This is a rush transcript from "Your World with Neil Cavuto" January 11, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Thank you, Bill.

Well, the tweetstorm is on. Twitter, Facebook and other big tech companies
facing growing backlash for silencing conservative views in the wake of the
Capitol siege, all of this as Amazon pulls right-leaning Parler social
media platform, and now Parler is suing Amazon.

Shares of Twitter, Amazon and Facebook all down today. Someone here who
says that the conservative revolt against big tech is very, very real.

Welcome, everybody. I'm Martha MacCallum, in for Neil Cavuto today, and
this is YOUR WORLD.

First, we go to Jackie DeAngelis keeping track of all of these big moving
developments today.

Hi, Jackie.

JACKIE DEANGELIS, FOX BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Hi. Good afternoon, Martha.

Well, when Twitter permanently suspended the president's account, followers
started leaving the platform in droves. Now, they're believed to have went
to a platform called Parler.

But, of course, Parler was suspended from Apple, Google Play, and Amazon,
effectively getting kicked off the Internet. Parler, of course, now suing
Amazon as well.

Parler's CEO said this on "Mornings With Maria":

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

JOHN MATZE, CEO, PARLER: I never thought we'd be living in a country where
things like this would happen, where you could get coordinated companies
canceling your -- what you're doing.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

DEANGELIS: Now, Twitter was already starting to see a tapering in its
users when it began flagging content posted by the president.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders tweeted this: "I have lost 50,000 followers this
week. The radical left and their big tech allies cannot marginalize, censor
or silence the American people. This is not China. This is not the United -
- this is the United States of America. And we are a free country."

We reached out to Twitter. A spokesman commented on this issue, saying --
quote -- "Changes in follower counts can be caused by a wide range of
different factors and may be due to unfollowing or because accounts were to
be in violation of the Twitter rules."

That's from the spokesperson. Twitter, of course, isn't saying that it's
about the rules, which many question, because the rules don't seem to be
the same for everyone. And it's also not saying that the loss of followers
is because they are leaving the platform, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Thank you very much, Jackie.

A lot of important questions raised here.

My next guest says that silencing by big tech constitutes unimaginable
interference.

FOX News contributor Liz Peek calls it an assault on our freedom of speech.
She joins us now.

Liz, good to have you here today.

You think about the town crier, you think about the newspaper, you think
about the ways that different generations have communicated with each
other. And to block it, the way that we see happening now, it's just --
it's an astonishing development. And it's a really frightening one.

LIZ PEEK, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Martha, it is truly an assault on the
freedom of speech.

And I think it's a -- it's something that every American should rail
against. Every American should be alarmed by this. We have never in our
country seen this kind of concerted effort to shut down any voices, but now
conservative voices. It's unimaginable to me.

And, by the way, this Twitter action had nothing to do with worries about
violence or Trump inciting violence against the Capitol. Remember, just a
few months ago, Twitter shut down very credible reporting from The New York
Post about shady business transactions that Hunter Biden had engaged in,
taking advantage of his father's position in the White House, in Ukraine
and China.

That had nothing to do with violence. That had to do with suppressing other
voices and helping Joe Biden become president. That, they did. And I got to
say, this entire several-month attack on the right to speak freely about
our politics and about our candidates is just -- it is the worst thing I
have ever seen in this country, literally.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

I mean, you look at that as a form of voter suppression, essentially, when
you look back at it. And in light of what's happening now, their argument
for why they were blocking the Hunter Biden content becomes less and less
legitimate.

And you look at their allowances for Chinese dictators, for the leaders in
Iran, it's very frightening, as an American, to see what's going on in this
country right now.

And, also, we just mentioned, the president tried to shut down 320 (sic),
right? He almost didn't sign the Defense Act because he wanted there to be
some attention paid to this matter, which gives them all of this freedom
from liability.

So, where should conservatives go now to fix this problem?

PEEK: It's a good question.

Section 230 basically protects these platforms against liability, in a way,
by the way, that FOX News is not protected or The New York Times.
Ironically, the idea is that they are supposed to conduct neutral
platforms. And, ironically further, Apple, in shutting down Parler, accused
of not reining in their content sufficiently.

In other words, they wanted them to be a publisher, which basically
abrogates the whole idea of Section 230. Where should conservatives do --
go to correct this problem? I think, in the 2022 campaigns, this has got to
be a leading platform issue for Republicans running for office.

