Models, influencers face legal trouble for promoting Fyre Festival

close

Video

Models, influencers face legal trouble for promoting Fyre Festival

Criminal defense attorney Mark Eiglarsh weighs in on the Fyre Festival lawsuits.

This is a rush transcript from "The Story," January 29, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, HOST: Hope to see that line at that man's funeral. Well done. Thank you very much, Bret.

So good evening, everybody. One of the political lessons of the midterms was that voters are not happy with what politicians have done for them on healthcare. So, right now you've got Democrats laying down their plan. And it may be hard for any candidate who hopes to win the nomination to not offer the full extreme healthcare for all single-payer government centered.

President Obama, of course, was criticized for saying that ultimately, that would be the goal. Then, he made a promise on Obamacare that he could not keep. Now, rising star, Kamala Harris is going there on the full government plan. Watches this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: If you've got health insurance, you like your doctor, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF.: You don't have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork all of the delay that may require. Let's eliminate all of that. Let's move on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Let's move on, she says in that idea already being endorsed tonight by one of the newest and most often loudest voices on the last. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you support Senator Harris's proposal last night, Medicare for all and eliminate five insurance companies?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-N.Y.: You know, I think that -- I think that's the direction that we absolutely need to go in.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Rhode Island congressman, David Cicilline is chairman of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, and he joins me tonight. Congressman, great to have you back on the program.

REP. DAVID CICILLINE, D-RI: Great to be with you.

MACCALLUM: Is that -- is that going to be where the Democratic Party goes as we head towards 2020, single-payer government healthcare?

CICILLINE: You know, Martha, we just want a midterm election and the House Democrats really ran on three issues.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

CICILLINE: One of them was driving down health care costs, particularly, the cost of prescription drugs. I think we have a number of new members that have a lot of ideas about the ways that we can expand healthcare and drive down costs for folks. There are a lot of different approaches to this, but Democrats are united in a commitment to ensuring that no longer does any American family lay away -- awake at night worrying where they will have some medical emergency that will bankrupt them. Or have a child who gets sick and unable to see a doctor.

So, there are a lot of different ideas about how to do it, but we're committed to making sure more Americans are covered to cost overdue.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: So let me just ask (INAUDIBLE). I understand but do you know, she is one of the most prominent people to have declared so far. We got a long way to go, I will absolutely grant to that. But do you -- do you support what she said last night at this town hall? Do you agree with her?

CICILLINE: Well, I don't -- you know, I don't take the position that you need to eliminate private insurance. I think you can expand Medicare, you can provide Medicare for everyone, and still have private insurance.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: What about this that, Congressman, that that's estimated to cost $32 trillion over the next decade? And just keep in mind that the budget -- annual budget right now is $4.4 trillion. So, I mean that, that would be a huge portion of our annual spending would go towards Medicare for all.

CICILLINE: Look, I think we live in a country, the richest country in the world. There is no reason that everyone shouldn't have access to quality affordable health care. If you eliminate the administrative costs and the profits to insurance companies, over time I think you can drive the cost down, you can drive down the cost of prescription drugs. But obviously, as part of --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: But that's what people were told with Obamacare, with all due respect, which PolitiFact, that year called the biggest lie of the year because people were told they could keep their doctor, they could keep their plan, and then they couldn't.

(CROSSTALK)

CICILLINE: But, but, no question about it, and I'm not -- yes. No, I'm not -- I'm not suggesting that, that you would need to eliminate private insurance. What I think we have to do is have a serious debate, build consensus what's the best way to move forward the Affordable Care Act made certain at 20 million more Americans have access to health care. That's important. We need to build on the success of the Affordable Care Act.

MACCALLUM: No, and I got you.

CICILLINE: There's a lot of different ways to do it.

MACCALLUM: Yes.

CICILLINE: But we need to have a real debate. With this is the richest most powerful country in the world, we ought to be over provide health care to every American.

