Media erupt over ‘spying’ charge

close

Video

Media erupt over ‘spying’ charge

Barr savaged for suggesting Trump camp targeted.

This is a rush transcript from "Media Buzz," April 14, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

HOWARD KURTZ, FOX NEWS HOST: On the buzz meter this Sunday, the media partisan crank up the volume as the attorney general says he thinks there was spying on the Trump campaign, but that he has no specific evidence.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RON KLAIN, CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It was a shame, I think, to see Bill Barr, one of our nation's most respected lawyers, a two-time attorney general, turn in his tortoise shell glasses for a tinfoil hat.

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Intelligence Community was not spying on the Trump campaign. They were investigating Russian interference. The FBI and DOJ were not spying on the Trump campaign. So what is Bill Barr talking about?

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Attorney General Barr today dealing a major blow to liberals everywhere, saying Trump was right, his campaign was spied on. Ha-ha.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Is this a crucial debate or just hot air as we wait for Bill Barr to release the Mueller report? President Trump confirming a scoop denied by the White House that he may flood sanctuary cities with detainees, furor over his shakeup at Homeland Security and pushing out Kirstjen Nielsen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFFREY TOOBIN: For the rest of her life, people will look at her and think, oh, that's the woman who put children in cages.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All these Democrats are talking about how horrible Kirstjen Nielsen was. That she is a terrible person for separating parents and children. If you go to America and go to prison, you get separated from your family.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: We have never seen a president do a systematic purge of Homeland Security, especially just to find people who won't tell him what is wrong or even illegal with his Zionist plan (ph).

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: It's not like Secretary Nielesn couldn't have spoken up sooner. It's not like she didn't help enable the policy, defend the policy publicly, and then in fact lie about the policy repeatedly.

LOU DOBBS, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK ANCHOR: It's not enough that she has been removed from that job, but now they want to destroy her. As one put it, make her (INAUDIBLE) in perpetuity. I mean, it's just inert (ph), it's madness, it's venomous.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: And the president slamming The New York Times over immigration story and predicting it will be gone in six years.

Julian Assange finally arrested in London and facing U.S. charges for conspiring to leak classified information. Is the WikiLeaks founder a threat to America, or as his lawyers argue, a whistle-blowing journalist?

Plus, behind the scenes at "The View," a whole lot of fighting and feuding, but has the show become more relevant with a strong conservative voice?

I'm Howard Kurtz and this is "Media Buzz."

With just five words on Capitol Hill, William Barr ignited a media explosion, hitting those who believe the Mueller probe is legitimate against those who think it was improperly launched. The attorney general soon qualified his words but that did nothing to cool things off.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES: I think spying did occur, yes.

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN, D-N.H.: Yeah.

BARR: The question was whether it was predicated, adequately predicated. And I'm not suggesting it wasn't adequately predicated. I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred. I'm saying that I am concerned about it and looking into it. That's all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: President Trump having declared himself exonerated also wants to investigate the investigators and amped up his language.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: These were bad people. And this was an attempted coup. This was an attempted takedown of a president. And we beat them. We beat them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Joining us now to analyze the coverage: Emily Jashinsky, culture editor at The Federalist; Kristina Partsinevelos, a correspondent for Fox Business Network; and Clarence Page, columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Emily, that word, "spying," prompted most of the media, I would say, to disarray (ph) William Barr, saying he's using Trumpian language to try to curry favor with the man who appointed him. Fair or unfair?

EMILY JASHINSKY, CULTURE EDITOR, THE FEDERALIST: Totally unfair. Trumpian language is the key there, right? This is part of an effort to depict Barr as a Trump stooge who may be hiding or aiding the president's efforts to be exonerated in the Mueller probe.

I cannot believe that we've come to the part we're debating the difference between the word "spying" -- the dictionary definition of the word "spying" versus the word "surveillance." If we can all agree that the Trump campaign, Carter Page was surveilled, then we can agree that he was spied on.

Maybe a sexier word for the same exact thing, but they mean the same things and this is all just an effort to see Bill Barr, to depict Bill Barr as someone who is doing Trump's bidding at the DOJ.

KURTZ: Kristina, whether you call it spying or surveillance or whatever the most sexy term is, the issue was whether it was justified, and Barr as we saw with later questions at that hearing quickly clarified that he has concerns but he doesn't know. So, do you think that some in the press sort of oversimplified the story, essentially turning one sound bite into several days of coverage?

KRISTINA PARTSINEVELOS, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK CORRESPONDENT: Isn't what we see often? That we've seen oversimplification of stories, especially given the time frame where we can explain it? I think just to your point, Emily, Barr is not a novelist. He knows --

JASHINSKY: Right.

