This is a rush transcript from "The Story," May 14, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, ANCHOR: Subway is always a good idea. Bret, thank you very much. Tonight --


WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Spying on a political campaign is a big deal. It's a big deal. I think there is this spying did occur. Yes, I think spying did occur. And I'm not suggesting it wasn't adequately predicated, but I need to explore that.


MACCALLUM: So, tonight the question is, how big a deal was it, actually? And did it go beyond the FBI, and was anyone else involved? There are hints that are being dropped by those who are close to this now widening investigation. Into who actually began the snooping that the FBI says was all fine and that the campaign says was not into the Trump campaign?


BARR: And I'm not just -- I'm not talking about the FBI necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly.

TREY GOWDY, CONTRIBUTOR: There's even worse than what you described. So, whoever is investigating this, tell him to look for any e- mails between Brennan and Comey in December of 2016.


MACCALLUM: We'll talk to him about that. Now, George Papadopoulos says that it did not end with the campaign. He says it continued against him on into the whole scope of the investigation. He says that the Mueller team, he believes planted $10,000 in his lap. And that they were trying to snare him in, and he says it probably wasn't just him.


GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, FORMER CAMPAIGN ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: The Mueller team is going around in trapping campaign associates, and the Trump associates the way they did to me. I'm sure it wasn't just me that they did it too. And it's going to open up a massive can of worms.


MACCALLUM: We're going to ask him about that in just moments. George Papadopoulos is on his way. But we begin tonight with Trey Gowdy. Former House Oversight Committee chairman, and now, a Fox News contributor. Trey, always good to see you. Thank you for being here tonight.

GOWDY: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.

MACCALLUM: You know, I want to get actually first to the sound bite that we just played. You say that whoever is looking into this. In this case, it's Mr. Durham, and I want to get your thoughts on that in a minute. But you say they should definitely look at the Brennan-Comey FBI e-mails in summer of 2016?

GOWDY: December of 2016.

MACCALLUM: December of 2016, thank you.

GOWDY: You know, over the weekend, Senator Graham is really, really exercised over the lack of corroboration of this dossier that was used in court filings. So, the question then becomes, was it unverified, uncorroborated when you used it? And then, when did you began to corroborate it?

And what I'm telling Mr. Durham, or whoever is going to look into this, I think you'll see late in 2016. Well, after it had been used, it was still unverified. And the people responsible for we're referring to it as unverified. And one of the other demanded that it be included in the intelligence assessment which then leaked, which then prompted the discussion you and I are having now publicly.

MACCALLUM: Yes, there is a statement that just came out this evening, that Catherine Herridge has been reporting, and I think we have that. We can put on the screen, but the gist of it is that, that Brennan -- John Brennan is pushing back on all of this today.

So clearly, he knows that there is now another investigation into it. He heard, of course, Attorney General Barr, say that "I'm not just interested in the FBI, I'm also interested in the other agencies which, of course, would point sensibly at John Brennan who was the head of the CIA at the time.

So, the statement tonight, or the finding in the reporting of Catherine Herridge tonight says, that John Brennan says that he and James Clapper did not want to include the dossier. That it was James Comey, who insisted on including the dossier, as they were doing the investigation and also in the intelligence report that was presented to President Trump. What do you think about that, Tray?

GOWDY: I think that it's one more place for Mr. Durham to start. That's a pretty easy thing to sort out who insisted that the dossier or the unverified material from Chris Steele be included.

But Martha, sometimes, when you have two people and tell you having been in a courtroom, sometimes when two people are blaming each other, they're both right -- it's both of them. And I think it's interesting Brennan and Comey right now, the only thing they seemed this year is a hatred for Donald Trump. It's going to be interesting if they begin to turn on one another.

I've seen the document, I'm not going to describe it any more than that. Comey has got a better argument than Brennan, based on what I've seen.

MACCALLUM: Well, that's interesting. Comey-Brennan was talking about this, this afternoon on another cable channel. And he -- you know, he's very defensive, obviously, about the need for any further investigation here. And here is what he said about what they were -- what they were doing, what they were looking into.


JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY: I think they're just trying to -- you know, demonstrate that there was -- you know, problems with what the Obama administration did as far as, as it pursued this investigation.

But as you point out, it went through a rigorous due process within the Department of Justice, the FBI. It was approved by the FISA Court. It went through all of those steps.


MACCALLUM: You know, the other thing that they made -- that they were emphatic about in that interview was that the FISA Court has an extremely high bar. They said there's no way that they would have approved to any wiretap, any -- you know, surveillance of Carter Page if they didn't have that whole thing down cold.