MACCALLUM: I mean -- I hear you. You know, 181 million people have private health insurance that they're -- that they are largely satisfied with. So, you know, I just think it's an interesting place to go. And when you -- when you look at the former star -- the Starbucks CEO, the founder of Starbucks who's also considering running now, Howard Schultz.

He said abolishing private plans is un-American. What will they do away with next? The coffee industry? What would you say to that?

CICILLINE: Well, again, I think if you even look at the Canadian system, private insurance exists. The people still have an opportunity to buy private insurance. But as we wanted to make sure --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: That you see something more on those lines?

CICILLINE: Yes, I just think we want to make sure that people have access to high-quality affordable health care. People should not have to go bankrupt and worry at night that a sick child can't see a doctor. We're better than that. And we can build on the success in the form of (INAUDIBLE), and do more.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: Well, that there's 28 million people who are uninsured. 90 plus percent of the country is insured and most of them seem to have adjusted --

(CROSSTALK)

CICILLINE: (INAUDIBLE), it's unacceptable. There are 28 million people are uninsured. We need to fix this problem but I think we've made tremendous progress, we need to build upon that.

MACCALLUM: All right.

CICILLINE: We need to look at the best ideas, build consensus and move forward.

MACCALLUM: I want to -- on Howard Schultz, for, for just for a moment. This is a heckler shouting at him. And then, we'll let you shout back and see what you think. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Don't help elect Trump, you egotistical billionaire - -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Well, what does she -- what did that person really think? Yes. What's really on your mind just shout it out?

CICILLINE: That was beat out, but I guess it was pretty bad.

MACCALLUM: Though, what do you think?

CICILLINE: Look, I think like -- look, if you -- if anyone thinks after the last two years of the Trump presidency, and the midterm elections. That the American people are searching for another billionaire businessman with no government experience to run the country, I think there's sadly mistaken.

MACCALLUM: I just want to put up one last question for you. This is a very interesting Pew poll that just came out. And I'm going to ask Mark Meadows about it, as well. So, I want to get your reaction which basically shows that most people in the Democratic Party and the Republican Party would like their elected officials and their party to move further to the right.

This is Democrat views. You want your party to be more moderate, 53 percent, say yes, I would like my party to be more moderate. And then the Republican one also says that they would like them to be more conservative. What do you make of that when you look at some of the movement that you've seen in your party that's going further left?

CICILLINE: Yes, it doesn't surprise me at all. I think Democratic voters and most voters want the Congress and those in elected office to get things done. So, saying be more moderate, meaning, compromise, doesn't surprise me.

But we ran a midterm election that focused on driving down health care costs, driving down the cost of prescription drugs, raising family incomes, rebuilding the infrastructure of our country, and taking on the serious corruption in Washington.

Some people would say those are moderate. I think those are important issues, I think that's where the American people are, it's where Democrats are.

MACCALLUM: Congressman Cicilline, thank you. Good to have you back tonight.

CICILLINE: Thanks for having me.

MACCALLUM: So, here with more, North Carolina Congressman Mark Meadows, a Republican, Freedom Caucus chair, and member of the House Oversight Committee.

Congressman Meadows, great to have you with us tonight as well. Thank you very much for being here.

REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C.: Great to be back with you, Martha. Thanks.

MACCALLUM: Great to have you. You listen to that conversation.

MEADOWS: I did.

MACCALLUM: And you heard what Kamala Harris said about, you know, we should probably just eliminate private insurance. Your thoughts.

MEADOWS: Well, I mean, obviously, at least, the Senator was being honest. I can remember a president that was saying if you like your healthcare you can keep it, she's at least, saying that you can't keep it.

So, I'm sure a $140 plus million people last night went, "Oh my gosh, we're going to allow for a government takeover of health care?" I can't think of any of us that want our health care decisions made by the government. And more importantly, when we look at customer service when you go into the DMV or the IRS, do you want their type of customer service really being the foundation for how you get your health care? I don't think so, and it's an extreme position.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: All right, but you heard Congressman Cicilline, and he basically was saying, "Look, we just went through a midterm where we, Democrats," he was saying, "understood that people are not satisfied with the health care that they are receiving and the plans that they're in, in this country."