PARTSINEVELOS: -- his words. Therefore, he practiced his testimony well in advance. He knew the word that he used. He knew it was charged, it was high voltage, and it would get people riled up. He did not supply any evidence and maybe he will in the future. The fact that he switched to surveillance shows that maybe, OK, maybe he went a little bit too far and here we are debating it, here we are -- maybe I looked up the definition to make sure spy and surveillance.

But overall, it was vindication for the president. It was put on a silver platter. He is even using it now to campaign, endorse people that are receiving text messaging of spying, fight back and donate $28.  KURTZ: Barr was a very careful witness, so I don't think he blurred anything out (ph). But Clarence, we have known all along there was surveillance of Trump associates like Carter Page -- no relation.

CLARENCE PAGE, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: Right.

(LAUGHTER)

PAGE: Thank you.

(LAUGHTER)

PAGE: Lisa Page either, by the way.

KURTZ: Yeah, a lot of Pages in the story.

PAGE: Yup.

KURTZ: But let's turn to page here. That was aimed at uncovering any improper ties to Russia, not necessarily aimed at the campaign. So are conservative commentators, in your view, seizing on the "spying" word to sort of declare victory for their point of view?

PAGE: Both sides are oversimplifying. That often happens in journalism because our job is to simplify, but you don't want to oversimplify. What shocks me, really surprises me, Barr is a reputable man with high credentials. This is why he won praise initially. But this was really amusing. Why he would say -- by the way, "I think spying did go on." What?

KURTZ: Yeah.

PAGE: He didn't define it, didn't say who did it, against who, what actually happened, and then saying, "I'm very concerned about it." And then the possibility -- he said, he started fudging the whole thing. I just think this was certainly very helpful for Donald Trump, promotion for whatever future rallies he has, but didn't answer any questions, just raised them.  JASHINSKY: I think to that point, it's actually the way that he framed this conversation. It was the question of whether it was adequately predicated or not, which I think speaks to how measured his testimony was overall.

KURTZ: Such a lawyer's term.

JASHINSKY: Right.

KURTZ: Is this actually predicated?

(LAUGHTER)

KURTZ: But Barr (INAUDIBLE) did say that he is having the Justice Department look into --

JASHINSKY: Right.

KURTZ: -- questionable conduct by the FBI, by Mueller's office. It was certainly has been welcomed by the media people on the right.

JASHINSKY: Yes. I think that his approach to this during his testimony was again, I will use the word "measured," he's not coming out with bluster. He's saying, we need to get to the bottom of it, there are fair and legitimate questions as to what happened, and I am pursuing them. He's not speaking in definitive terms. He's saying we are raising the questions and pursuing answers.

KURTZ: Go ahead, Kristina.

PARTSINEVELOS: To that point, I agree with you. I think that he is not going to show all his cards just yet. The big question is should he have even said that to begin with? If they are investigating, why drop that bomb for everybody with the word "spy," which is very sexy? We are all talking about it. Not as sexy as surveillance, but why drop that there?

KURTZ: Let me draw you back to the coverage because it seems to me now we have almost two media narratives that are polar opposites.

You have the Mueller investigation, which as we now know will need no further criminal charges but nevertheless many people in the media defend it as legitimate, and then you have the whole flawed Steele dossier, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, FBI, Mueller's team, was it biased, and then say that it's an illegitimate investigation and particularly the conservative press keeps promoting that.

PARTSINEVELOS: That's why we have conservative media and then we have the other side. We just -- everybody is going to take that story and put it to reflect their own echo chamber which is often the case. We hopefully -- this is what we're doing right now, discussing it. So it doesn't have to be like that because it's going to be a continuous story. The Mueller report - - we spoke about this for almost three years, 22 months of investigation. FBI people are involved.

They are saying that there was no criminal collusion within this report so you read it how -- there may be corruption, there may be other things going on. I don't know. But what we do know is that it's not collusion. You can infer whatever you want, but that's not the job of a journalist.  KURTZ: When president --

PAGE: The report said the evidence did not rise to a level to be able to charge collusion and that there were inconclusive about the conspiracy -- not conspiracy but obstruction of justice charge as well. A lot is still hanging in the air.

KURTZ: Sure. It doesn't mean you're a boy scout if you don't --

PAGE: But --

KURTZ: The president --

PAGE: -- there are dual narratives going on.

KURTZ: OK. But when the president says "attempted coup," as we heard moments ago --

PAGE: Yes.

KURTZ: -- that language sometimes echoed by the conservative press. Do liberals in the media places an attack on law enforcement?

PAGE: I've been in places that had coup.

KURTZ: OK.

PAGE: This is not an attempted coup. But I'm just marvelled at Donald Trump's vocabulary. He continues to argue positions without bothering to do any actual research to back him up or make an argument other than to call out inflammatory words like conspiracy, like a collusion.  KURTZ: It is not a question of researches. It not only him putting his best spin on as everybody in politics does. But Emily, The Washington Post has this piece saying, Trump claiming exoneration. We haven't seen the report. Nobody has seen the report.