They say they don't just to prove these things willy-nilly. We've heard differently that they -- that the bar is actually quite low for approving them. What do you say?

GOWDY: Well, the judges are not investigators, they're only as good as the information presented to them, which is why you make the applicant swear out. You swear out an application. And when the FBI is telling you that this information has been verified, and when they're telling you it's been investigated, and it's been corroborated.

The judge has to rely on that. They don't get to go conduct their own separate investigations, which is why it's really important to ask the FBI agents and Comey, if you verify this information before it's used, which we know you did not. But if your position is you did, tell us how.

I'm seeing the spreadsheet, Martha. I have seen each factual assertion listed in that dossier, and then I've seen the FBI's justification. And when you're citing newspaper articles as corroboration for a factual assertion that you have made, you don't need an FBI agent, you go do a Google search. And when the name Sidney Blumenthal is included as part of your corroboration, and you're the world's leading law enforcement agency, you have a problem.

And you can blame it on the FISA Court if you want to, but I hope Brennan is smart enough to know judges don't investigate, they have to rely on the honest word of the people presenting it to them. And if that honest word is missing, then the judge is going to make the wrong decision.

MACCALLUM: All right, there's another report tonight coming in from The New York Times, which suggests, you know, citing sources that are close to Mr. Durham or the Department of Justice or both. That this is just a review that he's just going to look over the Mueller report, and he's going to figure out whether or not there needs to be an investigation.

Now, my understanding, and I want to hear what you think about this, is that the reason that they -- that the DOJ wanted to have a U.S. attorney look into this is because they actually have a prosecutorial power. They might be able to actually get to the bottom of this if there is indeed some sort of criminal behavior, and, you know, that's way off at this point.

The other difference is that unlike in an Inspector General at an agency, they can look at people who used to work there. Not just people who work there. Is that accurate?

GOWDY: Yes ma'am, you put your finger. I'm a big Michael Horowitz fan, but you put your finger on the reason that many of us called for a second special counsel. A year ago, Horowitz doesn't have access to the grand jury. He doesn't have access to former employees. He's a wonderful investigator, but he's only as good as the tools he's given.

Durham has access to a grand jury, and he has access to search warrants, and he has access to subpoenas, and he's got access to any witness he wants to talk to. So, that's your A-number one investigation.


GOWDY: But, you know, Horowitz is the one who found the Strzok-Page text, and Horowitz is the one who dinged Jim Comey for that press conference.

MACCALLUM: That's right.

GOWDY: So, the more the merrier. I just -- it's been two years now. And I think the country would like to know from someone they can trust what was the factual predicate, not for the Russia investigation, but for the inter melding of the Russia investigation with the Trump campaign. Give us the factual predicate, and we'll decide whether or not it was sufficient or not.

MACCALLUM: Trey, thank you very much. Trey Gowdy, good to see you tonight, sir.

GOWDY: Yes, ma'am. You, too.

MACCALLUM: Also -- thank you. Also here tonight is George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign adviser, and author of Deep State Target: How I Got Caught in the Crosshairs of the Plot to Bring Down President Trump. Thank you very much for being here tonight, George. Good to have you with us.

PAPADOPOULOS: Thanks for having me, Martha. Thank you.

MACCALLUM: I do thank you for being here. I want to dig in a little bit to the story that you talked to Maria Bartiromo about earlier today. But I want to first play this for you. This is John Brennan reacting to the news that now there is a new investigation by a U.S. attorney in Connecticut, Mr. Durham. Listen to this.


BRENNAN: Does CIA spy? Yes. Do we spy against the foreign adversaries? Yes. Do we spy against domestic individuals? No, we do not. We work very closely with the FBI.


MACCALLUM: What's your reaction when you hear that, George?

PAPADOPOULOS: Well, I think the operation that was targeted against me at London by a Professor Stefan Halper. And this Azra Turk was clearly a CIA operation. And that's the reason why I was flown to London to be spied on.

And why the British were also meeting with me and probing me the same exact day that these two figures were paying me, and spying on me and recording my conversation. So, when I hear John Brennan, say this, I believe -- yes, usually, the CIA doesn't spy domestically, and that's why they brought me to London to meet Stefan Halper and this informants while the British were also involved in it.

So, I have to highly disagree with John Brennan. And I think the CIA is up to their neck in this.

MACCALLUM: Really? I mean, it's fascinating. And I -- you know, I look at you, and I think about all the interviews that we've done over the course of this, and how much skepticism, so many people placed on your story.

