This is a rush transcript of “Fox News Sunday” on July 25, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARTHA MACCALLUM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: I’m Martha MacCallum, in for Chris
Washington in gridlock over infrastructure, police reform and the January
6th Commission, six months since Inauguration Day.
MACCALLUM (voice-over): The rise of violent crime in cities across the
country sparks a rethink of police reform as bipartisan talks on the Hill
hit a roadblock.
CHIEF ROBERT CONTEE, D.C. POLICE: The justice system that we have right
now, it is not functioning the way that it should.
MACCALLUM: We’ll ask South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, the lead negotiator
for Republicans, about the outstanding issues holding up this bill.
Meanwhile, inflation and jobless claims on the rise as the fate of a
bipartisan infrastructure deal remains unclear. We’ll discuss the state of
play with Virginia Senator Mark Warner, who is helping craft the bipartisan
deal, as well as the Democrats’ broader spending plan.
Plus, the bipartisan committee to investigate the January attack on Capitol
Hill. It falls apart before their first hearing.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: We will not let their
antics stand in the way.
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA), MINORITY LEADER: This is the People’s House,
not Pelosi’s House.
MACCALLUM: House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy pulling all Republican
members after Nancy Pelosi overruled two of his picks. We’ll speak with
Indiana Congressman Jim Banks, one of the GOP members who was rejected by
JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We are engaged with public health
experts and the CDC about how to continue to attack the virus.
MACCALLUM: The delta virus raises new debates over mask mandates, even for
the vaccinated. We’ll ask our Sunday panel about the science and the
All, right now, on “FOX News Sunday.”
MACCALLUM (on camera): And hello again from “FOX News Sunday”.
Time is ticking on key parts of President Biden’s first year agenda,
concerning Democrats who say that the most promising window of action may
be closing for them. Infrastructure, obviously, one of the president’s top
priorities, is facing a crucial test of his ability to forge bipartisanship
in Washington and hold his own party together to get a deal.
Partisan polarization means little action on voting rights, on police
reform, and on a budget resolution. The president is also facing backlash
from fellow Democrats for his refusal to call for eliminating the
filibuster to push his agenda through a divided Congress.
In a moment, we’ll speak with key senators on both sides of the aisle, Mark
Warner of Virginia, and Tim Scott of South Carolina.
But, first, let’s turn to Mark Meredith, traveling with the president in
Hi, Mark. Good morning.
MARK MEREDITH, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Martha, six months end, President
Biden’s top priority still appears to be ending the lingering pandemic and
the rest of his domestic agenda really rests with Congress, where bitter
partisan divides could halt progress.
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The bottom line is we’re
delivering on our promises.
MEREDITH (voice-over): President Biden insists he’s getting things done,
but on Capitol Hill, both parties are still squabbling on everything from
nominees to infrastructure spending.
SEN. BILL CASSIDY (R-LA): We continue to work hard, worked all day
yesterday and through the weekend. There are some thorny issues but we can
get it done.
MEREDITH: Even Democrats are scrambling to keep their base on board with
plans to pass two massive spending packages, especially as Republicans
argue more spending could crash the economy.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): It will take an inflation problem that we have
today and poor jet fuel on it.
MEREDITH: In major cities, crime is skyrocketing. Two recent high profile
shootings have D.C.’s police chief calling for change.
CONTEE: We have a vicious cycle of bad actors who do things, no
accountability, and they end up back in the community.
MEREDITH: But in Congress, comprehensive criminal justice reform seems out
Meantime, the delta variant is calling a surge in new COVID cases and
deaths. The White House is struggling to increase vaccination rates and now
some cities, including St. Louis are re-imposing mask mandates even for
MEREDITH (on camera): Over the weekend, the president had a chance to make
a campaign stop in Virginia. The commonwealth is going to be holding a
gubernatorial election this November and that race may give both parties
crucial insight into how voters feel heading into next year’s midterm
elections — Martha.
MACCALLUM: Mark Meredith, thank you very much, Mark, reporting from
Delaware this morning.
So, joining us now is Senator Tim Scott, the top Republican negotiator on
Senator, welcome back to “FOX News Sunday”.
SEN. TIM SCOTT (R-SC): Good morning, Martha. Thank you very much.
MACCALLUM: Good morning, sir. Good to see this morning.
Let’s start, though, with infrastructure, if I may.
SCOTT: Yeah (ph).
MACCALLUM: It’s a $1.2 trillion deal. It’s something that, you know,
always seems like a kind — the kind of thing that we should be able to
push through, right? You got 59 percent of Americans who say that they
approve of doing an infrastructure deal, except last week, you know,
Senator Schumer was trying to get the procedural votes through on all of
this, and your side was arguing that you didn’t know what was in it.
Any more clarity on what is in this bill at this point? And how are you
looking at it?
SCOTT: Not at all. It’s amazing when we have a vote in the Senate on a
procedural vote to move to a bill that you haven’t seen. The days of
actually having to pass it to know what’s in it has to be over.