It is his mission accomplished moment. The idea of like it's like George W. Bush landing on the aircraft carrier only to have the Iraq War turned into a quagmire. Is that a historical parallel you would endorse?

JASHINSKY: No, because there's one key difference here, which is that we know there was collusion. We know that he's right on that particular point. Actually, I'm very willing -- we've had a White House aide who has spoken to the press saying they expect there to be some negative stuff that is actually --

KURTZ: Of course.

JASHINSKY: -- because they spent months with a special counsel's team probing Donald Trump. Of course, there is going to be some negative stuff in it. And I'm very willing to wait and eager to see what the report says. To that point, though, there was no collusion. There's no way around it. That is mission accomplished. He was cleared of collusion. There may be some stuff in the report but not going to say that he was colluding.  PARTSINEVELOS: Doesn't it a little bit of like ego boost to say mission accomplished? I agree with the no collusion but there still could be a lot of -- and coming from the liberal point of view, they are looking for something. So that something could be something really, really bad and --

KURTZ: In terms of -- obviously the mission accomplished reference was not done as a compliment to the current president. But in terms of looking for something, doesn't it seem to you that once this report comes out in the coming days, there would be endless media demands echoing the sort of Democratic subpoena for, well, let's see the redacted portions having to do with grand jury or classified information.

Does that reflect the minds that there's always something, as soon as we find out one this one more thing, that's going to be it for Donald Trump?

PARTSINEVELOS: But isn't that the basis of journalism? You are trying to dig in and find something that is not there at face value, sort of a redacted paper when it's black everywhere. I can understand anybody from either side. You are going to wonder. I can't read this at all. What does it even say if it's all black?

KURTZ: It's the basis of journalism but it should not be done with -- we know these guys are quick. We just haven't proven it yet. I just think --

PARTSINEVELOS: You're biased and you are going there with a mission. You have to go there with open eyes and unfortunately it doesn't happen all the time.

KURTZ: Clarence, I only have half a minute. How much of this whole debate is basically media filling air time until we actually see this 400-page report?

PAGE: It is interesting that we are able to argue so extensively on a report we have not seen.

KURTZ: We are very talented.

PAGE: I don't know. There's no collusion. Even in the summary, it indicates there was evidence pointing toward it, but didn't rise to a level of being heavy to make a charge. Remember there are lots of district federal court cases going on or federal prosecutor cases going on, about 20 investigations happening. This one was a very narrow investigation about Russia and the Russian government.

(CROSSTALK)

PAGE: There is more to come.

KURTZ: We will put Clarence down on the skeptical camp. We will all await the report. Ahead, the shakeup at Homeland Security sparks a fierce, a really fierce media debate. But when we come back, Julian Assange was arrested and faces criminal charges here, and many pundits have changed their view whether he's somehow acting like a journalist.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ: The images were just stunning. British police arresting Julian Assange who looked dazed and haggard, leading him out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where he's been hold up for nearly seven years. The WikiLeaks founder facing U.S. criminal charges tie to the leaking of classified military and diplomatic material back in 2010. President Trump deflected a reporter's question on the arrest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): Mr. President, do you still love WikiLeaks?

TRUMP: I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It's not my thing.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KURTZ: Assange's defense team trying to make the case that he was operating just like, well, a reporter.  (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JENNIFER ROBINSON, LAWYER FOR JULIAN ASSANGE: This precedent means that any journalist can be extradited for prosecution in the United States for having published truthful information about the United States.

KRISTINN HRAFNSSON, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, WIKILEAKS: Publishing of documents, of videos of killing of innocent civilians, exposure of war crimes, this is journalism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Kristina, Julian Assange who helped Chelsea Manning then Bradley Manning reveal all these military and diplomatic information back in 2010, Manning got a 35-year sentence, helped them hack into a Pentagon computer now saying, well, he's just acting like a journalist, really?  PARTSINEVELOS: No. They teach you even in journalism schools that you cannot do anything for the active journalism and if that involves doing criminal activities, if that involves paying someone, if that involves violence, bribery, lies and all that, then that is not the justified way to pursue journalism and pursue a story.

And there are other situations even with his case that he could indirectly have heard a lot of activists in other countries and things like that. And also the other point too is data dumps. He threw a lot of information on to WikiLeaks. Is that considered journalism when you are just putting documents on?

KURTZ: Right. Responsible journalists who deal with classified information, they talk to U.S. officials, they redact things, they hold things back involving truth, movements that might jeopardize somebody's life than do any of that.

But let's talk about shifting media loyalty here because during this time against the Iraq War, media conservatives denounced Assange. And when President Obama commuted Manning's sentence after seven years, very critical of that. Fast forward to 2016, he is helping with the hacks of the DNC e-mails, working with Russia, according to U.S. officials, repeatedly, President Trump said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: WikiLeaks has provided things that are unbelievable.