I think this would be wildly popular. Nobody wants to see our freedom of
speech squashed. Martha, when you interview or do -- look at polling about
immigrants and why they come to this country, it's not about money. And it
is about opportunity. But it's mostly about freedoms, freedom of speech,
freedom of religion.

These are incredibly important, iconic beliefs in America. And to see those
thrown under the bus now in a sort of partisan rage is unimaginable. We
have got to fight back against this.

MACCALLUM: I couldn't agree more. And you speak to people who came to this
country from other countries, and they're the most terrified right now,
because they have seen this happen in their countries.

And I think a lot of people, a lot of Americans just sort of go, oh, this
could never happen here. And you listen to the CEO of Parler, he says, I
never imagined that something like this could happen in this country. And
so people need to wake up.

But two years is a long time to wait for any of this to change, Liz.

PEEK: It's true.

As to the Parler situation, we do have antitrust laws. This was a fast-
emerging, fast-growing threat to Twitter and Facebook. Therefore, the idea
that these companies, these giant companies, colluded and basically put
Parler out of business, it is unimaginable.

And I cannot sympathize more with the CEO of this company. We do have now
four antitrust cases lodged against Google. My guess is, the Justice
Department will pursue those even more aggressively. And, by the way,
liberal Democrats, let us not forget, Elizabeth Warren and many others
called for the breaking up of these tech companies.

The tech companies now have sort of curried favor with the left. But I'm
not sure that they are basically going to escape harm from that side as
well. They're too big, too powerful. And everybody knows it.

MACCALLUM: Well, at this point, given the makeup of Congress and the White
House, it is going to take some prevailing minds to get together as, you
point out, to recognize the danger of this, because it will come back to
have backlash against them eventually as well, if this game continues to
escalate in such a frightening way.

Liz, thank you very much. Always good to talk to you.

PEEK: Thank you so much.

MACCALLUM: Thank you for being here today.

So, we're going to have a lot more on the legal fallout from all of this
later this hour.

Now to a growing number of companies that are suspending their political
contributions, which companies across the board have done for generations,
but now they want to make sure that they are -- they're targeting these GOP
lawmakers who objected to the certification of the election.

AT&T is the latest one to do.

So FOX Business Kristina Partsinevelos is following that part of the story
for us today.

Kristina, good afternoon.

KRISTINA PARTSINEVELOS, FOX NEWS BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon,
Martha.

You have companies all across the country that are taking a stance by not
donating to political leaders that tried to overturn the election. You have
roughly 147 Republican lawmakers that did vote to overturn the election, as
well as a riot that stormed Capitol Hill last week.

So, you have big businesses that have been known to donate to political
leaders because they want to focus on specific areas of interest. But now a
slew of corporations, from 3M, Airbnb, Marriott, Citi, J.P. Morgan, have
all said that they're revising their political giving via the political
action committee.

And this started on Sunday, and the trend has been growing dramatically
today. This -- take this statement from MasterCard that we received --
quote -- "We have suspended political action committee giving to members of
Congress who voted to object to the certification of the 2020 presidential
election. We will continue to review the criteria that inform our political
contributions to ensure they reflect our values."

And, in some cases, you have the suspension that is only a short-term
situation, like Facebook, that said that they would pause donations just
for the first quarter. You have the PGA of America announcing or voting to
remove the PGA Championship event from President Trump's New Jersey golf
course next year.

And then, finally, you also have the National Association of Manufacturers
in Washington that call for President Trump's removal from the Oval Office.
And, lastly, you have some corporations that have decided they're going to
suspend political giving altogether. That includes both to Republicans, as
well as Democrats.

And, Martha, this just highlights a growing trend, companies facing
increasing pressure from shareholders, as well as investors, over their
political contributions -- back to you.

MACCALLUM: Kristina, thank you very much.

So, coming up: As House Democrats pushing impeachment, a group of
Republicans are urging someone to push back on this idea. You might be
surprised who that someone is -- when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats set to introduce
an article of impeachment against President Trump this week, in the wake of
the Capitol Hill riot.

To FOX News chief White House correspondent John Roberts with how the
administration is responding to all of this on this Monday.

Hi, John.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Martha, good
afternoon to you.

Clearly, this is something that the president doesn't like. But the White
House isn't too worried about the political implications of another
impeachment, because, even if they do it quickly, the Senate isn't
scheduled to come back in session until the 19th. And it would be pretty
difficult, if not impossible, for the Senate to hold an impeachment trial,
potentially convict the president, before he leaves office.