But now, you have -- and, you know, I think that the fact that they are still looking into it, and the fact that the attorney general is saying, not just the FBI, we also want to look at other agencies. You know, that must be encouraging to you as someone who's been saying all along that you believe that there is CIA involvement here.

PAPADOPOULOS: Well, you know, what I liked -- what our Congressman Gowdy just stated about the prosecutorial abilities of the -- of Durham, and you know, I think Barr found his bulldog. Mueller had his bulldog, Weissmann. I think Barr found his bulldog in Durham.

And I think you're probably going to see some people likely scrutinize if not indicted. Reaching up to the CIA. Because you know, most of my story, if not, it's the overwhelming majority of my entire story. And the spying and the various entrapment operations targeted against me and likely others were all based abroad.

I was in London, most of them are in London. Somewhere in Israel, somewhere in Cyprus. You know, my story had nothing really to do with Washington or New York. So, of course, when these Intel agencies are -- you know, spying on me, and basically trying to dirty me up abroad.

The FBI doesn't have jurisdiction abroad, the CIA does.


PAPADOPOULOS: So, it's going to be very fascinating to see how Durham and Horowitz, and Hoover on what they find. And to see what kind of surveillance it really was on us because I mentioned earlier in one of these interviews I gave that immediately, upon joining the Trump campaign, I have -- was presented with foreign ministers, deputy prime ministers, energy ministers, State Department officials.

So, of course, there was some sort of eye on me upon joining the Trump campaign immediately. And who put that eye on me? I'm pretty sure it was a CIA, not the FBI.

MACCALLUM: Very interesting. You know, I only have about a minute left. But just the short version. You believe that Andrew Weissmann, who was one of the 19 attorneys who was working on the Mueller report, you believe that he set you up with -- you know, somebody dumping $10,000 in your lap in Cyprus, I believe, or no, it was in Greece, right?

Can you give us the thumbnail version of what you believe happened to you?

PAPADOPOULOS: Absolutely. I had a random individual reach out to me to get into some sort of political consulting. He flies me to Israel, and he drops $10,000 in my lap. I think there was something incredibly suspicious about it. Because I went to Israel, thinking I'm going to be doing something, and then I go there, and we -- I find out that it was nothing what I agreed to do.

I fly, then, the next day to Cyprus at the same exact day when Weissmann is in touch with Cypriot authorities about some sort of money-laundering case that he's trying to put together.

And then, after that, I fly to Greece, I have dog sniffing for money, I leave the money in Greece. I'm then, arrested in a savage like manner at Dulles with agents rummaging through my bags looking for money.

So, clearly, this was some sort of sting operation. And by the time it happened, the special counsel was appointed. And this really smells of a Weissmann entrapment operation. And you know, I have the money still. My lawyers are keeping it safe in Athens, and I really want Durham, Horowitz, Barr or whoever is responsible to examine these bills.

MACCALLUM: Well, I mean, it's something like somewhat of a spy novel. And I know that -- you know, you've stated your suspicions against him, it's just a suspicion at this point that there was some involvement on Weissmann's part, and we'll see where the story goes as it moves forward. George Papadopoulos, thank you, George.


MACCALLUM: Good to see you, tonight. Thank you.

PAPADOPOULOS: Thank you very much, Martha. You, too. Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Coming up next, the 2020 candidates seeking a bit of immediate do-over trying to win back some of the momentum that has been gobbled up by Joe Biden, and they're doing it in some fascinating ways. That's coming up next. Our political panel on that.

Also, Laura Trump from the Trump campaign weighs in from her side of the story live in New York.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: I got boot edge, edge, I got Beto, Beto, Beto's falling fest. What the hell happened? I don't know what the hell happened to Biden. What happened to him? And Bernie, you know, Bernie is crazy. Bernie is crazy.




JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I'm not going to get down in the mud wrestling with him. I'm not going to stoop to his level. I'm not going to engage in the name-calling. But I'm just going to -- someone said, give him hell, Joe. Well what Grandpop used to say, quoting Harry Truman, these guys yell, Harry give them hell, I said no, I'm not going to give him hell, I'm just going to telling them the truth and they're going to think it's hell.


MACCALLUM: Joe Biden on the ground today in New Hampshire continuing to dominate the 2020 Democratic field. As Politico puts it, when Biden announced, everything changed. And we have definitely seen that in the numbers so far, very early going here.