WikiLeaks has done a job on her, hasn't it?

WikiLeaks, some new stuff, some brutal stuff.

WikiLeaks. I love WikiLeaks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: And Sean Hannity now says that Assange is more credible than fake news media mob. So does it depend on who the political target is?

JASHINSKY: Oh, absolutely. I mean, there's no way around that. That's the case in so many different stories. Julian Assange is not a good actor. He is a bad actor in our politics. I think there is -- Kristina's point, she made a critical point there, he is doing data dumps. There is difference between journalism and actively conspiring with people which he's alleged to have done.

PARTSINEVELOS: Allegedly.

JASHINSKY: Alleged to have done, right, exactly.

KURTZ: OK.

JASHINSKY: And so -- but there is a question about the president here. So whether or not he is a traditional journalist, we don't have gatekeepers in the media at the same level that we used to. And so there is reason to be concerned that the president is on the line with this.

KURTZ: Right, that's a fair point. Although he wasn't charged, he was charged with conspiracy in that espionage. Clarence, let us take the opposite view. Media liberals are very sympathetic to Assange when he was building himself as a whistle blower against George Bush's Iraq War. Then of course he was a villain when he was hurting the Hillary campaign. So, which is it?

PAGE: People believe what they want to believe.

(LAUGHTER)

PAGE: I mean, yeah --

KURTZ: I'm saying they are not consistent.

PAGE: You know, when the media opened up, explosion of the 90s, when Fox and cable T.V. news and other alternative media exploded it, I was delighted at new diversity. But I said, brace yourselves, be aware.

Julian Assange called himself a journalist but he was an irresponsible journalist like everybody say. He doesn't check things out. He didn't care about that. He's just a conduit really for leakers. He was leaking what you want him to leak. Great. Wonderful. Otherwise, he is a villain. That's what -- KURTZ: He's leaking what you want him to leak. I think that's the selling point. Kristina, he is also apparently not the best house guest. He is described as dirty and spreading feces, according to Ecuadorian officials. But --

PAGE: The cats.

KURTZ: Let's take it (ph) at the media defenders --

PARTSINEVELOS: This cat, yeah. Sorry.

(LAUGHTER)

KURTZ: All right. Cat got enough air time.

PARTSINEVELOS: Yeah.

(LAUGHTER)

KURTZ: In 2010, when he was distributing all of this stuff about U.S. embassies, confidential cables, American troops, he is working with distributing it through The Guardian, Der Spiegel. The Guardian gave it to The New York Times. So, those publications were sort of in bed with him then.

PARTSINEVELOS: Yeah.

KURTZ: And maybe everybody who used this material. So is that, you think, affect the way there are some media sympathy for him even now?  PARTSINEVELOS: I think there's a little bit because they did work with him back then. His character -- we can't comment on that because that is not a reflection of what's going on, what happened in 2010. Will they go back and say that they were wrong in working with them?

No, because the data dump happened. They dug through it. They got the information. But we don't know the means. So if he allegedly did engage in criminal activity to get that, then, it could be an issue for a lot of these news organizations.

KURTZ: Yeah, helping to hack Pentagon password is not something journalists do. I happen to think that he uses journalism as a kind of a fig leaf to cover what he does and sometimes it damages America.

Great to see you all this Sunday, Clarence Page, Kristina Partsinevelos, and Emily Jashinsky. Ahead, a backstage look at the incredible tensions among the ladies of "The View."

But up next, the media swoon over Mayor Pete intensifies as he rises in fundraising and polling. Is the coverage fueling his longshot campaign?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our man.

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: CNN is calling you the hottest candidate in this race. Scarborough, after you came on his show, basically compared you to Barack Obama himself. How does it feel?

BUTTIGIEG: It feels great. You know, I'm trying not to let it go to my head.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: The media are swooning over a guy who most of us never heard of a few short weeks ago. Pete Buttigieg, a small town Indiana mayor, as the new Beto O'Rourke, dazzling the pundits especially but not exclusively on the left.

As Politico notes, Ben Shapiro of the conservative Daily Wire calls him nice and refreshing. The New York Times columnist David Brooks said he is smart, modest and self-effacing. Others on the right find him rather sanctimonious.

The mayor of South Bend, a road scholar and Afghanistan war veteran, who is formerly announcing today, he calls the flood of reaction after appearing on Morning Joe. Now, he is on the cover of New York magazine. The L.A. Times called him the hottest thing in politics.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

So Buttigieg who's still largely unknown outside of political junkies has made a real impression. He's a very impressive guy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: The gushing coverage is a huge boost with Buttigieg raising $7 million more than Beto and surging past Kamala and Cory and Elizabeth at third place in a new poll in Iowa and in New Hampshire poll as well. That kind of traction has generated a bunch of pieces asking is America ready for a gay president.