That is not in America’s best interest to literally have blank pages on a
multitrillion dollar spending plan that doesn’t seem to be negotiated on
either side, frankly. When you have nothing to negotiate from a page
perspective, you can’t see it, you can’t negotiate it.
I don’t support that. I voted no and I’m skeptical, along with the
Democrats who are actually planning to do, not with just the 1.2, but with
the 3.5 that is fused together. That’s just in enormous spending.
And inflation is already a tax increase on people making much less than
$400,000. It’s a tax increase on people working paycheck to paycheck. This
is a bad decision.
MACCALLUM: Let me ask you this. There was discussion from the president
that he initially said, I only want the infrastructure deal if I’m also
going to get the 3.5 spending bill, which is known as the human
infrastructure side of this equation, has a lot of entitlement and spending
Do you think that that is still where the White House is on that, and is
that one of the reasons that you’re reluctant to support the infrastructure
built? Would you be more likely to support it if you knew what was in it,
if it was separate and apart?
SCOTT: Yeah, between Nancy — Speaker Pelosi and President Biden, we’re
all confused, because they keep stepping on each other. We really don’t
know of what, in fact, we’re negotiating.
It seems to me that one thing is very clear — the $3.5 trillion is, in
fact, fused together with a trillion plus dollars of infrastructure
spending. That human infrastructure plus, the actual infrastructure is a
very confusing package, but one thing we’re not confused about is nearly
$4.5 trillion to $4.7 trillion of additional spending on top of the $1.9
trillion COVID package that only had 1 percent in the COVID package for
So, we should be asking ourselves what’s really in there and without
clarity, you don’t move forward.
MACCALLUM: You know, there’s a poll out this morning. It’s partly online
poll, ABC/Ipsos. But, you know, it gives one indication of where Americans
And it said that 55 percent of Americans are pessimistic about the
direction of the country and that’s up from 36 percent in May. So it’s a
very big jump.
MACCALLUM: What do you think would account for that?
SCOTT: Well, listen, if you think about the fact that wages went up a
little bit, but inflation was so high, over 5 percent, that your actual
spending power is down. When you’re paying more for fruit and for fish and
for meat, when you’re paying more for little Trey’s shoes to go back to
school next month, you — you don’t seem optimistic.
When you see that our economy is grinding slower than it should have been
in what should be the glory days, frankly, with the pent-up demand that
we’ve had in the economy, you see the violence of — let me say this way,
Martha: we have the highest level of violence we’ve seen, the highest
increase, in 50 years. We have inflation that makes your increase in pay an
actual reduction in pay.
And we have liberals in Washington literally saying, we need more. The
economy is overheating, but let’s spend and put more fire on the economy.
We have almost 9 million jobs with fewer than 8 million people looking for
SCOTT: Their formula for success is miserable.
MACCALLUM: It’s interesting because the president did a town hall this
week and he cited this quote from Mark Zandi, the economist at Moody’s, as
their argument for why they believe that inflation is just going to be
Here’s what Mark Zandi: Worries that the plan will ignite undesirably high
inflation and an overheating economy are overdone. The fiscal support it
provides is only sufficient to push the economy back to full employment
from the recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
And then, if I may just go to this. This is also from that same town hall.
President Biden arguing, and really conceding, for one of the first times,
that the additional benefits that the Americans got may have kept some of
Let’s play that, then we’ll get your thoughts on both, if I may.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think your business and the
tourist business is really going to be in a bind for a little while. And
one of the things, we’re ending all those things that are — the things
keeping people back from going back to work, et cetera.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: What you think about that? He says we’re ending all of those
things that kept people from going back to work, Senator?
SCOTT: Well, they continued for several more weeks except for states like
South Carolina where we decided to do away with enhanced unemployment
benefits. And what happened to our unemployment rolls? They went down. They
There’s no doubt that adding more money, adding more benefits for too long
reduces the number of people who will go back to work. Secretary Yellen
said just a few weeks ago that yes, we should expect inflation to continue
to increase for the next several months. That’s not transitory.
MACCALLUM: Let me ask you — let’s turn our attention to police reform,
obviously something that you are very passionate about, and you’ve had a
lot of frustration in trying to get this through. That was the big
conversation for a long time after what happened to George Floyd and all of
the protests and riots that followed after that.
But now, we’ve got some serious increases in homicide and crime in cities
across the nation at this point.
So, tell us where police reform stands. You’ve worked on this with Senators
Booker and Representative Karen Bass.
Is there any hope for this bill?
SCOTT: I think there is hope for the bill, without any question. We worked
on it yesterday. We’ll have it in the conversation today. We’ll be meeting
tomorrow. I will be talking with law enforcement leaders tomorrow as well.
The one thing you cannot do in police reform is leave the impression that
somehow we’re going to demonize police officers. That is dead stop, not
going to happen, can’t happen.
We can see today in Baltimore over almost 400 officers vacant. In other
words, they need 400 more officers, so much so that they’re asking for 100
federal officers to come in and to fill the void.