Republicans hadn't -- you had a nice chunk of time to get this ironed out and this will be a problematic issue for you going forward if you don't. So, what do you plan to do?

MEADOWS: Well, it will be. I mean, when you look at this, when we're under a system right now of Obamacare. That's a Democrat-led, not one Republican voted for that. And yet, insurance premiums gone to -- have gone up prescription, drug prices have gone up.

And so, what we have to do is find a way to allow the pressures to come down. But it's not about a government takeover, it's allowing for people to make choices that best fit their families so they don't have to buy a one-size-fits-all kind of health care program.

But, but you're right. We have to address it. I can tell you there's real discussions going on between our Senate colleagues and House members on how we can address that.

But, but when you look at, can you imagine all the union workers that are out there that all of a sudden, they've got these great plans and their candidate. Many of them supporting the Democrat nominee, the front-runner. She is saying, we're going to get rid of that. I can't imagine how that will actually play out eventually.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: No, I mean, I think you're right. Most Americans do have a plan that, at least, they can count on for the most part they definitely won't cost to come down, and there's going to have to be some solutions for that.

Switching over to another topic, I want to play another sound bite from Kamala Harris at the town hall, and this one is on gun control. An issue that she feels very strongly about, and she proposed something -- you know, quite dramatic in terms of making her point on how frustrated she is that more than has not happened. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: Here is what I think, I think that somebody should have required, and this is going to sound very harsh. I think somebody should have required all those members of Congress to go in a room, in a locked room, no press, knowing nobody else, and look at the autopsy photographs of those babies. And then, you vote your conscience.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: She's talking about Sandy Hook, sir.

MEADOWS: Yes, obviously, any time you lose any person to gun violence, it's a terrible day. And yet, what we've seen Martha, and you know this well, is some of the cities here in Washington, D.C. where I am, Chicago, with the strictest gun laws are not actually the safest places to be.

And so, we have to make sure that we address mental health issues, a number of areas where we keep school safe. But really, when it comes up to putting forth common-sense proposals, I haven't heard a whole lot of evidence that comes out of the Senate that would suggest let's give some more money to making sure that school resource officers are well paid and supported. And we cover those envelopes.

You know, we can -- we can look at this and say, "All right, the ultimate problem here is the gun, but it's really more about us taking proper steps to make sure that our kids and families are safe."

MACCALLUM: Going to be a big issue in the coming election. No doubt. Thank you very much, Congressman Mark Meadows. Great to have you with us tonight. Thank you, sir.

MEADOWS: Thank you, Martha. So, we all saw what happened when Tom Brokaw took a stance on assimilation. He was excoriated. Now, Pope Francis has used some similar language about this. So, is he going to also face requests to apologize for what he said? Brit Hume and Marc Thiessen, tackle chapter two of this story tonight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM BROKAW, AMERICAN JOURNALIST: I also happen to believe that the Hispanic should work harder at assimilation. That's one of the things I've been saying for a long time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Tom Brokaw took a lot of heat for those comments and it is continuing today and also for apologizing sparking an intense debate over the word assimilation and whether migrants should be expected to adapt or should want to adapt when they move to a new country, in this case, the United States. So the issue even came up with Pope Francis yesterday who was asked to weigh in on the decision to remove hundreds of asylum seekers from a community near Rome.

The Pope acknowledged that this was a complex situation and added it comes to mind the example of Sweden. a country that back in the 1970s received many, many immigrants due to a situation of dictatorship in Latin American countries and managed to integrate all the people who migrated. But the Swedish have said a few years ago that they should take this process more slowly so they can finish it. And this is the prudence of rulers.