And as a result, his opponents are "reintroducing, resetting, some talking tougher, or pivoting on some of the issues, some aligning themselves with the likes of AOC, and other -- they're all hoping to get her endorsement. They've kind of been scrambling for it. And others just coming right out and admitting that they're not actually resonating with the voters and they want to change that.


BETO O'ROURKE, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I recognize I can do a better job also of talking to a national audience.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, I-VT, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: United States must lead the world with a global approach which emphasizes the Green New Deal.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It was in the context of saying let's get rid of all the bureaucracy, let's get all of the --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, not the insurance companies.


SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We are going to give them thoughts and prayers which to me is just --


MACCALLUM: Here now, Howie Kurtz Fox News Media Analyst and Host of "MediaBuzz" and Katie Pavlich Editor and Fox News Contributor. Richard Goodstein is out there somewhere but we're fixing his audio so hopefully, he'll be able to join us in just a minute. And he's good. He can hear me. Richard Goodstein is also with us.

Howie, I want to go to you first. I mean, you know, it's interesting to see you know, Cory Booker sort of like you know, throwing out the curse words there and Kamala Harris kind of trying to reset the whole "you're going to have to get rid of all of your private health insurance" which clearly was a not a good point for her. Her poll numbers went down after that. What do you make of how they're using the media to try to restart?

HOWARD KURTZ, MEDIA ANALYST: Well, unlike Cory, I'll keep it clean. Look, all these stories --

MACCALLUM: It's cable. Go ahead, let it rip.

KURTZ: -- about relaunch and a reset is really an admission of failure so far from candidate who were stuck in single-digit land, and it's a gimmick to try to get the media to take a second look because they're being crushed in the early polls by Joe Biden who by the way the media said was going to drop like a rock, terrible forecast.

Beto O'Rourke is a perfect example. He launched like a hot air balloon of media hype, quickly fell to earth. It wasn't just the Springsteen Born to Run comment in Vanity Fair. He kind of built his campaign around a super cool new age personality but he didn't have much to say that was interesting about policy. And also he made the not so brilliant the decision to stay off T.V. and meet with small groups of voters. You could do that in a Texas race, you could not do that in a presidential.

MACCALLUM: Yes, it's interesting because Biden now having to do the exact opposite because he's got national name recognition but now he's going to do the small group thing in New Hampshire. Here's Beto O'Rourke today facing the ladies on The View. Watch.


JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, THE VIEW: Would you say those are mistakes being on the cover of Vanity Fair?

O'ROURKE: Yes. So maybe --

BEHAR: It looks elitist, what?

O'ROURKE: Yes, yes, I think it reinforces that perception of privilege. And that headline that said I was -- I was born to being this. No one is born to be President of the United States of America, least of all me.


MACCALLUM: Richard, I mean, he's like I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry to my wife, I'm sorry I was on for the magazine. What do you think about all that?

RICHARD GOODSTEIN, FORMER CLINTON CAMPAIGN ADVISER: Look, it's a rookie mistake for him to be kind of falling all over himself. Honestly, the fact he even -- you know, went into the campaign in the first place after being a House member of few terms and losing a Senate race.

I do want to say one thing if you don't mind. There was this narrative that somehow the Democrats were being pulled way left and if you look at everybody who's now either at the top of the polls or was gotten and recently Biden, Bennet, Bullock, Buttigieg. They're frankly moving towards the center as Kamala Harris and now Beto are basically trying to kind of pull themselves back to the center as well because it's a recognition that most Democratic primary voters are not on Twitter, and they tend to be frankly more moderate and less Liberal. So I do think that's something that's kind of an interesting thing that's come out of all of this.

MACCALLUM: Yes, I think you're absolutely right about that, Richard. And I think you know, you look at it everybody kind of pulling towards Biden looking at him and saying well, whatever he's doing, it seemed to be -- seems to be working. And then you have Pete Buttigieg slow jamming last night with Jimmy Fallon which worked out for President Obama. Watch.


PETE BUTTIGIEG, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I want to talk about you and the needs of everyday Americans.

JIMMY FALLON, COMEDIAN: Oh yes, Pete Buttigieg wants to satisfy all your needs.


MACCALLUM: Katie, what do you think about these attempts to get back on track?

KATIE PAVLICH, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think it depends. Look, the reason why Joe Biden waited so long is because he wanted to be the last one in the race for a reason. All the candidates who declared very early on ran the risk of fizzling out and not getting the same attention later on in the race.

Now, it's very early. The Pete Buttigieg appearance I think worked well for him because it was in the vein of his same authenticity of who he has portrayed. The problem with people like Kamala Harris or Kirsten Gillibrand or Elizabeth Warren or even Cory Booker trying to reintroduce themselves to the media is that they're doing it in a very fake, inauthentic way that voters can see right through.