And to have a trial in the Senate later, after the Biden administration has
been trying to get up to speed, and then only for the reason of preventing
the president for running again for reelection in 2024, might present a
different difficult calculus politically, even legally.

White House sources say that they are simply trying to keep the president
focused on his accomplishments in the closing days of his administration.
The president's traveling to the border in Texas tomorrow.

The White House also trying to put together an event on Operation Warp
Speed, another one on rebuilding the military, and another one on economic
growth, so the president can talk about things that he's done in the past
four years.

The president's Republican supporters, while denouncing the violence at the
Capitol Building last Wednesday, also say impeachment proceedings would
only further divide an already fractured nation.

Here's Congressman Michael Waltz on FOX this morning:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHAEL WALTZ (R-FL): I think this is just going to pour fuel on the
fire.

The president himself has come out repeatedly now and said he intends to
peacefully transfer power, he intends to leave the White House. He
obviously has tens of millions of followers, and that feel like they have
not been heard, that feel like he has been hounded and harassed since day
one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTS: Now, one lingering consequence here at the White House at least
of what happened last Wednesday is, there has been a pretty serious falling
out between the vice president and the president.

FOX News is told that, last Wednesday, while the vice president and his
family, who had come to watch the ceremony, were being moved around quickly
by the Secret Service from secure location to secure location, the
president never picked up the phone to call his number two to see how he
was.

The vice president chaired a Coronavirus Task Force meeting this afternoon.
So, he is here at the complex. But sources tell FOX News that the vice
president has not spoken to the president since last Wednesday morning --
Martha.

MACCALLUM: Quite a development.

John, thank you very much.

So, meanwhile, a group of House Republicans are now urging president-elect
Joe Biden to step forward and to encourage House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to
drop the impeachment efforts against President Trump, in the spirit of
unity going forward.

They write this: "A second impeachment only days before President Trump
will leave office is as unnecessary as it is inflammatory. This impeachment
would undermine your priority of unifying Americans and would further be a
distraction to our nation at a time when millions of fellow citizens are
hurting."

I want to bring in former deputy Assistant Attorney John Yoo.

Great to have you with us today, John. Thank you for being here.

JOHN YOO, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Hey, Martha.

MACCALLUM: What do you make of that argument?

There's obviously political, deep political desire on the Democrats' side
to try to prevent the president from running again and to punish him for
what happened last week. But there's also this larger picture of the desire
for what is best to bring this very hurt nation together.

What do you think?

YOO: I think there's some excellent points you have just made.

There is a short-term desire to punish the president for his terrible
actions last week. On the other hand, using impeachment has some serious
constitutional and political challenges. First, we don't know whether it's
possible to impeach a president after he's left office.

As John Roberts just reported, there's no time in the Senate calendar to
hold an impeachment trial before January 20. And the Constitution is not
clear whether someone who's out of office can be impeached.

Second, the other constitutional problem is that, since the major remedy
for impeachment when someone's convicted is to remove them, the only other
punishment left is disqualification from future office. You could make the
argument, let the American people decide that. The American people can
choose never to elect Donald Trump to office again. They can impose that
judgment.

Why do we need -- and this is the last point -- to consume probably 20, 30
days or longer in a trial, where everything else in the political world
will have to stop, just like it did a year ago, to have a trial of
President Trump on the floor of the Senate and prevent the new
administration from doing the people's business?

MACCALLUM: John, just listening to you, it just strikes me that there's
been an effort under way to remove or damage this president since day one.

And it's hard to imagine in that environment, with the same players in
place, that they're going to change their mind about that, once they have
dominated the House and the Senate. Do you believe that there is the will
on the Democrat side to let that moment pass? Or do you think they will
want to make sure? And can they make sure with that vote that he can't run
again, legally?

YOO: Legally, it's not clear at all.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

YOO: In fact, this will just prolong attention on President Trump even
longer, for months and months, because suppose the Senate does convict.

The House looks like they're almost certain to impeach in a few days. It's
really going to turn to the Senate, where you have to get two-thirds to
convict. Suppose the Senate does. Suppose a number of Republicans do switch
off this time, unlike last time a year ago.