Here now Brit Hume, Fox News Senior Political Analyst and Marc Thiessen American Enterprise Institute Scholar and Fox News Contributor. Gentlemen, welcome.

BRIT HUME, SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Good to be with you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Thank you both for being here today. Marc, you think that the Pope isn't really in favor of assimilation although he did express understanding that sometimes you have to hit the pause, hit the brakes and wait till people are integrated or assimilated. Take your word.

MARC THIESSEN, CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, I think he means something different between integration and assimilation. In fact, in his homily on this on my -- on World Migrant Day, he actually talked about how we should -- the country should not require learning the language to be a requirement of citizenship. So I don't think he's on the same page.

Unfortunately, Tom Brokaw is more right than the Pope is on this one. I mean, look what you're seeing in this case especially with Brokaw is what - - the toxic result that happens when identity politics meets the social media mob. There is nothing wrong with assimilation. Assimilation is how we have been able to be a nation of immigrants for all these years.

If you go to Europe and you go to a country like France, you can have a family of immigrants that's been there for three or four generations and they're still not considered French. Here in the United States, they're considered -- they become Americans within you know, months of becoming citizens, and they're -- and within one generation because we have a tradition here, we used to call the great American melting pot where everybody who comes here, if you believe in the idea of America --

MACCALLUM: I'm glad you mention that. That's the Schoolhouse Rock. Let's play a little just for nostalgia reasons.

THIESSEN: Sure.

MACCALLUM: The wonderful great American melting pot. Watch this closely and listen to the words.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They brought the country's costumes, their language and their ways. They build the factories to the soil, help build the USA.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: They help build the USA. They brought their costumes, they brought their culture, and they helped build the USA. It's worth --

THIESSEN: That's considered racist now. That's not OK. I mean, what's great about America is that we're the only country in human history that's not built on blood and soil but on an idea, the idea of human freedom. If you subscribe to the American creed that every man is created equal. It doesn't matter what your color is, you race, your gender, your ethnicity, you can be an American. That's what assimilation means.

MACCALLUM: All right. I want to go back to Tom Brokaw because it's still coming at him, Brit, and you were on this show last night and spoke out, said that you think that there was no problem with what he said. NBC is now being asked by the Hispanics Journal -- Hispanic Journalists Association to do a number of things as a make good in terms of this. They want more than a social media apology. They want a donation to the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. They would like a series highlighting Hispanic history and contributions. They're saying no thank you, Mr. Brokaw. The apology does not work.

HUME: Well, my own feeling was that I didn't think Tom had any to apologize for. I think his heart -- knowing Tom as I do, that his heart is clearly in the right place on this. and wishing for better assimilation is really wishing something good for the people being assimilated just for the reasons that Marc has just discussed with you.

So I don't think he should have apologized and I certainly don't think NBC should feel it is under any obligation to start providing pressure groups particularly those who proposed -- who say they're journalists who are supposed to be neutral. Journalists are supposed to be neutral in these controversies to provide some kind of reparations to them.

And one other thing, Martha. You ever heard of Telemundo owned by NBC. It's the second-largest Spanish language news -- Spanish-language network in America. It seems to me that NBC is given at the office on this already in a very major way. So I think that demand is frivolous and should be ignored.

MACCALLUM: Brit, I want to close with you. But just on the larger question of this idea that -- and we see this sometimes. We've seen it with some of the #MeToo cases and other cases where someone offends someone and then they're asked to make a big donation to someone. And it strikes me that there's just something inherently wrong with that and you're not allowed to just have conversations and apologize or say you know, I was taken out of context. Now there seems to be a price tag in some cases attached to it.

HUME: Well, it shows you what happens. This is -- look, these organizations -- America is a compassionate country and a country that does seek justice and the American people are decent. And when they see a downtrodden minority done wrong they want to see something done about it. And what happens in a situation like this too often is that that sense of being the victim becomes a source of power.