When you demonize police officers, when you defund the police and you start
talking about this war on police and prosecution and not on crime, you’re
going to have a reduction of forces, and if you tell officers that their
personal liability is on the line, it is a bad decision.
That’s one of the reasons why we’ve never been negotiating on qualified
immunity for the individual officer. It’s just bad policy. I won’t support
Things like the chokehold and 1033, which is the militarization of police –
– those are things we can negotiate on. No-knock warrants, we can make them
better and more transparent. We’re making progress on those issues.
But we cannot, and I will not support defunding the police. We need to
frankly refund the police. We saw that with the mayor’s race in New York,
the new mayor ran on law and order. Sounds familiar to me.
MACCALLUM: Yeah. You know, just overall, when you look at the
infrastructure package, the 3.5 human infrastructure deal, police reform —
how are you feeling about the ability to get anything done in a bipartisan
way, particularly before the August break, Senator?
SCOTT: I can tell you that that’s a full agenda. I see us getting some
things done but I hope that we keep in mind, not Republicans or Democrats,
but we keep in mind the American people. We are literally putting them
under more stress by the bad policies coming out of Washington.
We should not be a part of that conversation. We should force the
conversation into what’s best for America, reducing inflation, good for
America, getting rid of the disincentives for work, good for America, and
restoring confidence that we can actually have strong presence of law
enforcement in the poorest and the hardest hit communities — those things
are actually celebrated.
Eighty percent of African-Americans want the same level or more officers in
neighborhoods. We should take those facts and use them to fuse together an
agenda that the American people will celebrate because it’s about them and
not about politicians in Washington.
MACCALLUM: Before I let you go, Senator, articles this week about the
amount of money you were able to raise for your Senate campaign, almost $10
million. I think it’s the most of any incumbent that is running in a 2022
races and you say this is going to be your last Senate campaign. What does
that say about — why are you not going to run for Senate again after that?
And there’s a lot of talk about you in 2024. Will you be running for
president in 2024?
SCOTT: I’m going to run for reelection, as you’ve just stated without any
Here’s what I believe. I believe the American people would really
appreciate politicians not being lifetime public servants. God bless the
wonderful option I’ve been given and blessing to serve the people of South
Carolina, but I had a job before I went into the Senate and I want a job
when I leave the Senate.
So I believe in term limits for all elected officials, and it’s one of the
reasons why it I’ve committed myself to making this my last term in the
Senate, and I’m excited to serve the great people of South Carolina any way
they will allow me to.
MACCALLUM: All right. We’ll be watching for more from you on whether or
not 2024 is a possibility for you.
Thank you very much, Senator. Good to see you today.
SCOTT: Thank you, Martha. Yes, ma’am, you too.
MACCALLUM: So, coming up next, we’ll speak with Senator Mark Warner, who
is working on that infrastructure deal as well. We’ll ask him about how
it’s going with Democrats and Republicans and whether there’s any hope for
MACCALLUM: Senators say that they are on the brink of finalizing a massive
bipartisan infrastructure bill after it failed to keep tests this week, but
there are still obstacles.
Joining us now, Virginia Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat in the middle of
both bipartisan negotiations and a broader Democrats-only spending bill.
Senator Warner, good to have you here this morning on “FOX News Sunday”.
Thanks for joining us.
SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): Thank you for having me, Martha.
MACCALLUM: So, you said that you thought there would be an infrastructure
bill that could be looked at on Monday and that you all were working
through the weekend. Will you have that bill in place for everybody to look
at come tomorrow?
WARNER: Martha, I believe we will, because the one thing I hear and all
across the Virginia the last couple of days, people want us to invest in
our infrastructure. If you step back, you know, we have actually — are
investing at about half the rate that we invested in our infrastructure as
we did in the 1990s. Matter of fact, Infrastructure Week became, as you
know, a joke line during the last administration. They kept planning (ph)
they were going to do — promising they were going to do infrastructure, it
never came to pass.
A group of us, ten of us, five Democrats, five Republicans, have been
working on this for the last couple months. This is the same group who
actually put together the last COVID deal under President Trump. So we know
each other, we trust each other.
And I think you’re going to see, whether it’s $100 billion plus for roads
and bridges, whether it’s, you know, close to $50 billion for resiliency
for those coasts who are having sea level rise, whether it’s making the
kind of investments in cleaner buses. For example, our country is going to
buy 20,000 new school buses over the next couple years. Should those buses
be made in China or made in America? I think they ought to be made in
And there’s a host of new things around making our grid smarter, broadband.
I think we’ve got a menu of options. And candidly, we’ve had those menus of
spends — spending items agreed to for weeks.
What we have had to work through, because my Republican colleagues did not
want to use enhanced or actually making sure we follow our IRS tax laws, so
we had to replace some of those pay-fors. We’re down to the last couple of
items, and I think you’re going to see a bill Monday afternoon.
MACCALLUM: What do say to those — I know there was that dispute over
whether or not the IRS part of that deal would go through. There’s also —
would you — do you want to see $800 billion in unspent COVID funds be part
of this infrastructure bill? Is that going to happen?