Even if they disqualify him, President Trump's going to go to court and
say: I want to run again. It's unconstitutional because I was already out
of office. That's going to go to the Supreme Court, I'm sure, by the end.
We don't know what's going to happen.

But all you can do is, it's going to keep President Trump in the mind's
eye, at the center of politics for months and months. It's going to
distract from things like a stimulus bill, like getting President Trump --
President Biden's nominees into office.

MACCALLUM: So, speaking of the president-elect, Joe Biden, this is a
moment where he could step up and show leadership. He could say that he
wants them to drop this effort.

I think of the pardoning of Richard Nixon, obviously, different
circumstances. And -- but he could have that same sort of moment to heal
the country. Do you think there's any chance that that happens?

YOO: Oh, there's certainly a chance.

I had the privilege to be general counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee
when Senator Biden was the ranking minority member, the lead Democrat on
the committee. And he does think carefully about the Constitution. He does
worry, I think, about the stability of the country.

As you say, this is a chance for him to heal the nation. He could say: I
don't want an impeachment trial. Go ahead. The House can impeach him. That
already puts an asterisk next to President Trump's name in the history
books. Don't bother with a trial. Let's get it behind us. President Trump's
not going to run for office again. And then let's go forward and solve the
pandemic. Let's go forward and get the economy back on its feet.

So, I think that's politically very attractive to a President Biden.

MACCALLUM: Yes. And it's like, remember when the pandemic was the only
thing we had to worry about. It seems like a simpler time in the most
bizarre period that we have lived in over the past year-and-a-half.

John, thank you. Great to have you here today. Good to talk to you.

YOO: Thanks, Martha.

MACCALLUM: You bet.

So, president-elect Biden getting his second vaccine jab, speaking of that,
today, but could his distribution plan impact others from getting their
second shot? We're going to talk about that.

And, later, big tech faces the lawsuits in wake of the enormous free speech
showdown in this country. So, which side has a better case?

Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: Breaking just moments ago: The Department of Homeland Security
is not wasting any time getting ready for next week's inauguration, putting
security plans in motion starting Wednesday, in wake of last week's riot.

We're going to have more for you coming up on this with Asa Hutchinson
after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: So, COVID vaccine part two today for president-elect Joe Biden,
getting his second Pfizer shot.

But what about other Americans who are waiting for their shots across this
country?

To FOX's Peter Doocy in Wilmington, Delaware, with the latest from the
Biden team.

Hi, Peter.

PETER DOOCY, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: And the latest, Martha, is that the
president-elect is trying to figure out how to advance his agenda with a
Senate that might be focusing on an impeachment trial.

So, here's one new idea he's got for time management.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT-ELECT: Go a half-day on dealing with impeachment,
and a half-day getting my people nominated and confirmed in the Senate, as
well as moving on a package.

So, that's my hope.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DOOCY: Well, the one hiccup there might be the president-elect saying that
he's not sure if that's possible. And he's waiting for an answer from the
parliamentarian.

While he waits, Biden got his second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in
public, as a Politico report surfaces that he's expressing frustration in
private with transition officials about a lack of progress advancing his
promise to vaccinate 50 million people by April, 100 million shots in 100
days.

But, today, as he hung around waiting to see to make sure that there were
no adverse effects from that latest dose, he gave his guys a vote of
confidence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Mr. President-elect, do you still have confidence in your COVID
team that they will be able to vaccinate 50 million Americans in the first
100 days?

BIDEN: I do.

Let me make a couple of brief statements. Number one, my number one
priority is getting vaccine in people's arms, like we just did today, as
rapidly as we can.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DOOCY: But there's still a big question mark. How much does Joe Biden's
COVID-19 relief plan cost? He hasn't told us yet.

But he assures us that he will on Thursday -- Martha.

MACCALLUM: All right. I have heard you press him on that. We are still
waiting for the answer.

Peter, thank you very much.

So, all of this coming with states struggling to get up to speed on
speeding up the vaccine deliveries.

This is on everyone's mind across the country who is actually wanting to
get the shot. The CDC saying that, of the 25 million doses that are out
there, nine million have been administered.

Let's get the read from Arkansas Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson.

Governor, great to have you with us today.

You headed Homeland Security. You have a lot of handle on this whole
country in terms of these kinds of efforts. What's going wrong here, in
your opinion?

GOV. ASA HUTCHINSON (R-AR): Well, first of all, in terms of the
vaccinations, you're absolutely right. It's on everybody's mind, whether
your 70-year-old wanting to vaccination or you have compromised immune
systems.