Power corrupts and that leads to things like this so-called journalists association demanding what a amount of reparation from NBC because of something in my opinion reasonable that one of their senior -- their senior journalists said. I just think that's -- I think that's all wrong. This is I think that the labeling of any criticism of any non-white minority group, any non-white ethnic group is amounts to racism. It doesn't.

Racism has a clear meaning. We've talked about this before, Martha. It means the view of one race is superior to another. That's not present here and not what Tom said and not what the Pope said. It's just not there.

MACCALLUM: Brit Hume, thank you very much. Marc Thiessen, thanks to you as well. Good to have you both.

THIESSEN: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So coming up next, a closer look at Roger Stone's early days in politics, who he is and the story behind his obsession with Richard Nixon coming up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why did you put up the salute, the Nixon salute when you left the courtroom?

ROGER STONE, FORMER CAMPAIGN ADVISER, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: Because I admire Nixon's resilience and his persistence.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But it ended badly for him, so why would you want to --

STONE: He reached the strategic arms limitation with the Soviets, open the door to China, ended the war in Vietnam, desegregated the public schools. He did a lot of good.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACCALLUM: Roger Stone there with the double victory signs giving another nod to his political idol Richard Nixon of whom he has a tattoo on his back, after pleading not guilty in federal court today to charges of obstruction, witness tampering, and making false statements. So who is this Watergate-era political firebrand and how did he land in the center of an indictment by the Special Counsel.

Here with the backstory of Roger Stone's path to politics is Leland Vittert. Hi Leland!

LELAND VITTERT, CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Martha. You know, a lot of us have heroes, even idols, but few memorialized that love in the way that Roger Stone does. Tattooed on Stone's back is a picture of Richard Nixon. Stone wrote a biography of the President entitled Tricky Dick, a reference of course to a nickname earned by Nixon during the 1950 U.S. Senate race in California.

As you noted, Stone has over the years and especially the past couple of days emulated the victory salute with both arms raised of Nixon. Stone got a first-hand look at Nixon's tricks in the 1972 re-election campaign. Although the love is not returned by the privately funded Nixon Foundation who put out a statement shortly after Stone's arrest. Mr. Stone during his time as a student at George Washington University was a junior scheduler on the Nixon re-election committee.

Mr. Stone was not a campaign aide or advisor nowhere in the presidential daily diaries from 72 to 74 is the name Roger Stone. But Stone played a small role in the Watergate scandal answering the jailhouse phone call from one of the burglars. Stone would write of Nixon. He was brilliant, devious, insightful, sometimes less than truthful. It was his sheer resilience in his will to compete and win that I admired.

Stone met Donald Trump through a mob lawyer named Roy Cohn. Cohn represented Trump in New York. Cohn had cut his teeth as a lawyer for Joseph McCarthy during that dark chapter in American history.

The Stone-Trump relationship went through some ups and downs. This from a piece in Politico. Roger is a stone-cold loser, Trump told Jeffrey Toobin in 2008. He always tries taking credit for things he never did. But when Trump ran for president, it was Stone Trump called for advice late at night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STONE: What I'm guilty of is politics. I took that information and I puffed it, I hyped it, I bluffed, I postured because I was trying to draw as much attention to whatever was going to be released as possible for votes. That's called politics.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VITTERT: Well, today, Stone pled not guilty. Those seven charges in federal court, perhaps remembering the advice of his other mentor, Roy Cohn, who said, "I don't write polite letters, I don't plea bargain, I like to fight."

And Martha, I guess tonight we will let the viewers decide whether Richard Nixon, Mr. Stone's other hero and mentor, would be proud.

MACCALLUM: Leland, thank you very much.

My next guest is directly tied to Stone's political tactics, described as person one in Robert Mueller's indictment. Dr. Jerome Corsi is a conservative political commentator and author of the book, "Silent No More, How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller's Witch Hunt." Dr. Corsi, welcome. Good to have you here tonight.