WARNER: Well, interesting thing, Martha, is everybody was for some of
these unspent COVID funds that came from the 2020 legislation. Again, most
of that legislation passed under President Trump. Everybody is for scraping
most dollars until you go back and look at the actual programs.
For example, hospital relief. For example, some of the programs for small
businesses. We are and have agreed jointly on about roughly $70 billion of
funds that were not unspent that will be redeployed to help pay for this
infrastructure package. So —
MACCALLUM: What do say to the criticism that you heard from Senator Scott?
WARNER: The challenge is though, Martha — the challenges, Martha, you’ve
got folks who want to make big bold statements but sometimes don’t want to
roll up their sleeves, get into the details and make the very hard choices
about where we — about where we find these pay-fors.
But, go ahead. I’m sorry?
MACCALLUM: You heard Senator Scott and others said, you know, they didn’t
have a bill to vote on last week.
And this is what Senator Schumer said about his intention and his timeline.
Watch this and then I’d love to get your answer on the other side.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: I have every intention
of passing both major infrastructure packages, the bipartisan
infrastructure framework, and a budget resolution with reconciliation
instructions before we leave for the August recess. That’s the schedule I
laid out at the end of June, and that’s the schedule I intend to stick to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: I mean, that’s very ambitious. Democrats hold the House, the
Senate, the White House, can you get those two things done by this August
WARNER: I sure want to and — by the way, I mean, there’s a little bit of
wordsmanship going on here. You know, there were a half-dozen times when
Mitch McConnell was leader of the Senate where he would put up what’s
called a shell bill because you’re not finished the details and then you
substitute the actual text once you get into the negotiations, because
there will be amendments on this infrastructure bill, but we’ll have that
text. It will be out there tomorrow.
After we’re done with the bipartisan bill, I would love to have some of my
Republican friends join on the reconciliation effort, the larger effort
that looks at things like universal preschool, that looks at things like a
free community college, that looks at things like a broad-based middle
class tax cut for every family that has a child in terms of the child tax
I would hope some Republicans would join us on that, but if not, I think
the group of 50 Democrats will have to work through that resolution as
MACCALLUM: Well, Senator, obviously, there’s a lot of concern about the
inflation that we see rising in the country and Senator Graham spoke to
this just the other day. Let’s watch that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): There’s a mandate in this bill to require
every employer to offer paid family leave. That sounds good, I guess, on
its face, until the employer has to come up with the cash to meet the
mandate in this bill.
Guess what the employer is going to do? They are going to increase their
prices because the government has increased their cost. And over time, as
we increase taxes in this bill, which they will have to do, there’s less
money to do things that businesses need to do like to modernize and hire
So this is a nightmare for American business. It’s going to be a nightmare
for American consumers if this reconciliation bill passes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: So he’s talking about driving up the costs for American
businesses across this country and what the impact might be on consumers.
Do you share those concerns about this enormous $3.5 trillion bill?
WARNER: Well, Martha, unlike a whole lot of the folks I work within the
Senate, I actually spent those 30 years in business. I was involved in
telecommunications industry, started a very large company. I can actually
read a balance sheet, which is something that some of my colleagues can’t.
The amazing thing that Lindsey just mentioned is there is every industrial
country in the world, with the exception of the United States, provide some
level of paid leave if somebody is having a baby or has got a death in the
family. Other countries have managed to do that and their economies are
still moving forward.
Matter of fact, if there are inflationary pressures, it is because we put
$5 trillion into the economy, $3.5 trillion of that under President Trump
to respond to the COVID crisis. I think history will actually treat that —
those investments as appropriate because we are seeing our economy rebound.
We’ve added 3 million jobs in the last five months.
And, Martha, I just got to tell you, as somebody who spent longer in
business than I have in politics, if we don’t invest in road, rail, water,
and sewer systems, broadband, those infrastructure investments will
actually help us grow the economy, virtually every economist from left to
right agrees on that.
MACCALLUM: Yeah. You know, I mean, as somebody who spent 30 years in
business, as you say, what about the bottom line? What about these
trillions and trillions of dollars that have been spent since COVID? And
then you have an economy that is starting to get moving again, the fear is
that all of this money that you talk about that’s being thrown at this
problem is going to ignite inflation that will not just be transitory, that
will be long-lasting. And I don’t think Americans have a long memory for
what that actually feels like for companies and individuals.
Are you concerned about that as you seek to push through this $3.5 trillion
WARNER: Well, again, am I concerned about inflation? I’m always concerned
about inflation. But I also believe the Federal Reserve has pointed out
that they think this is short-term in nature.
We’ve already seen things like the cost of lumber, which went sky high,
starts to come down. We’ve already seen a little bit of relaxing in the
used car market. Finally, one of the problems around our car market was
because would not have it available semiconductor chips. We need to make
investments there to keep up with China.
And when you talk about some of these numbers, 3.5 trillion, big, big
number, but that is spent out over ten years, so that’s not all being spent
in a single —
MACCALLUM: It’s still a big, big number.
WARNER: Right, but —
MACCALLUM: It’s unprecedented.
