUM: And what do you think of that? You know, I mean, do you agree?
I mean, obviously when you're a -- he is the inspector general for the agency so his job is to, you know, go look back in all of this and figure out whether or not there was any political bias involved. It is a very difficult thing to determine but I guess the most important thing is as you step back from it is, what happens now?

And you know, you heard Christopher Wray talking this afternoon about what they need to do to make sure that this never happens again. And I guess, my question is, can you put this genie back in the bottle or are we so divided as a nation that the FBI will not be able to approach questions like this in a completely unbiased way and do their work.

TURLEY: Well, you know, I'm optimistic because this was an important step.
First of all, this was a wonderful report, it is comprehensive, it's right down in the middle. Nothing is hidden and he comes to a very honest conclusion that he can't say that bias produce these outcomes while detailing some examples of bias.

He also said some things that were truly newsworthy like the fact that Hillary Clinton was effectively hacked by foreign powers and there was classified evidence of compromise.

Comey is now on the record once again for violating core Department of Justice rules and policies. That by the way is going to make it difficult for Robert Mueller to proceed on obstruction on the basis of terminating Comey. This is another report of career officials saying, yes, Comey really did act in violation of the rules.

MACCALLUM: Yes. You know, that's just had something that I find very interesting. Because I spoke to Eric Swalwell about this earlier. If the inspector general has found that James Comey basically gave reason to be fired by being insubordinate and usurping power from the department of justice, but the president mentioned that he wanted him to leave because of the Russia thing. You know, how does al of that sort of patch, I mean, how do you put that together, and does it mean that the firing of James Comey overall was the right thing to do in retrospect?

TURLEY: Well, the irony is that the best defense for President Trump on obstruction may be James Comey and this report. You'll notice the inspector general said to come I'm not going to make assumptions about how bias might have influenced the outcome. He said I haven't found any documentary evidence that shows that that was a result.

Well, that was basically the argument of the Trump team. That yes, maybe the president was thinking about Russia, or maybe he dislike Comey but that there were legitimate reasons to do what he did precisely what the inspector general--


MACCALLUM: That's why Rosenstein outline in his memo.

TURLEY: That's right. That is exactly what the inspector general decided today.


TURLEY: There were legitimate reasons for what he did and he's not going to make assumptions of any violations of law.

MACCALLUM: Fascinating. Jonathan Turley, always good to see you, sir.
Thank you so much.

TURLEY: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Up next, a veteran journalist provokes a head-scratcher about President Trump.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With all these tweets and all that other stuff, he just may have some idea what he's doing.


MACCALLUM: And Corey Stewart ran on the Trump agenda and just won the Republican Senate primary race in Virginia. His take on that, after the break.


MACCALLUM: So, to Trump or not to Trump? That's a question for some GOP candidates out there.


BOB CORKER, (R) UNITED STATES SENATOR: It's not the place for any party to end up with a cult-like situation as it relates to a president that happens to be purportedly of the same party.

MARK SANFORD (R) UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE: Like my opponent said last night, her words were, this is the party of Donald J. Trump. I don't believe it's the party of Donald J. Trump.


MACCALLUM: So not supporting the president did not end up working well for Mark Sanford who you saw here last night, but supporting President Trump is working well for some others including our next guest, Corey Stewart, who is self-proclaimed Trumpier than Trump. He has gotten lot of attention for this contentious interview last night after winning the Virginia Senate primary.


COREY STEWART, (R) UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE: I don't agree with any of those things that you said. The thing is -- they are all true. Chris, what you are trying to--


CHRIS CUOMO, HOST, CNN: You are trying to deny your past but they are like a big ugly shadow, Mr. Stewart.

STEWART: Chris, you are trying to change the topic by the fact -- no, I'm always playing the race card.

CUOMO: Just the fact.


MACCALLUM: So it is going to be an interesting ride for Virginia Republican Senate candidate Corey Stewart. Thank you very much for being here. Good to have you tonight.