We're working very hard. The challenge is that it's a limited supply, it's
not coming fast enough, and then we have got to work harder in getting it
out and getting into people's arms. We're making progress. We have up to
almost 40 percent of the doses that have been received have been
administered. We want to get that up even higher.

And then I think president-elect Biden's decision to get the doses out more
quickly to the states is right on target. We have to have the flexibility
to manage that.

We want to make sure we stick with a two-dose regime and -- regimen -- and
make sure that we follow that protocol recommended by the CDC.

MACCALLUM: There are hubs that have opened it today in New York City.

What's your method for getting them? It seems like there ought to be a much
easier way to do a drive-through, to have people show their I.D. There's
registration. People don't know how to register or if they should register.

How are you doing it? And are you succeeding?

HUTCHINSON: Well, that's an excellent point.

And we could do drive-through. We could do mass vaccination arenas and
programs if you had an unlimited supply. But when you have a limited
supply, you have to set the priorities. And that is what makes it a
logistical challenge.

What we're doing is prioritizing the 1-A, which is long-term care
residents, staff, health care workers, and first responders. That way, we -
- our goal is to get that all done by the end of January. Then we move to
1-B, to the larger populations.

We're utilizing our pharmacies that are in every community, as well as our
hospitals. We will broaden that as needed when the supply increases. Then
we will go to greater volume distribution mechanisms that we have,
utilizing an arena, other facilities that can do a mass vaccination.

MACCALLUM: So, are saying that you have used every single shot that has
come into Arkansas? And have -- it's a two-part question. Have you used
every shot?

And the second part is, have you had any go to waste, like we have seen
here?

HUTCHINSON: No, we haven't used every shot. And I certainly hope I didn't
say that.

MACCALLUM: But you said you were waiting for supply.

HUTCHINSON: The doses that we have received -- the doses we have received,
40 percent are in people's arms.

And, yes, we want to up that percent. Now, there's always going to be a lag
there, because it's a throughput. You're receiving them one day. They're --
then you get them out the next day. And so we want to increase that. We
have got to do better in it.

But there is -- if we had an unlimited supply, we would open up Bud Walton
Arena, we would open up War Memorial Stadium, and we would have everybody
get in line and vaccinate them hopefully in a more organized fashion.

But we can't do that, because we only receive a limited number of doses
every week. We hope that does increase.

MACCALLUM: Yes. I mean, it seems like that's the problem. You have got all
these states that have only used a percentage of what they're getting out
there.

So, Operation Warp Speed seems to have hit a bit of a roadblock when it
gets to the point of getting it in people's arms. Do you think that the
states were unprepared to have a better delivery system once you got them
all?

HUTCHINSON: Well, it is a big lift for all the states to do this.

But here, again, we are utilizing an effective program for the
vaccinations. As the vaccinations increase, you will see the numbers grow
exponentially. There is a three-day lag in the numbers that come in on
vaccinations, because the providers, those that are doing the vaccinations,
the pharmacies, they have three days to enter the data.

There is a lag. We're going to see that accelerate as we continue to get
better at what we're doing.

MACCALLUM: Yes. Well, we don't want to see any wasted vaccines. There
ought to be a really strong way to get people to be on call if there are
extras. We don't want any of them to go to waste.

Governor Hutchinson, thank you. Good to have you here today.

HUTCHINSON: Absolutely. All right, thank you.

MACCALLUM: We got to get the shots in these people's arms, right?

All right, so, after fueling a free speech showdown, big tech needs to
start lawyering up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

MATZE: They claim that we somehow were responsible for the -- the -- what
they call the insurrection on the 6th, which we have never allowed
violence.

We have never allowed any of this stuff on our platform. And we don't even
have a way to coordinate an event on our platform. So, they somehow want to
make us responsible. And this seems to me like an excuse to just basically
eliminate free speech at a convenient time.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Sounds like it.

That was Parler CEO John Matze yesterday to Maria Bartiromo.

Today, the social media company filing a lawsuit against Amazon, alleging
political bias and calling for the tech giant to reinstate their platform
on the Amazon web services. So, we reached out to Parler and to Amazon.
Haven't heard back yet. But this could be the first in many legal battles
over big tech and free speech.

So, let's talk about that with former federal prosecutor Katie Cherkasky.

Katie, good to have you with us today.