WARNER: Nothing near to the — nothing near to the $5 trillion that we
spent in the last year under both COVID — under both Trump and Biden.
MACCALLUM: All right. You know, just in general as a Democrat, when you
look at this period of time with control over the White House, the House,
and the Senate, are you disappointed with what you’ve been able to get done
WARNER: Well, I actually think the American Rescue Plan that ended up
providing, for example, middle-class tax cut for every family that makes
less than 150 grand that’s got children with the child tax credit, I think
that makes sense. I think the dollars that have gone to state and local
government to shore those up who lost revenues during COVID makes sense.
And in a state like mine, I was a telecom guy, you know, I’m proud to work
with my governor — we’re going to make sure every household in Virginia
has high-speed broadband by 2024. That would only happen because of the
American Rescue Plan.
I frankly think, and I would hope, every state would do that same kind of
plan, because if you don’t have broadband going forward, your chance for
any kind of economic future is not going to be bright.
MACCALLUM: Before I let you go, do you — do you think the president
should move to get behind the idea of eliminating the filibuster in order
to get some of these things through while this window is still open?
WARNER: Martha, I don’t want the Senate to become like the House, but I do
believe when it comes to voting rights, when it comes to that basic right
to exercise and participate in democracy, I get very worried what’s
happening in some of these states where they are actually penalizing,
saying if you give somebody water waiting in line to vote, or in states
like Texas where they are seeing a local government can overcome the
results of a local election, that is not democracy. And if we have to do a
small carve out on filibuster for voting rights, that is the only area
where I would allow that kind of reform.
MACCALLUM: You don’t think that’s a slippery slope?
WARNER: Listen, I would wish we wouldn’t even have started this a decade
ago. When the Democratic leaders actually changed the rules, I don’t think
we have the Supreme Court we did if we still had a 60-vote margin on the
But we are where we are, and the idea that somehow to protect the rights of
the minority in the Senate, we’re going to cut out rights of minorities and
young people all across the country, that’s just not right to me.
MACCALLUM: Senator Warner, thank you. Good to have you here today.
WARNER: Thank you, Martha.
MACCALLUM: So coming up next, the bipartisan investigation into the
January 6th insurrection devolves into partisan warfare over the makeup of
the committee. We will speak with one of the Republicans who was dropped by
Speaker Pelosi, Jim Banks of Indiana, next.
MACCALLUM: Coming up, the partisan fight over the makeup of the January 6th
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): In light of statements and actions taken by them
of — I could not appoint them.
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): We will run our own investigation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCCALLUM: We’ll talk with one of the Republicans booted by Speaker Pelosi,
MACCALLUM: Plans for a bipartisan committee to investigate the January 6th
insurrection at the Capitol fell apart this week when House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi rejected two of the Republicans who were named to that panel,
prompting House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to pull all of his GOP picks
and threatened to launch his own investigation.
Joining us now, Indiana Congressman Jim Banks, who was one of those. He
would have been the top Republican on the panel.
Congressman, welcome back to FOX NEWS SUNDAY. Good to have you with us this
REP. JIM BANKS (R-IN): Hey, Martha, thanks for having me.
MACCALLUM: So, tell me, you know, I know that you had had conversations
with Representative Bennie Thompson about what were — what was going to be
the matters at hand, what would be discussed. What do you think blew up
this commission last week? What was the motivation?
BANKS: Well, it’s more clear than ever that Nancy Pelosi is not interested
in an investigation. She’s only interested in a narrative. She claimed that
the reason that she booted me from the committee was because of antics on
the part of Jim Jordan and I. And in hindsight what I realized what she
means by that now is that we were prepared to ask questions that no one
else has asked and demand answers as to why the Capitol was vulnerable to
an attack on January 6th. Why was there a systemic breakdown of security at
the Capitol on January 6th? If we’re going to investigate January 6th, why
not ask those questions?
And that’s — that’s all that — that’s all that this comes down to. She
has — she has already predetermined a narrative about Donald Trump, about
Republicans. She doesn’t want to talk about what happened at the Capitol
that day to make sure that something like that never happens again.
MACCALLUM: So you don’t think that she has concerns about those issues and
how that security breakdown happened? Do you think that she feels it will
reflect poorly on her?
BANKS: I — I — I really do. And — and here’s why. On — on Wednesday,
before I found out that I was banned from the committee — I found out, by
the way, on Twitter — I was meeting with the head of the U.S. Capitol
Police Union, who represent the rank and file heroes that make up the
Capitol Police who protect me, my family, my staff, every single day. And
here — here’s what he told me, the head of the Capitol Police Union told
me, that on January 6th the Capitol Police officers weren’t prepared for
what was going to happen, even though the head of the Capitol Police had
intelligence reports dating back to three weeks before January 6th that
something potentially very dangerous could happen that day. They weren’t
prepared for it, they weren’t trained for it, and, maybe most important of
all, they weren’t equipped for it. They lacked — they lacked equipment,
basic equipment, to take care of something like what should at that point –
– should have been expected would occur.