In an age of leftist populism and right-wing populism, voters don't want to see a regular politician who's just doing the same thing they think people want to hear. They want authenticity and they want to be spoken to like they mean it.

And Joe Biden has been able to do that a little bit. He still has some risks on the campaign trail for sure. We have a long way to go. But right now he's coming off as the most authentic politician in that race.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, we have a really long way to go. It's interesting to hear you say, Katie, that he wanted to be the last one in the race. It's remarkable because President Trump got in June I believe when he went down that escalator, and he is not ignoring all of these efforts of these candidates. Let's listen to what he had to say in Louisiana today. Watch this.


TRUMP: I got -- Beto, Beto. Beto is falling fast. What the hell happened? He's trying to restart his campaign. That generally doesn't work out too well. I don't know what the hell happened to Biden. What happened to him? I'm looking -- I said, that doesn't look like the guy I knew.

And Bernie, you know Bernie is crazy. Bernie is crazy. But Bernie has got a lot more energy than Biden so you'll never know.


MACCALLUM: Well, there's the President sort of going after everybody and giving them their typical nicknames which he likes to do which we've seen him do a lot, Howie. But you know, what about Bernie Sanders? Bernie Sanders seems to be scrambling a little bit.

KURTZ: Yes. Well, Bernie Sanders, you know, a lot of the pundits thought that he was going to be a supercharged force in this race, and a lot of his support went to Biden once Joe got in so that is a problem for him.

The problem for all these candidates in the Trump era is kind of encapsulated by the president already taking these little jabs and mocking those who are you know, at least in the top of the race is that you not only have to go on T.V. and it's a lot harder when you're running against 22 people, but you have to have that Trumpian talent not to drive a media message, to make people talk about what you said so the other candidates have to react to you.

So when people like Cory Booker's allies are saying, oh he's not getting fair coverage and maybe it's racial, that's part of a candidates job to make news and to drive the agenda, and that's something that -- where they all not only have to compete with each other but they've got to compete with the president.

GOODSTEIN: What if I could make a quick point, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Real quick, go ahead.

GOODSTEIN: Which is I think there's some question whether what Democrats are looking for is the anti-Trump, that the swing vote, the suburban women who went for Trump in 2016 and abandoned the Republicans in 2018 when they just kind of had it with Trump's act. And we just don't know but right now his poll numbers with the economy doing as well is at 42-44 percent. That's not a great place to be with the economy doing as well as it is. That's all.


PAVLICH: And we're going to get workers in Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, and Michigan to come back to the Democratic Party. And right now Joe Biden seems to be the only one who's interested in doing that.

MACCALLUM: All right, thanks guys. We're going to get response from the Trump campaign right now. So what do they have to say about all this? Senior Campaign Adviser Lara Trump, Lara good to see you. Thank you for being here.


MACCALLUM: First of all, you know, the buzz is that your campaign is concerned about Joe Biden. His numbers are pretty strong and I think we have one poll that comes from one of our competitors here that shows him at 51 percent versus Trump 45, and then it shows the president also down against Kamala Sanders -- oh it's Bernie Sanders, excuse me, and a little bit by Kamal Harris as well.

L. TRUMP: Well, we're not worried about anyone we've seen get in the campaign. I continue to say this over and over again. The reality is this president promised people a lot of things in 2016. He's delivered on them. You have someone like Joe Biden who had eight years under Obama's presidency to make big changes in this country and we didn't see that happen.

In fact, our economy got worse, we lost jobs, we lost a lot of manufacturing jobs that he and Obama told us were never coming back especially to his home state of Pennsylvania. So whomever the candidate might be, we're not worried about it. We don't really -- and we've never taken polls very seriously, Martha, because we saw in 2016 they were never really accurate.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, these are obviously national polls. They're not typically accurate over the course of time. Here's one just to look back at April of 2016 which shows President Trump, now President Trump, then the candidate at 41 percent. Hillary Clinton was at 54 percent. So that gives you a little sense of how off they can be.

Let's talk a little bit about women because that was brought up by Richard Goodstein as well, and the concern about suburban women voters. But the interesting piece today in Politico talked about the fact that half of the donors are women to the campaign, in the last time it was around a quarter of them.

L. TRUMP: Yes, 2016 we had about a quarter of the donations came from women. Right now half of our donations come from women. And we have twice as many women donating to the Trump campaign as the leading female Democrat candidate Kamala Harris. So, I mean, when you look across that spectrum there, it tells you a lot.