What did you think about what the Parler CEO said there?

KATIE CHERKASKY, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, I think that's
absolutely what they're going to try to prove here.

And the problem you have is that these are really disputes between private
companies more than anything else. So, I think it's going to boil down to a
lot of what the contracts between these companies said, and whether there
is a breach.

And, hopefully, they're able to get some sort of temporary injunction in
the meantime. But these lawsuits will likely drag on for quite a while.

MACCALLUM: Yes

I mean, so you refer to the rules. They're private companies. They have
rules about what can and can't -- what they're not going to sell and what
can go on these sites. So they're going to have to prove that they in some
way led to this insurrection, which I think would be pretty, pretty
difficult to prove.

CHERKASKY: Well, actually, I don't think that they necessarily need to
even prove that.

MACCALLUM: OK.

CHERKASKY: These are mostly about the contract terms between the
companies, and whether Amazon is required to provide certain notice periods
before they terminate service and things like that, more so than really any
federal level issues.

I know there's been some antitrust violations that have been lodged. But,
in order to prove that, Parler is really going to have to show that there
was a conspiracy to close off the market between these companies, which is
going to be a difficult task on their end as well.

So, really, unfortunately, this does come down to a lot of free market
ideas. And how that's going to play out in the long run really remains to
be seen, needless to say.

MACCALLUM: Yes, I mean, it speaks to that convergence that we have seen
with all of these companies that have gained such an incredible amount of
power, that they sort of present themselves as individual companies, which
they are, but not as arbiters of the information on them.

So, at what point do they get to the level where they're treated like a
utility, where they do have regulation? And I think a lot of people are
against regulation. But, in this case, we have seen a lot of folks on
Capitol Hill speak out that there has to be something done.

And now it got to this boiling point before anything was done.

CHERKASKY: Right, exactly.

And I think that's why you hear a lot about the protections that some of
these companies have under Section 230, where they're immune from
liability, to a large extent, but also are now choosing to regulate what
speech is on the platform. So, are they entitled to both?

Isn't that sort of having it both ways? And I think that's something that
people will want to see some changes to. Biden has previously said that he
was interested in potentially removing some of those protections. So, maybe
they were trying to get ahead of the curve there with that.

We have all heard that, I think, theory floated around. But in terms of
what can be done, it is very difficult when you have private companies, and
it all boils down to what the free market ends up looking like, I think, to
a large degree.

MACCALLUM: Yes, it's going to come down to what some of these politicians
can agree on in terms of free speech as well. It's been benefiting the left
in a big way, the course of these transactions and these decisions that a
lot of these companies have made over the last couple of months.

But it could come back to bite them.

Katie Cherkasky, thank you. Good to have you here today.

CHERKASKY: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So, new details sparking even more questions about security
lapses after this riot and before the riot. So, find out what the FBI was
reportedly doing before all of this started.

And why Speaker Nancy Pelosi's reaction to a question about Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez has gone viral today, what it's saying about the future of
the Democratic Party.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: A source telling FOX News that the FBI urged extremists not to
travel to D.C. ahead of last week's deadly riot.

FOX News Aishah Hasnie has the latest -- Aishah.

AISHAH HASNIE, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Martha.

Yes, this was a huge blow to Capitol Police, a department that is already
facing immense scrutiny, immense pressure over what the events that
happened on Wednesday. Listen to this.

According to a source, a source that tells FOXNews.com, the FBI visited
pro-Trump extremists prior to that rally in urging them not to travel to
D.C. And NBC is reporting that the FBI and the NYPD even went as far as to
warn Capitol Police ahead of time about the potential of violence.

The outgoing Capitol Police chief, Steven Sund, has told The Washington
Post, though, that he did, he tried to request the D.C. National Guard be
put on standby just in case ahead of the rally. But his calls, he says,
were squashed by House and Senate security officials.

Now, nine days before the inauguration, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser is asking
the Department of Homeland Security for added security, extending security
well past the historic day. She's also asking that all First Amendment
demonstration permits be canceled.

Tours right now at the Washington Monument have been suspended already
because of credible threats from groups involved in the violence on the
Capitol on Wednesday.

And, Martha, also, this just developing today, the -- FOX News has
confirmed that the FBI is warning about plans for armed protests, armed
protests in all 50 state capitals before, during and in the run-up to
inauguration -- Martha.

MACCALLUM: Aishah, thank you very much.