And here’s the — here’s the bottom line. Once you go up the — to the top
of the — the — the flagpole of who is in charge of the Capitol Police,
who the Capitol Police Union chief, they blamed the leadership of the
Capitol Police. But — but due to the rules of the United States Capitol,
the power instruction of the Capitol, Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the
House, has more control and authority and responsibly over the leadership
of the Capitol Police than anyone else in the United States Capitol. So she
doesn’t want us to ask these questions because at the end of the day she is
ultimately responsible for the breakdown of security at the Capitol that
happened in January 6th.
MACCALLUM: So, your colleague, and I think you used to have a pretty good
relationship, Liz Cheney, came out swinging against you, calling the things
that you had said about the commission disgraceful.
Here she is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. LIZ CHENEY (R-WY): I am absolutely confident that we will have a non-
partisan investigation, that it will look at the facts, that it will go
wherever the facts may lead. There are three members that the minority
leader proposed that the speaker did not object to. She has objected to two
members. And the rhetoric around this from the minority leader and from
those two members has been disgraceful. This must be an investigation that
is focused on facts. And the idea that any of this has become politicized
is really unworthy of the office that we all hold and — and unworthy of
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: So she — she called some of the things that you said
disgraceful with regard to this investigation.
What do you say to Liz Cheney?
BANKS: Well, as I — as I’ve already said, Speaker Pelosi didn’t just ban
me and Jim Jordan from serving on this committee, she also banned the —
the very basic questions that we’re asking. Why — why was the Capitol
vulnerable on that day when three weeks before January 6th there were
intelligence reports that the leadership of the Capitol Police were aware
So, whether it’s Speaker Pelosi or Liz Cheney or anyone who sits on this
committee, it’s clear that those are questions that we should be demanding
answers to. Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want me on that committee, but she doesn’t
also — also doesn’t want us to ask those questions because it leads to a
series of answers that don’t fit her narrative.
MACCALLUM: So, I guess, there are a lot of questions this morning about
what this investigation is actually going to look like because Minority
Leader McCarthy said you guys are all out. Everybody is not going to
participate. And yet we’re hearing that Speaker Pelosi intends to go
through with this on Tuesday.
Here’s what she said about the makeup of what this committee might look
like just a short time ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS “THIS WEEK” ANCHOR: Will you be appointing
more Republicans to the committee like Congressman Adam Kinzinger?
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): That would be my plan.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So when will that be announced?
PELOSI: Perhaps after I speak to Adam Kinzinger —
STEPHANOPOULOS: And you believe he’ll —
PELOSI: But I’m not about to announce it right this minute.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: She was pretty tight-lipped about that.
What’s your understanding of who they’re going to add to the committee and
are you planning to do your own investigation on the Republican side?
BANKS: Well, again, it’s clear that Pelosi only wants members on this
committee who will stick to her talking points and stick to her narrative.
That’s why she’s picked the group that she’s already picked. And anyone
that she asks to be on this committee, from this point moving forward, will
— will be stuck to her — her narrative, to her point of view. There won’t
be another — another side. And that’s — in the history of the Congress,
something like this has never happened before. In the history of our
country you’ve never had the speaker of the House deny the — the
representatives that the minority party submitted for a select committee.
It’s never happened before. It’s a break in precedent.
And as everyone in America knows, you have a majority view, a minority
view. That’s the whole point of our committee structure in the Congress.
So, why does Nancy Pelosi not want to hear the other side? Why does she not
want to answer the tough questions that Jim Jordan and I were prepared to
ask and demand answers to? It’s pretty clear why, because the further you
go up that chain of command, the — the closer you get to Speaker Pelosi.
We also know that the Senate, by the way, recently completed an
investigation of their own. The Homeland Security and the Rules Committee
jointly published a report that came out in June, and it talked about the
systemic failure of leadership and the — and the — and a breakdown of
security on January. We — we know that a number of documents from the
speaker’s office were submitted for that report, but there are also a
number of documents that they refused to release, that the speaker’s office
refused to release for that investigation that still — still sit on the
computers in the speaker’s — speaker’s office that we should be demanding
to take a look at as well. And the reason I can only speculate as to why
they don’t want those documents to be released, because it — it — it —
at the end of the day, it — it shows that — that the speaker was involved
and the lack of leadership and the breakdown of security that occurred in
MACCALLUM: Congressman Banks, thank you very much. Good to have you with us
today. We’ll be watching that as it plays out this week.
BANKS: Thank you.
MACCALLUM: And coming up next — thank you — should vaccinated people put
masks back on again as COVID cases rise? We’re going to bring in the Sunday
panel to discuss the debate, the politics and the science coming up next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LATOYA CANTRELL (D), NEW ORLEANS MAYOR: We know that masking up works.
While I have, in the past, gone maskless, I’m making up, going into
wherever I go with that mask on, even in my office.
GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): There’s been talk about potentially people
advocating at the federal level imposing compulsory mask on kids. We —
we’re not doing that in Florida, OK.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: New Orleans Mayor Latoya Cantrell issuing an indoor mask
advisory as COVID cases surge in her city. And then you saw the Florida
governor, Ron DeSantis, doubling down on keeping masks optional this fall
in classrooms across his state.