And women may not tell a pollster that they support Donald Trump but they're happy to donate to our campaign. And I think you have to take those numbers very, very seriously.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Well, it is interesting. And you know, people do put them their money where their mouth is.

L. TRUMP: I actually think the President's approval rating is 46 percent if I'm not mistaken.

MACCALLUM: OK. Well, that -- yes, that maybe -- this is a CNN -- that's a women's approval. They had it at 38 and 61 unfavorable in terms of the women. Can we put that one up? This is -- this is a CNN poll. You may have a number that's better. That's -- there, look at it.

You know, in terms of what's going on with how you're going to change the minds out there that need to be changed. I mean, you know, how do you approach those suburban voters. I know you say that you felt like they're already in your camp, but what's the strategy?

L. TRUMP: I just think it's about reminding people come November of 2020 about how their life has improved under this presidency. And look at your life in 2016 versus 2020. Are things better for you? Do you have a higher paying job? Has your 401(k) gone up? Do you feel like there are better opportunities for your kids out there? Do you feel safer as a country?

And I think it's our job at the campaign to remind people to check it out and check in with yourself and your life. And I think there are some people that, listen, may not love the president's tweets all out time but life has gotten better for them and I think they are going to go vote for him in 2020.

MACCALLUM: I want to get your reaction to this story that Omarosa Manigault is wanting to join a lawsuit --


TRUMP: Well, of course.

MACCALLUM: -- against the former -- I mean, that's what -- against the former campaign in 2016. Another woman launched a lawsuit that says that the women on the team were paid about 18 percent less than the men and now Omarosa wants a piece of that action. Has anything been done to change that metric on this campaign?

TRUMP: I mean, I think if you look across the board, I think women are paid pretty equally to men on the campaign. I mean, we were a pretty small group at this point. But, certainly, we like everything to be equal. Now Omarosa I would take everything with a grain of salt. She is of course trying to get herself back out there.

MACCALLUM: She used to be a very good friend.


TRUMP: As usual.

MACCALLUM: Of all the --

TRUMP: It's funny how that changes, isn't it? It's sad. But unfortunately, that's the world we live in these days.

MACCALLUM: What about the fact that Don Jr. has now agreed that he will sit down with the Senate intel committee?

TRUMP: Well, unfortunately, no matter what we do as a family, our family, the administration, the campaign has complied with everything up to this point. Don, I think has testified for over 30 hours now. He is going back because he wants to do the right thing and he wants to makes sure everyone knows he is doing the right thing.

And it's sad because no matter what any of us do they will never leave us alone. And there will never be any off limits like in the past or going over the line when it comes to our family.

But, listen, he has always told the truth. He'll go back in he'll tell the truth again. I'm sure we'll hear from him and it will be no big news because we've all heard that we didn't collude with Russia. The president didn't collude with Russia.

MACCALLUM: All right. Lara Trump, thank you.

TRUMP: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: Thanks for coming in. Always good to see you.

So, coming up, a live look at the Alabama Senate where lawmakers are set to vote any minute on a bill that would effectively ban abortions in that state. Shannon Bream up next with where this could go in terms of the Supreme Court.


MACCALLUM: All right. A live look tonight at the Alabama State Senate where lawmakers are set to vote on a bill that would essentially ban all abortion in the State of Alabama, except to prevent serious health risks to the mother.

Now, if this passes, it will head to the governor's desk and then likely face a legal battle in the courts as states nationwide attempt to exert more power on both sides of the abortion debate setting up a possible collision course that leads directly to the Supreme Court. Potentially.

Shannon Bream, anchor of Fox News at Night and author of the new book "Finding the Bright Side" has been hanging out with us in New York which is very fun for us. Great to have you here.


SHANNON BREAM, HOST: It's great to see you in person.


BREAM: It's nice to be here.

MACCALLUM: It's great to have you here, and congratulations on the book.

BREAM: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: "Finding the Bright Side" is available today.


MACCALLUM: And it's a wonderful book and you can also listen to the podcast that we did.

BREAM: We did together.

MACCALLUM: Which we also talked a lot about that as well. But you are our premier Supreme Court legal mind. So, I want to get your thoughts on this Alabama case and a lot of stories this morning about the fact that this is the beginning. That there is a nationwide push that could end up in a big decision at the Supreme Court.

BREAM: Yes. It's interesting because so much activity has happened at the state level over the last couple of years on this both for and against. More regulation, less regulation of abortion.