So, breaking this hour, we did tell you that the Homeland Security
Department is beefing up those inauguration preparations this Wednesday.

Former FBI Deputy Assistant Director Danny Coulson joins me now with
discussion on all of this.

Danny, this is a very frightening time for the country. And we head into
the inauguration, and you hear Aishah's report about how they're beefing
things up. What do you make of all this?

DANNY COULSON, FORMER FBI AGENT: Well, you said they're frightening times.

I think that's a height of understatement. I think it's terrifying times.
I'm in the security business. I have been involved in violence for decades.
And I'm really concerned about our country and where it's going.

We're so divided right now that it's a scary time. I'm concerned about my
family even going out. So, it is scary times. And, basically, this
inauguration is very, very important to our country. It's a symbolism of a
change of power.

But if -- I hope that they're going to put the Secret Service in charge of
everything here. The FBI, of course, will support them. But these are bad
times.

They had professionals running it. They don't need to be worried about
optics, like they were with the Capitol. And they need to let their law
enforcement people do their job. And I hope they turn them loose, and I
hope they stop any violence that's going to occur there.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

I mean, it's unnerving to read these reports of the request from the head
of the Capitol Hill police, Officer Sund, asking the House and the Senate,
saying that they were getting more and more concerned as they got close to
this event on January 6, that there were more people coming, and that they
wanted backup.

And, as you just pointed out, they were told that to have the National
Guard on the steps of the Hill, of Capitol Hill, would be an optic problem.

COULSON: Yes.

Martha, that's typical. That's very typical of security people. We are
constantly dealing with non-professional people worried about optics.

If you remember, Reagan was shot because the security plan was changed by
his staff members, who changed it and moved the demonstrators and the media
close to the scene and caused him to get shot.

That was an optic issue.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

COULSON: And we can't have that here.

We don't have time for political correctness. Staffers need to plan on tea
and cookies and menus, and not -- let the professional Secret Service set
things up and do it the right way.

MACCALLUM: So, what's your anticipation? There's this event on January 17
that people are ramping up all over the country, and also for January 20.

What needs to be done to make sure that these areas are going to be
hardened, because, sadly, that's the only choice that we have right now?

COULSON: Well, frankly, if it were up to me -- and it's not -- I would not
have this inauguration outside. I would do it in a football stadium.

We know how to secure football stadiums. We can control access. We can
control everything from drones to people. And they need to do that.

Right now, what we need to have is a very strong presence. But, also, there
are certain techniques that should be done. They should have extraction
teams in the crowds ready to pounce on anybody that tries to instigate a
riot. Then need to have arrest teams. They need to have a strong physical
presence.

They need to monitor drones. Drones is a huge issue for me in a lot of my
events.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

COULSON: And they need to put a cone around that place, so you can't fly a
drone in there.

And there's about a million things we can talk about. But let the Secret
Service run it. Let the FBI help them. Keep staffers out of it. And let's
have a safe one.

MACCALLUM: Good advice, Danny.

When you tell me you're terrified, that makes me -- that's unnerving.

(LAUGHTER)

MACCALLUM: Thank you very much. Good to see you, as always. Thanks, Danny.

COULSON: Thank you. It's always good to see you, too.

MACCALLUM: Thanks.

COULSON: Have a good one.

MACCALLUM: You too.

So, coming up next: the response from Speaker Pelosi to a question that she
was asked on "60 Minutes" about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and now her
reaction is going viral. What does it say about where her party is headed?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LESLEY STAHL, CBS NEWS ANCHOR: Why does AOC complain that you have not
been grooming younger people for leadership?

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I don't know. You will have to ask her, because
we are.

STAHL: That was kind of sharp, kind of dismissing her for.

PELOSI: I'm not dismissing her. I respect her. I think she's very
effective, as are other -- many other members in our caucus that the press
doesn't pay attention to.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Interesting.

So, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shutting down New York Congresswoman
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez's claims that Democratic leaders haven't been
preparing the next generation of leadership.

With the House speaker seemingly at odds with a key progressive figure,
what could this mean for the future of the party?

Let's talk to GOP pollster Lee Carter, Democratic strategist Jason Nichols,
and Republican strategist Hal Lambert.

Great to have all of you with us.

Jason, let me start with you. What goes through your mind when you watch
that exchange?