Time now for our Sunday group.
We have Jason Riley of “The Wall Street Journal” and author of the new book
“Maverick,” Catherine Lucey who covers the White House for “The Wall Street
Journal,” and Fox News political analyst Juan Williams.
Great to have all of you with us today.
You know, we have this sort of joyful reopening of full capacity
restaurants and baseball games and everything, Catherine.
Politically, this is, obviously, a rewind that a lot of people don’t want
What do you think the impact is of these decisions in Louisiana and in L.A.
County and the fact that Ron DeSantis is sticking his ground on no more
CATHERINE LUCEY, “THE WALL STREET JOURNAL”: This is a tricky situation now
isn’t it, Martha? I mean we’re really heading into a tougher phase here.
Certainly at the White House, you know, they’re making clear, you know, the
CDC is saying for now they are — they’re not issuing new guidelines. The
White House says they will follow whatever the CDC does, but that they will
defer to local rules.
But, broadly, this does present a political issue, you know, for the
president. You know, he really ran on, you know, getting shots to people,
reopening. We saw this, as you said, on July 4th, this, sort of, turn the
And, you know, if people are getting more anxious now, if their — you
know, as debate continues on. You mentioned earlier this ABC poll that
suggests a rising, sort of, you know, lack in optimism, that people are
more concerned about the future, you know, that could really president an
issue for the president going forward as he tries to work on the rest of
Jason, Catherine mentions those polls. One from ABC that shows 55 percent
of Americans think the country is not headed in a positive direction. Also
his own poll numbers have dropped about 6 points according to Gallup in the
most recent week.
What’s the impact of this resurgence of the delta variant on the Biden
administration and their agenda?
JASON RILEY, “THE WALL STREET JOURNAL”: Well, Martha, according to Dr.
Walensky at the CDC, something like 97 percent of people being hospitalized
for COVID are unvaccinated people. That sounds like a vaccination problem
to me, not a masking problem. I understand that people — some people are
hesitant to get the — the vaccine. A lot of Democrats spent time
undermining the rollout the vaccine during the Trump administration. So
here we are. But I still don’t know why the rest of us need to mask up
until these other folks decide whether or not to get the vaccine.
I also think that masking undermines the — the — the vaccination effort
in some ways. I mean one reason to get a vaccine is so that you don’t need
to wear a mask. And if you force people to do both, I think they have less
incentive to go get a shot.
MACCALLUM: Juan, how problematic is this resurgence for the Biden agenda.
JUAN WILLIAMS, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think that, obviously,
it cases — it creates anxiety in the country because everyone’s unsure,
even those who are vaccinated. I mean you think about the mask issue,
Martha, and, you know, masks are a matter of caution for people who are
vaccinated, but they potentially are a matter of life and death for people
who are unvaccinated, and that includes children under 12.
So when you have, you know, 99 percent of the people who are dying being
unvaccinated, you come to understand, we have a solution as the American
people. The solution is, get vaccinated. So this is the people’s choice.
Open schools. You know, get our offices back open after Labor Day. Keep the
economic recovery rolling.
You know, it seems to me that we should just be very clear, enough
vaccinated people, then we don’t have a debate over masks, we don’t have to
debate vaccine passports. And I think they should, you know, the governor
of Alabama this week was saying, you know, you could blame the
unvaccinated. But I think the people who have been telling folks, oh, you
don’t need a vaccine is what’s led to high rates of COVID resurging in
Florida, in Texas, in Missouri. These are red states. And it seems to me
that’s where this resurgence has taken a foothold in the country. So
somebody has to be accountable for this and say, you know what, let’s get
MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean we’ve also seen people who are vaccinated, who are
getting breakthrough cases. So it’s not only those who are unvaccinated who
have been impacted by this.
I want to turn to President Trump — former President Trump and President
Biden, both out on the campaign trail, so to speak, over the last — over
the course of this weekend. The Virginia governor race is kind of going to
be the first bellwether as we begin the midterm season. And there you have
Glenn Youngkin running against Terry McAuliffe. And President Biden left
the White House this weekend to go campaign for him, his first time out
there as president.
Here’s part of what he focused on when he spoke in Arlington on Friday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We have to keep cutting through
the Republican fog that government is the problem and show that we the
people are the solution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MACCALLUM: So, Catherine, how much of a help do we think that President
Biden is going to be on the campaign trail for these candidates, and, you
know, this is the first time he’s gone out there for Terry McAuliffe. Mot a
new name. He’s been around a very long time. What about this race?
LUCEY: Well, certainly Terry McAuliffe really wanted the president in
there. This is an early, you know, stump to get out there before Labor Day
to make the pitch. And I think you’re seeing a lot of interest from
Democrats in getting the president out on the campaign trail and he’s done
a number of events recently, not political events, you know, events
promoting his agenda, but he’s been out in Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan,
you know, in congressional districts that could be closely fought next
And Democrats really think that a lot of — and a lot of what we saw on
Friday was kind of a preview of what the message could be for the midterms.