Pete Buttigieg often talks about his husband who is active on Twitter. And there has been gushing praise from journalists since Mayor Pete spoke in LGBTQ event of his early struggles with his sexuality.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUTTIGIEG: If you had offered me a pill to make me straight, I would have swallowed it before you had time to get sip of water. It's hard to face the truth that there were times in my life when if you had shown me exactly what it was inside me that made me gay, I would have cut it out with a knife.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Not your typical scripted candidate. The left-leaning media also love that Pete Buttigieg is a liberal who speaks openly about his faith. The New Republic claims the religious right is terrified of him. But there have been missteps. Buttigieg picked an unnecessary fight with Mike Pence, painting the vice president who turned the other cheek and has never said a bad word about him, as antigay and hardly seemed Christian when Buttigieg said it was difficult to imagine that President Trump believes in God.

For all the journalistic hype, Pete Buttigieg is still a total long shot for the Democratic nomination. His unique status and some good T.V. appearances have wowed the chattering classes but he will have to prove that he is more than the media's flavor of the month.

Ahead on "Media Buzz," why the National Enquirer emerged in two consecutive scandals about to be solved? But first, President Trump pushes out Kirstjen Nielsen and gets pounded by the press over his handling of the border crisis.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HOWARD KURTZ, MEDIA BUZZ, HOST: The Washington Post reported Friday that the Trump Team had pushed a plan to send detainees to sanctuary cities, sending a message for Democratic strongholds as Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco District, the White House is pretty dismissive saying in a statement, this was a suggestion that was floated and rejected, which ended any further discussion. But hours later, the President tweeted that he is seriously considering such a plan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: California certainly is always saying, we want more people, and they want more people in their sanctuary cities. Well, we'll give them more people. We can give them a lot. They're always saying they have open arms. Let's see if they have open arms.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: Joining us in New York, Kat Timpf, a reporter from National Review online, here in Washington, Mara Liasson, national political reporter for NPR. Both are Fox News contributors.

Kat, so the Washington Post story says this, it's based on memos. The White House is dismissive. Trump comes out and says, yes, I am considering it. Didn't he kind of undercut his own communication's office?

KAT TIMPF, NATIONAL REVIEW: Yeah, which is why I've never been jealous of anybody who has to work in communication's office, let me just say because this is not the first time something like this has happened. They worked really hard to kind of minimize this and say, you know, we just kind of talked about it, kind of we wanted to make it go away.

And then, he did the opposite ensuring that it didn't go away by tweeting about it and saying, actually, yeah, you know, I'm very seriously considering this. And he just -- it makes you kind of wonder how well-lined up the two are, but he doesn't really care. He likes to go directly to the people on Twitter. I think he wouldn't have a communication's office, if he could.

KURTZ: Yeah. Sometimes it seems like -- it seems that way. So the New York Times has the story saying that the President told the now acting Homeland Security Secretary to close the borders and said he would pardon him if he got into any legal trouble. The President denies this.

Here is one of several. New York Star -- Times story, knowingly wrong, they never called to check the truth, says the President's sources often don't exist, they lie and cheat. The Times in 6 years will be gone anyway.

By the way, Times reporter Maggie Haberman tweeted, hey, you ought to check with his press office because we e-mailed three times for comments and didn't get any. Mara.

MARA LIASSON, NPR: Yes. And he often says that after the election, the New York Times was failing, they ought to apologize to their subscribers, they were about to go out of business. And then, usually, you have a Times reporter, as happened yesterday, saying, our subscriptions are actually way up.

Look, the President likes to operate this way. He's a party of one. He believes he's his own best communication adviser. He likes to talk to the press directly. He doesn't really want to vet his ideas, when he gets an idea, like hey, let's send immigrants to San Francisco. He says -- he blurts it out. It was kind of a self-owned because I think every immigrant would want to go to San Francisco, where a place they would be welcome.

KURTZ: Yeah.

LIASSON: And a bunch of mayors said fine.

KURTZ: Right. We'll have to see.

LIASSON: Yeah.

KURTZ: But it's certainly something that he put out there as being provocative.

Kat, on the Homeland Security shake-up, which dominated the part of this week, I mean, the media consensus was the President is decimating that department, that he's making Kirstjen Nielsen a scapegoat, playing politics at the border, and what I would ask in terms of all these media stories is she entitled to have a staff that he wants.

TIMPF: Right, absolutely. A lot of people on the left try to say, look at all this, it's so tumultuous. People in, people out, I thought he hired the best people. But I think everyone on the right and a lot of people are saying look, this is a businessman, this is not a typical politician. If he wants to fire someone and get someone new in there, then fine. He wasn't satisfied with the job she was doing, so he's got to have her be out.

And that's the way a business works. And that's the way he's running the government. And I don't see nothing wrong with that.