And many of the states have been accused of trying have-to-have a Trojan horse putting together some kind of bill that would then serve this up to the Supreme Court.

A number of lawmakers in Alabama have been very open though that they want this to be a direct challenge to Roe and they want to send it up as the most restrictive abortion law in the country. So, they haven't many of them made a secret of the fact that that's actually what, for many of them this is about.

MACCALLUM: So, they went -- they went so far with it essentially because they want it to be challenged. And then they are hoping that that will move up.

In North Dakota there was a fetal heart beat bill that was struck down and, you know, some people thought that might lead to the Supreme Court. And then have you had a lot of other decisions that have been percolating around the country as you say with regard to Planned Parenthood and whether or not they need to -- whether they could get federal funding.

You know, I guess all of this kind of nipping at the heels is due to the fact that we now have a more conservative Supreme Court, right?

BREAM: And you know that so much of the questioning of Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh the two new ones was a lot about Roe v. Wade. Do you think it's settled precedent? What do you think about it?

And some of the other people that were on the short list for the Supreme Court there were a lot of questions about exactly how they felt. What have they said about Roe v. Wade? What have they written? Have they made any cases, any decisions or opinions on issue because it is the premier issue that comes up as a litmus test for a lot of people when they say whether or not they are going to support these nominees, so a lot of attention have been paid to both their records on that.

MACCALLUM: So, you have to wonder about Brett Kavanaugh who relied, you know, so heavily on Susan Collins. And he essentially promised her that he believed that this was precedent upon precedent.

She is up for election in Maine. And she is up for a pretty tough election in Maine. Would you surmise that he is hoping that this does not come his way before 2020?

BREAM: I don't think most of the justices are anxious to take on a case like this and it does take four votes, it's a secret private conference vote so we don't know how many or who they vote. But to get a case actually on the docket for the Supreme Court takes four of them saying yes. So, they have to feel like the time is right. This case is right. It's teed up perfectly for all the legal contours that we are going to have to examine.

So, to convince four of them that takes some doing because they get thousands of appeals every year. They won't take one of these cases up unless they think the time has come. There is a split maybe in the lower courts, that kind of thing.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Fascinating. "Finding the Bright Side" is the new book. Congratulations, Shannon.

BREAM: Thank you so much.

MACCALLUM: Thanks for being here tonight. Coming up next, the law professor at Harvard University who lost a prestigious position on campus after he joined Harvey Weinstein's legal team. Is that right? When we come back.


MACCALLUM: Some are calling it the most severe violation of academic freedom in decades. A law professor at Harvard University Ronald Sullivan, Jr. fired as an undergraduate faculty dean following a swell of criticism on campus because he deigned to be on the defense team of controversial movie mogul Harvey Weinstein who is set to stand trial on rape and sexual assault coming up.

Now, tonight, there is a twist in the story. For that we turn to Trace Gallagher in our West Coast newsroom. Hi, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Martha. Ronald Sullivan is the very same Harvard law professor who has a long history of freeing people who were wrongly convicted of crimes. And when Sullivan agreed to joins defense team of Harvey Weinstein, he sent a lengthy e-mail to Harvard undergrads defending the idea of representing those who are unpopular, vile or undesirable.

Quoting here. "To the degree we deny unpopular defendant's basic due process rights, we cease to be the country we imagine ourselves to be. In fact, most of the due process rights we hold dearest derive from lawyers who represented unpopular defendants."

Still, the undergrads pushed back, some claiming they felt unsafe around a lawyer representing a sexual assault suspect. Other students said that Sullivan's decision to defend Weinstein disqualifies him from serving in a role of support and mentorship.

Sullivan was also verbally abused in the residence where he lives with his family was vandalized. Sullivan and his wife law lecturer Stephanie Robinson were also Harvard's first African-American faculty deans leading the Winthrop House residence fall.

But the university reportedly conducted a climate review asking students if they found Winthrop House to be sexist, nonsexist, hostile or friendly? Then on Saturday, Sullivan and his wife were fired as faculty deans with the university saying that, quote, "Students and staff have continued to communicate concerns about the climate in Winthrop House."

But the firing came a day after Ronald Sullivan had already withdrawn from Weinstein's defense team saying the case conflicted with his teaching responsibilities.

Harvard law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz labeled it McCarthyism comes to Harvard. Listen.


ALAN DERSHOWITZ, PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: This is political correctness run amuck. These are students who don't care about due process, don't care about free speech. The only thing they care about is getting their way. They don't like the fact that he is representing somebody who they don't like.