So talking about the Biden agenda, you know, what he’s done so far in terms
of COVID and shots and checks, but also the legislative proposals around
infrastructure and the poverty plans that they’re trying to push through.
LUCEY: Of course the issue though is that, you know, there are a lot of,
you know, challenges rising. You know, as the delta cases rise, concerns
about inflation, and, obviously, you know, they haven’t gotten these
legislative proposals across the finish line. So those things remain to be
MACCALLUM: Yes, that’s exactly the point, Jason. You know, how effective
can President Biden be when he’s having so much trouble with, you know, all
three houses, the House, the Senate, and the White House, all in Democrat
hands, and he’s having a tough time getting these big things passed?
RILEY: Yes, I — well, the president’s job approval rating is right around
50 percent. So I don’t think a Democratic candidate would have a problem
with President Biden stumping for him. You know, Biden won the state by ten
points. He’s pretty popular in Virginia according to the polls.
So, no, I don’t — I don’t think him being out there right now is going to
be a problem. I think the party still sees him as someone who can rally
voters and get them out in this — in this special election.
MACCALLUM: Yes. And President Trump in Arizona, Juan, trying to make sure
that Arizona gets back into his column. He also went after Mike Pence last
night saying someone gave him some bad advice on certifying the election.
Last thought on Trump in Arizona.
WILLIAMS: Well, I think, you know, Biden said in Virginia, he ran against
Trump and he whipped him. And that now you have Terry McAuliffe running
against Trump in Virginia in terms of Glenn Youngkin. So I think that’s a
pretty good line.
And what you see Trump doing in Arizona is trying to stir his base. I don’t
know that he has much ability at this point, though.
MACCALLUM: Thank you all. Good to have you with us on our Sunday panel this
Coming up next, our “Power Player of the Week,” Bryan Cranston, on the
iconic roles that have made him one of our most respected actors.
MACCALLUM: He was a journeyman actor who turned small parts into memorable
characters. And as we first told you last winter, when he finally got his
big break, he was ready to make the most of it. Here’s Chris Wallace with
the “Power Player of the Week.”
BRYAN CRANSTON, AWARD-WINNING ACTOR: From the time I was 25 years old, I
was making a living as an actor. And that really was my goal. Once that
happened, whatever happens on top of making a living is just gravy.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR (voice over): Bryan Cranston is one of
America’s most accomplished actors, but he still seems surprised by his
CRANSTON: My dad was an actor. He really wanted to be a star. And when he
didn’t become a star, it really kind of destroyed him.
So I wasn’t going to be an actor. I was going to become a police officer
here in Los Angeles.
WALLACE: But he was a natural and a scene stealer.
WALLACE (on camera): The first time I remember seeing you was as Tim
Whatley, the dentist on Jerry Seinfeld.
How big a break was that?
CRANSTON: Enormous. Being cast as Tim Whatley on “Seinfeld” was like
permission to go to comedy camp.
WALLACE (voice over): He gained a bigger following as the dad on the unruly
family sitcom “Malcolm in the Middle.” And then came his unforgettable turn
as Walter White, the chemistry teacher turned drug kingpin on “Breaking
Bad” that earned him four Emmys.
CRANSTON: To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of
WALLACE (on camera): Did you realize that was going to change everything?
CRANSTON: No. A little show on AMC? I — no one has any clue that it’s
going to become what it became.
WALLACE: And why do you think the show and you made such a mark?
CRANSTON: The most underrated element in all of performance art is the
writing. I always say this, if Meryl Streep got C-level material, she could
bring it up to a B. But that’s it. When you get A-level material, as I was
handed in “Breaking Bad,” you get a little nervous, like, oh, I can’t mess
this up now.
WALLACE (voice over): The role propelled Cranston to leading man status
with turns on Broadway as LBJ and Howard Beale in “Network.”
Now on Showtime’s “Your Honor,” Cranston plays a judge using his legal
knowledge to keep his teenage son alive and out of jail after a hit-and-run
accident killing a mobster’s son.
CRANSTON: Your worst fear is the threat of — of something happening to
your child. Everyone said, oh, yes, if I felt my child was under mortal
threat, I would absolutely become a criminal or do whatever it takes to
save my child.
CRANSTON: I can still make this work.
WALLACE: Maybe it’s time for Cranston to raise his sites from just making a
WALLACE (on camera): You are now one of the most respected actors in the
business. It’s got to be kind of fun.
CRANSTON: Oh, it’s a blast! It’s a blast! I love what I do. I love acting.
I’ll leave when it stops being fun. But, right now, it’s still a blast. So
I’ll still do it as long as people will have me.
MACCALLUM: And that is it for today.
Have a great week, everybody, and I’ll see you tomorrow on “The Story” at
3:00 p.m. Eastern on Fox News Channel.
And we’ll see you back here next FOX NEWS SUNDAY.
Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, 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 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You
may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from
copies of the content.
400 Bad Request
400 Bad Request