KURTZ: It was a bit sad to see Kirstjen Nielsen outside of her Virginia home, surrounded by the press, and saying she wanted to thank the President for getting rid of her. But there were a lot of leaks from her side in the next couple of days, saying she spent weeks resisting the family separation policy at the border. She argued he shouldn't close the border when he was starting to do that. And generally, she tried to steer away from moves that might be legally questionable.

LIASSON: Right. There are a lot of leaks, right, that suggested she was kind of a guardrail. She agreed with his goal that she would push back against suggestions that she thought wouldn't pass constitutional muster. And that was definitely coming from her side.

What I think the real story is that I think when you see the headlines Homeland Security...

KURTZ: Yeah.

LIASSON: That sounds like he did something bad. The President is frustrated because he can't get the Department of Homeland Security to carry out his vision. You know, he can't get the career people to sign onto his vision. And the people he's politically appointed over there can't seem to be competent enough to work in the government.

KURTZ: And some of it has been blocked by the courts like the asylum.

LIASSON: But the bottom-line, the way he should be measured or evaluated is not whether this is a purge or not -- because you're right, he has the right to have anybody in his department or nobody if he doesn't want to have anybody.

KURTZ: A lot of people are acting -- in acting capacity.

LIASSON: Yeah. But the measurement is, is he meeting goal to stop people from coming and asking for asylum in the border. And he hasn't been able to yet.

KURTZ: Well, others would say Democrats don't have much of a plan either. And it is a genuine crisis.

LIASSON: Right. But he's not asking them to make a deal.

KURTZ: I understand. All right. A lot of media coverage -- the fact- checkers out in force when President Obama's name was brought into this. This is what President Trump said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: President Obama separated the children. Those cages that were shown -- I think they were very inappropriate. I'm the one that stopped it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: In fact, while there were some family separations during Obama administration, it really ramped up to well over 2,000 families when Trump adopted the zero-tolerance policy. And then, he reversed it after an international outcry.

TIMPF: Right. He really does need to be more careful because I don't know if he knows this or not -- actually, I know he knows it because he talks about it all of the time. But a lot of people in the media don't really like him. So they are going to be carefully -- very carefully listening to everything that he says and making sure that it's absolutely correct.

And even though, President Obama wasn't the friendliest on immigration either, there's plenty of things he could have pointed in terms of President Obama is supporting deporting so many people. But he took it a little too far by saying that it was President Obama leading to the separation of families...

KURTZ: All right.

TIMPF: When really, it was his zero-tolerance policy. And anyone who did little Googling could know that.

KURTZ: We have that exclusively. Many in the media don't like Donald Trump.

Mara, just to close off here, when Kirstjen Nielsen was pushed out, major news organizations said that the President was considering to bringing back the family separation policy. He denied that the next day. It doesn't seem to be happening. And I didn't see anybody backing up that reporting.

LIASSON: Well, I think -- wait a minute. I think there were several places that explained he backs -- he backs off of it as an explicit policy. But he said in the same breath, it's a deterrent. In other words, they want the deterrent...

KURTZ: Yeah.

LIASSON: ... of having the threat of being separated from each other without the explicit policy. And I think several news organizations including NPR tried to point that out.

KURTZ: All right. Good conversation, guys. Mara Liasson and Kat Timpf, thanks very much for stopping by.

After the break, an inside look at how Meghan McCain changed The View and why the show's primary conservative is often target of verbal combat.

And later, Charlie Gasparino on the fate of the National Enquirer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ: It's no secret that the women on The View often engage in bitter clashes. And right now, it's Meghan McCain, the strongest conservative voice often on receiving end.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARARA WALTERS, THE VIEW CO-HOST: Let me just finish.

MEGHAN MCCAIN, THE VIEW CO-HOST: Yeah, part of your job is to listen to me.

WHOOPI GOLDERBEG, THE VIEW CO-HOST: OK, so here is the deal. Here's -- here's what's not going to happen today. We are not going to do this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: But a new book says things are even more heated off-camera on the increasingly polarized program. Joining us from New York, Ramin Setoodeh, New York Bureau Chief at the Variety, and author of the book Ladies Who Punch: Inside -- The Explosive Inside Story of The View. Welcome.

You say that Meghan McCain who told you, she turned down the job because of all the turnover, but took it as father's urging, has transformed the show. In fact, they made it to Saturday Night Live last night. Let's take a quick look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you let me finish?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, can you let me talk?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let me finish.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, can you let me talk? Because it's actually your job to listen to me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: So, how has Meghan transformed the show, why is it often seen that the other panelists are beating up on her?

RAMIN SETOODEH, VARIETY: That was really funny last night at SNL. Meghan is the first real conservative The View had since Elisabeth Hassleback. And they went through a period where they brought in a number of conservatives like Candice Cameron Bure, Nicolle Wallace, and Jedediah Bila. But for the most part, these other conservatives that they brought in were always agreeing with the other co-hosts.