STEWART: Yes, my pleasure. Thanks a lot, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So, you know, obviously the subject that you are arguing with him last night at CNN is going to continue to come up. When you have debates, when you are going through this process the questions about people that you have associated yourself with in the past have been written about on the Daily Wire, in the Weekly Standard.

Paul Nehlen is one of the names that is in there and he has been harshly criticized for anti-Semitism. You once called him a hero and said you were inspired by him. Will you discount that, do you reject that? What's your answer to that, sir?

STEWART: Yes, actually I have many times. You know, when I supported Nehlen is when Philip Schaff did and Anne Coulter did and President Trump did as well, he said very nice things about him. It was only afterwards that the guy kind of lost his marbles and said all these terrible things.
And we all at that point distance ourselves from him and disavowed him.

But of course that's not enough for CNN and all the left-wing media, they are trying to connect us to all that. And the reason they are as they are trying to distract from the main message which is this. That is that President Trump is strong, he is getting stronger, and those of us who have tied ourselves to President Trump and who vowed to support his policies are winning. We're winning in the primaries. And we're going to increasingly win as we get closer to November.

I think, I think that by that point, we will have a red tide because of the popularity of President Trump.

MACCALLUM: You may be right about that. One more question because I move up of this topic, because Paul Nehlen, you are right, did not start to, it wasn't revealed that he had made this anti-Semitic comments when you said such going things about him. However, he had already said that he believe that all Muslim should be deported from the United States. Do you agree with that?

STEWART: No, not at all. You know, not every person that you meet with, and you meet a lot of them in politics. You don't do a background check on everybody and I certainly would not agree with that. I have a very good relationship in fact with the Muslim community and the community that I served right now.

MACCALLUM: So in terms of the Trump campaign, you are involved with the Trump campaign, you were fired from the Trump campaign in 2016, but now the president is supportive of you. He wrote a very nice tweet about you congratulating you on the campaign the other night and you have made it very clear that you want very much to be closely aligned with him as you move forward in this campaign, correct?

STEWART: That's exactly right. Look, he's had a tremendous string of successes here. The tax cut which has led -- and you can actually see it, I'm telling you. You can actually see the resurgence in manufacturing in particular, in Virginia, in southwest Virginia and around the state. And now with this latest success in the Korean peninsula for the first time, we got peace breaking out since 1950 in the Korean peninsula, and you can't argue with that success.

MACCALLUM: It's remarkable. You know, you're going to run against Tim Kaine in the state of Virginia, obviously that's going to be a very tough race, it's always a tight race in Virginia. So, tell me what, you know, just very quickly before you go, what's your main strategy, what do you think his weaknesses?

STEWART: That he hasn't done anything. I mean, Tim Kaine has been in office for six years and he has accomplished absolutely nothing. Not a single, even Democrats admit, not a single accomplishment in the past six years. The only thing he has done is run for vice president and he didn't even do a good job at that.

MACCALLUM: All right. Corey Stewart, thank you very much. Congratulations on your win and thanks for answering the questions tonight. We'll see you soon.

STEWART: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So coming up in just a moment, we are watching the baseball game too that plays out this evening. That was the walk out earlier of Steve Scalise exactly one year ago. The House majority whip was shot and seriously wounded and almost lost his life. But tonight he is playing baseball in Washington, D.C. And also tonight, the Louisiana congressman as we mentioned -- yes, he's out there playing. That's what we're saying. He's out there playing. Steve Doocy is out there too and he joins us live from Nationals Park. So stick around for that, it's going to be awesome. There he is, hi, Steve. We will be right back.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who is running Congress? Everybody seems to be here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nobody. Nothing is going on right now. Yes, we're all here at the ballpark.