JASON NICHOLS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, I thought it was -- first of
all, the first thing that goes to my mind is that Republicans who said that
Lesley Stahl was somehow harder on Republicans need to watch that
interview. It seems like she was really tough on Nancy Pelosi.

I think Nancy Pelosi is probably a little frustrated because of some of the
things that have been said by AOC. I think AOC is right, in the sense that
there needs to be new leadership groomed both in the House and in the
Senate. We need new energy.

We don't know how much longer that they are going to be in the positions
that they hold.

At the same time, I think age is a number. I think that the Democrats need
to look at people like Barbara Lee, who they overlooked for seemingly
decades, who has done an incredible job and is also someone who
progressives can side with.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

NICHOLS: So, I think that there's leadership that needs to come, and new
leadership, but it doesn't necessarily have to be somebody in their early
30s.

MACCALLUM: All right, let's take a look at another interesting exchange
about the stimulus. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STAHL: What about the COVID relief package...

PELOSI: Yes.

STAHL: ... that was held up for eight months?

PELOSI: Right. But that was their obstruction.

Understand this.

STAHL: But wait.

PELOSI: It was their obstruction.

STAHL: Yours too.

PELOSI: It was their obstruction.

STAHL: No, yours too. It takes two to...

PELOSI: No, it wasn't obstruction.

STAHL: You held out for eight months.

PELOSI: No. No, we held it up because there was no, no respect for our
heroes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Lee, I wish you had the dials on some of these comments. What
do you think?

LEE CARTER, REPUBLICAN POLLSTER: I think that what she's trying to do is
blame Trump, right, and say this wasn't her fault.

It's not surprising to me that this is her position. I think, really, what
she was trying to get across in this interview was that she is -- it's
going to be a new day, that all the problems that we have had are because
of problems with Trump.

And I think she was also trying to distance herself from AOC, I think less
about age and more about, that's not all the party is. She gets a lot of
attention. There's lots of other people too. So, I think she's trying to
say, we're going to be a more moderate Democratic Party.

And I think that she was also saying that, we are the party of the people.
The problems you had were with Trump, and that's going to change now.

Hal, what do you think about...

CARTER: I'm not sure if it's true, but that's what I think she was trying
to...

MACCALLUM: Oh, thanks, Lee. Sorry about that.

Hal, you want to weigh in?

HAL LAMBERT, GOP STRATEGIST: Yes.

I mean, you hear about the rails of politics you're not supposed to touch.
Well, there's clearly two rails you can't touch with Nancy Pelosi in an
interview. One is her record as speaker, and, two, bring up AOC.

And Lesley Stahl did both in the same interview. And you could just feel
the tension and anger through the screen from Nancy Pelosi. And it's --
they're perfectly legitimate questions.

And the pushback on the stimulus, Nancy Pelosi, within just a couple of
days, was able to get $2,000 approved for every -- almost every American to
go out. Why didn't she do that six months ago? Why didn't you do that in
the summer? Well, we know why.

She didn't want to give a win to the president before an election. So, she
made the American people wait, and then she came out after the election
with the $2,000. So it's a perfectly legitimate question.

And you bring up the age factor. I mean, there isn't -- they're not
grooming anyone. They have had the same leadership for decades.

MACCALLUM: Jason, you have got Republicans asking Nancy Pelosi to drop the
impeachment plan and to call for a unification of the country.

Very quick, 20 seconds. Can you respond to that?

NICHOLS: Well, I think we need to hold people accountable, particularly
our elected officials, particularly when people died on their watch, and
they have actually instigated the event.

I think that there's no question that we cannot allow this president to
walk away as if nothing happened, when we watched a police officer be
beaten to death. I think that there's no question it would be a dereliction
of duty if Congress did nothing in this situation.

MACCALLUM: All right.

We have got to leave it there. Thank you, guys.

Just -- breaking news just coming in: Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, who
you have come to know well -- he's been interviewed here a lot -- is now
stepping down, so his name added to the list of many White House officials
and administration officials who have decided to leave before the end of
this administration.

We thank you for joining us today. I'm in for Neil, "Your World." Good to
be with you. Neil will be back tomorrow.

Join me tonight at 7:00 p.m. Eastern for "THE STORY."

And right after this, "THE FIVE" gets under way, so stick around for that.

Have a great day, everybody. I will see you tonight at 7:00. More breaking
news straight ahead.

And the folks of "THE FIVE" joining you right now.

END

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 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.