And Meghan has gone back to be Elisabeth paradigm, where you have a conservative truly talking about her conservative ideals. And I think as a result of that, ratings are up on the show. It's the most watched The View has been in the last five years.

KURTZ: Wow, fascinating. You know, in reading your book, it seems like three pages, one of the panelists is crying in the make-up room, ready to quit, or actually quitting. So, for example, you say Rosie O'Donnell complained that Whoopi Goldberg was mean to her, that this was the worst experience she's ever had in television overall, her doctor said she was having a health crisis. And meanwhile, you say she made life a hell for everybody else?

SETOODEH: The show is very dramatic show. What you see on screen is not manufactured. It's actually how the women you know are when the cameras aren't rolling. But I was interested in the show because I've been covering it as a journalist for many years. And there's a lot of interest in America about The View because it's such influential show. And it really changed daytime TV. And I would argue television in general, because it provided this panel of women, who didn't always see eye to eye, debating about very serious political issues.

KURTZ: Yeah. I think when Barbara Walters created it, it did change daytime television. But just -- Rosie O'Donnell in response to your book says you only wrote the negative stories about conflict, that you're a misogynist. And she's disappointed of you as a human being, your response.

SETOODEH: I hope that Rosie reads the book. But the book also celebrates Rosie and all that she has done in entertainment, her talk show in the 90's, you know, was incredibly popular. She made daytime friendly to celebrities. And I don't think she's actually read the book. I think she's just looking at sort of the pick-up and headlines. But the book is accurate reflection of what it was like to be on the show and it was a very difficult thing, when she was the on show. But she also made the show very successful the first time she was on it.

KURTZ: You mentioned Elisabeth Hassleback, who of course at one time had worked at Fox News. She, according to your book, felt ganged-up on as conservative, she was furious at times at Barbara Walters, when she told her on the air that they had to have reasonable conversations and not all these clashes. And then, there's an incident that you described where she started cursing off the set and you have audiotape of that. Let's play it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELISABETH HASSLEBACK, FORMER THE VIEW CO-HOST: I'm not going back out. I can't do the show like this. She has reprimanded me. She knew exactly what she was doing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I know.

HASSLEBACK: Goodbye. Read about that in the New York Post. I quit.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What are you doing?

HASSLEBACK: I'm quitting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ: So, was that typical of what happens at The View, not just with Hassleback, but you say what's on the air is a reflection of the very personalities that really sometimes don't seem to get along.

SETOODEH: Right. Sometimes the fights -- most of the time, the fights are real. I think that Elisabeth audio shows how frustrated she was that she wasn't able to express her conservative point of view. And Barbara Walters cut her off.

In talking to Meghan, she says it's a very difficult job. She decided to take the job because of her father. And he thought it would be a wonderful platform for her. And it is.

But it's hard sometimes being the lone conservative on that panel and trying to represent all conservative points of view, when the other women are liberal and are frustrated and won't let you talk.

KURTZ: Right. Now, Jenny McCarthy who was a panelist for a while, she said she was miserable on that show. Barbara Walters will review her wardrobe choices. But what about Barbara's point of view? I mean, it must have been difficult all the years when she ran it to sort of hold it together the different fractious groups of panelists.

SETOODEH: Barbara, when she started the show never anticipated -- she told me, she never anticipated that it would become so dramatic and so contentious. She thought it was going to be a nice show with women talking about the headlines of the day.

I think one of the things I uncovered in the book is just how good Barbara was as a producer and keeping things running and masking some of the tensions that were happening backstage. And also, Barbara really didn't want to retire, when she left television in 2014. It was a difficult thing for her. And she had a lot of complicated emotions. And in some cases, she took that out on Jenny, which she talks about in the book.

KURTZ: Right. Well, she had a remarkable career, I must say, that stretch far beyond The View. Got to go. But I do want to note that you say that 20 publishers turned down this book. So, obviously, you persisted in getting it published. It's fascinating.

SETOODEH: And it -- and it just made the New York Times' best seller list.

KURTZ: All right.

SETOODEH: I'm very excited about that.

KURTZ: That's breaking news. Ramin Setoodeh, great to see you, thanks so much.

SETOODEH: Thank you, Howie.

KURTZ: Still to come back, in the uproar over the Jeff Bezos expose, why the owner now wants to sell the tabloid run by Donald Trump's friend. We'll examine the fate of the National Enquirer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ: The National Enquirer days of being sold, that's story was first broken by the Washington Post owned by Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder who of course, was the subject of expose about the affair that just led to his divorce, and has accused the tabloid of blackmail.

Joining us from Connecticut to shed light why on American media is suddenly dumping the tabloid, Charlie Gasparino, senior correspondent for Fox Business Network. And, Charlie, a lot of people may not know that the Enquirer's parent company is owned by a hedge-fund run by a guy named Anthony Melchiorre. Why is Enquirer now on the verge of being sold?