GALLAGHER: Ronald Sullivan remains a Harvard law professor. He says he and his wife are now weighing their options. Martha?

MACCALLUM: Quite a story. Trace, thank you very much.


MACCALLUM: Coming up next, the Trump administration's footing on the global stage as tensions mount with Iran and with China. General Jack Keane up next.


MACCALLUM: Tonight, leaders from both Iran and the United States dialing down tension amid talk of a potential war. The country's supreme leader has said that there will be no such thing. But a key advisor to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is singing a far different tune tweeting this.

"Donald Trump, you wanted a better deal with Iran. It looks like you are going to get a war instead. That's what happens when you listen to the mustache. Good luck in 2020."

The mustache in reference to national security advisor John Bolton. Earlier the New York Times reported that the administration is considering 120,000 troops to Iran. But the president pushed back on that today. Watch.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Would I do that? Absolutely. But we have not have planned for that. Hopefully we are not going to have to plan for that. And if we did that, we'd send a hell of a lot more troops than that but I think it's just -- where was that story, in the New York Times? Well, the New York Times is fake news.


MACCALLUM: As of this afternoon at the White House, joining me now Fox News senior strategic analyst General Jack Keane. General, good to see you as always. Thank you for being here tonight.


MACCALLUM: What do you think about the 120,000 troops story.

KEANE: Well, I think it's a pretty much a distortion of what really happens. I'm intimately familiar with the process of providing options dealing with a potential crisis like this. And by the way, the options are really provided by the Central Command Commander General McKenzie from Florida. They may present them in the Pentagon but that's where they come from.

So, let me give you an example. So, Iran can take some action, clearly a drone attack. A missile attack. Mining the harbor. So, we'll run options and risks associated with every one of those or multiple things at the same time.

And possibly one of those options were, they were making comprehensive attacks, multiple locations with different means then we would have to have a base force that's larger than what we have there. So that's an option.

It doesn't mean that that's the option we are going to execute. And that's why the article, I think, is a distortion. You got the reaction from the president he doesn't even know what they are talking about.

MACCALLUM: You know, so the other line of thinking is that John Bolton and Saudi Arabia and Israel very much want war with Iran and that that's what they are pushing for. There was even a suggestion that, you know, that these -- that the explosions in the Saudi Arabian oil tankers might have been done to provoke that. What do you say to that?

KEANE: Well, I think that's also a distortion. I think that's fairly unfair to Ambassador Bolton, the national security advisor. There is no doubt that when John was out of government, he had very strong and some would describe it hawkish views in the execution of foreign policy. That's true.

But he is working for President Trump. And President Trump does not share those views. President Trump drives national security and foreign policy. And John would be the first one to tell you that.

So, the thought that because John Bolton is there somehow, we are closer to a war, that is nonsense. President Trump is measured in dealing with Iran. What he really wants to do is negotiate with them and create a better deal than the PCPOA or the nuclear deal that we had. And he said it many times.

So, a lot of what we're doing is to push back on Iranians, get their attention, change their behavior. We are not looking for regime change and we're certainly not looking for a war.

MACCALLUM: Before I let you go, you know, there is some thinking that the former Secretary of State John Kerry at one point encouraged them to just hang in there. He said President Trump won't be in office in the next term. Wait it out and we'll get you JCPOA back.

KEANE: I believe that's true, and I think it's outrageous behavior, and really quite unprecedented. It's one thing to talk to a foreign government, it's another thing to provide advice to a government which a stated adversary of the United States as it been -- and been killing Americans since the early 1980s. That behavior is despicable.

MACCALLUM: Senator Marco Rubio has talked about Logan Act investigation into what John Kerry may have said to the leadership in Iran. So, we'll see if that goes anywhere. General, thank you very much. Good to see you tonight, sir.

KEANE: Yes. Good seeing you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: You, too. More on The Story next.


MACCALLUM: Finally, tonight, we salute a genius of television comedy. Tim Conway died with his wife and daughter by his side after a long illness. He was best known of course for his work on the Carol Burnett show where his deadpan delivery brought laughter to millions during the late '60s and '70s. He sometimes even cracked up his costars. Watch.


TIMOTHY CONWAY, COMEDIAN: There was a freak show one time, and I saw these Siamese elephants. Joined together by their trunks like cats. And this train are making them stand up on their back feet and they had their trunks stretched like that. All they could do was just blow and go.


MACCALLUM: Carol Burnett telling Fox News that she is heartbroken. He was one and a million. Not only as a brilliant comedian, but a loving human being. Tim Conway was 85 years old.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.