MACCALLUM: So as you know, the big congressional baseball game is going on tonight. I mean, it's hard to believe we were there last year, we did a live broadcast from the game. It was a very moving night. Steve Scalise was in the hospital fighting for his life at that point, he had been gunned down with others at a baseball field outside of Washington, D.C., in a just horrific and enormously obviously unexpected horrible attack that happened there. So tonight, they are back on the field. Here's what happened on the first play, OK. The leadoff batter hits a sharp grounder on the first pitch at the congressional baseball game, right at Scalise who feels that cleanly and throws out Democrat-- Democrat California Republican Ruiz at first. That courtesy of Chad) program to play by play. He's goes to play by play all the time.

Steve is here. Steve Doocy is at the game this evening, there is a look at it. I mean, you can't make that up.

STEVE DOOCY, CORRESPONDENT, FOX NEWS: You know, you cannot make that up, absolutely right, Martha. We have spent the entire day with Steve Scalise. And you know, I know he's been practicing, I know he's had a dozen surgeries since one year ago today when just a couple of miles from where we're standing right now here at Nationals Park. That crazed gunman came out with a long gun, the semiautomatic and tried to kill as many Republicans as he could.

Steve Scalise was down, pinned it down. His teammates wanted to come and rescue him, couldn't, it wasn't until the brave action of the police officers, the capitol police, as personal security detail that actually was able to bring -- neutralize the gunman, killed the gunman. And then everybody was taken to hospitals. Steve Scalise faced so much rehab, a dozen surgery. He wanted to come back tonight, it has been his mission to be here and waved to the crowd, and he was able to do it. And so, Martha, for him to be able to on the first play of the game, throw a Democrat out? I'm telling you, there wasn't a dry eye in the house. It was like a movie in the way, it was just too perfect.

MACCALLUM: You know, Steve, I remember last year when I interviewed him after he came back, I ask him that and I talk to the other guys in the team mates, I said, who is going to play second base next year? And they all look at Steve Scalise and said, I think he is.

DOOCY: Right.

MACCALLUM: And he said, I am. So, it is so remarkable.

DOOCY: Yes, that's right.

MACCALLUM: And it's such a great moment. I'm so happy for him. I'm really am.

DOOCY: Absolutely. And in addition to Mr. Scalise, the two capitol police officers who were injured that day, they threw the balls out, the first two ceremonial pitches, and they threw them to two of the other guys who were actually struck by the gunmen as well. And then Steve Scalise came in and, you know, we've been wondering what it was going to be like. It was great. He plays the -- he was there for about two innings. He had other official congressional duties to attend to. But I will tell you what, there is just such a a different feeling today. In fact, I was talking to the speaker of the house with Steve Scalise about how different it was, and this is what he had to say.


PAUL RYAN, UNITED STATES SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Our prayers are answered, look at him. A year later to the day he's out there playing the second base.

DOOCY: He performs miracles.

RYAN: No words, I got no words. It's amazing.


DOOCY: It was amazing. And you know what, Martha, it wasn't just the brave actions of the police but it was his teammates a year ago today, so many of them jumped in. Doctors who are also Republican members of Congress, they got up and put a tourniquet on him and other people and I saved their lives. And that is why there are thousands of people here tonight trying to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for area charities. And tonight, they saw a great show. Steve Scalise, ladies and gentlemen, is back in baseball.

MACCALLUM: Great. Great coverage. Thank you so much. It's great to see you. Quick break and we will be right back with more.


MACCALLUM: This is interesting. This is an hour ago on James Comey's Instagram account, his verified account. Take a look at what he just posted on a day that, I don't know, I would imagine was not the best day for him. He posted this picture of him standing next to a large gnome and it says Comey, Comey's Gnomey. So try to decide for that what that means. So we were at the baseball game and we want to bring you this special moment that we all remember from September when Steve Scalise finally made it back to the work to the people's house on his return to Congress last year. Watch.


REP. STEVE SCALIS, R--LOUISIANA: A tragic event and an evil act. To me, all I remember are the thousands of acts of kindness and warmth and love that came out of this and kept me going through all of it. And again, just re-emphasize just how wonderful most--



<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.>