CHARLIE GASPARINO, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think the hedge-fund guy is just an asset management -- is just embarrassed. I mean, think about what would have happened here.

The Enquirer got into a death match with one of the richest people in the world, essentially maybe not totally illegal, but it looks really sleazy. They try to extort Jeff Bezos...

KURTZ: Let me just jump in and say that the Enquirer's version of that is that the stuff about we have the naked selfies and so forth was not extortion.

GASPARINO: Right.

KURTZ: But was part of settlement talks, which they were going back and forth.

GASPARINO: Right, right.

KURTZ: Let me just -- I want to get that on the record.

GASPARINO: Yeah, of course. And by the way, there's a very fine line between extortion and a contract. I get that legally. But it looks really bad. And I think Melchiorre guy set-back and said listen, the National Enquirer probably accounts for like 5 percent of our revenues here.

KURTZ: Plus it's losing money.

GASPARINO: And a hundred percent of our problems. Let's get rid of it. I do know that -- I know people who know David Pecker, I should point out, I've done some freelance work for AMI, and Men's Fitness. I was in personal finance for them a while. I know people who know David very well. This was his baby. He actually likes running the National Enquirer.

So, from what I understand, he had been essentially convinced to get rid of this. This is something he really likes. It gave some degree of power, obviously.

KURTZ: You're saying he was pressured into it.

GASPARINO: Yeah. I mean, it's essentially what I'm hearing. Now, they're saying he was onboard. I ran this by AMI's PR people. They say he was onboard. But I'm hearing that Pecker told others not so.

We should point out that the National Enquirer you know had its moments like this. Listen, nobody's ever going to get the National Enquirer confused with the Wall Street Journal or the Washington Post. But, you know, they broke some stories over the years. This will actually...

KURTZ: Oh, absolutely, the John Edwards story, Tiger Woods, and other stories maybe more suspect. But let me just provide a little bit about political context here. Because, as you know, David Pecker, a close friend of President Trump, he's the CEO of the company, AMI.

GASPARINO: Absolutely.

KURTZ: And it was Pecker and company that struck an immunity deal, just a few months ago, admitting they were trying to influence the 2016 campaign by paying this former Playboy model Karen McDougal who had an alleged affair with Trump, $150,000 and what was known as this story and made sure that the story never got out.

So, in part of the immunity deal, they can't break the law or anything else, so they can be prosecuted for the first thing and then along comes the Bezos' controversy.

GASPARINO: Right. And, you know, one of the things people are talking about, if you buy the National Enquirer, you get all the stories that they caught and killed and stored over here in the safe.

KURTZ: Yeah.

GASPARINO: That is a legitimate question that has been asked. You know, Howie, two things come to mind. You know, in some ways, all publicity is good publicity. Maybe this helps the sale of it. There's also a really bad stench to this thing. I don't -- I kind of wonder who really wants to buy this.

KURTZ: On that great point, because it's very murky. The New York Times has a story a couple of days ago saying that Ron Burkle, California supermarket magnate and friend of Bill Clinton was in talks to buy it. And then, Burkle's people come out and say, no, we were not buying. We were never in any talks.

GASPARINO: Right. David Pecker and Burkle are longtime friends. If the National Enquirer is sold, it makes sense, kind of. They're sold in shopping supermarkets.

KURTZ: Right, right.

GASPARINO: Listen, I think this is going to be a hard sell. I can imagine how much it's good to go for. And it might be a good thing that this thing isn't around anymore based on what happened just recently.

KURTZ: Well, it still got the brand name. You know, a lot of people who -- obviously, all print publications are struggling. But, finally, Charlie, if assuming that it is sold, and also who buys it, if David Pecker is no longer running it, does the President lose -- his close friend selling this, publication that has very much been in his corner and during the campaign, you know, attack the people who ran against him?

GASPARINO: Yeah. I mean, this was like his Luca Brasi. Do you member Luca Brasi in the Godfather? This was -- I mean, if you want to hit on Ted Cruz. And I remember the Ted Cruz coverage, which was absurd and disgusting. But it might -- but might have won a few votes Republican primary when he was saying Ted Cruz had multiple affairs and his father may have killed JFK. I mean, these are actual stories that ran during the campaign. And then, stuff on Hillary.

KURTZ: Right.

GASPARINO: You know, this is something that it's one less -- one less thing in Donald Trump's corner against a complete media that essentially hates him.

KURTZ: A political player. Got to go, Charlie. Thanks so much.

That's it for this edition of Media Buzz. I'm Howard Kurtz.

Hey, check out my new Podcast, Media Buzz Meter. We talk about the day's five hottest stories. And you can subscribe at Apple iTunes, or Google Play, or FoxNewsPodcast.com.

Hope you like our Facebook page. You can read my daily columns there, original videos. We make just few online. And let's continue the conversation on Twitter @HowardKurtz.

They tell me I'm out of time. I will just say see you next Sunday with the latest buzz.

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