JEROME CORSI, CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Thank you for being here. That's his defense, and that's essentially yours as well, that we engaged in politics, dirty tricks at times, and the kind that Roger Stone learned way back in the days on the Nixon campaign.

CORSI: Well, I don't admit to any dirty tricks. I think Roger is an accomplished political operative and I'm confident he is going to wage a vigorous defense. I don't expect him to roll over, and my association really was with Roger.

I was working with WorldNetDaily as a reporter reporting on Roger, and working with stories on Roger, and writing various things for him, and the major problem I had with the special prosecutor in the, I had no direct contact with Julian Assange. And so therefore I could not establish a link from Roger Stone to Julian Assange, which was part of the, I believe, the conspiracy theory, the collusion theory that the Mueller team is trying to develop.

MACCALLUM: Let's take a look at a couple of the e-mails that you wrote. You and Roger were going back and forth, you know, trying to get in touch with WikiLeaks, trying to figure out when this dump was coming. It says, "Word is friend in embassy plans two more dumps." Friend in embassy is obviously Julian Assange, WikiLeaks.

"One shortly after I'm back," you wrote this, you are on vacation in Italy, so this was mid-summer, "second in October. Impact planned to be very damaging." And then it goes on to say "time to let more than the Hillary -- than the Clinton campaign to be exposed as embed with the enemy, if they are not ready to drop HRC. That appears to be the game. Hackers are now about would not hurt to start suggesting that Hillary Clinton is old, memory is bad, has a stroke. Neither this or nor she is well. I expect that much of the next dump focused, setting the stage for the foundation debacle."

That sounds really very much a spot on to exactly what happened.

CORSI: And I think the special prosecutor had a hard time, and probably the public does -- that was our 25th wedding anniversary, my wife and myself in Italy. I had some time and I really connected the dots, I figured out that Assange had Podesta's e-mails, and I was remarkably right about them.

It's generally the special prosecutor said I had to have a source. We spent the last 20 hours or 40 hours of this gruesome interrogation -- I detail it in "Silent No More" -- looking through all my contacts, all my sources in 2016. And we couldn't find anyone that I was using to be in touch with Assange. Neither could the special prosecutor.

So, I'm maintaining, as difficult as it may be to understand, I did connect the dots and figure it out on my own.

MACCALLUM: Yes, I mean, the irony is, it sounds like when you look at these it's like, he's, Roger Stone is telling you, you really ought to get in touch with WikiLeaks and find out when they are going to make their next dump. Which by the way, they have been very clear about admitting to the world, we have more of these e-mails and we are going to release them. This discussion was everywhere. Reporters were talking about it all the time.

But he says you had to link to WikiLeaks. He is asking you, can you get information? And then you're saying the same thing about him. So, which one of you was in touch with Julian Assange, and potentially with the Russians on the other side of that equation?

CORSI: Well, first of all, I know I was not in touch with Julian Assange.

MACCALLUM: Do you think he was?

CORSI: You'll have to ask him. I don't know if --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: You said in an earlier interview that you do think that he was in touch with him --

(CROSSTALK)

CORSI: Well, I began to suspect he must have some contact with Assange, but again, I can't prove that.

MACCALLUM: And he says in another one that he went going out for dinner with Assange tonight, he claims that was a big joke.

CORSI: All I can tell you is what I did, and for sure, otherwise I'm just speculating. And what I can tell you for sure, I had no contact with Julian Assange is the case. Julian Assange has even affirmed that. WikiLeaks put out a statement in the last two weeks saying naming me by name and saying Jerome Corsi had no contact with Julian Assange or WikiLeaks on the 2016 campaign or the DNC e-mails.

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: He also says he had no contact with the Russians and that Russians gave him nothing, so that's --

(CROSSTALK)

CORSI: And I think --

MACCALLUM: Nobody had the chance to question him --

CORSI: And I wonder why not. I mean, this is a predicate of the Mueller investigation. I would think he would start at finding out what evidence Julian Assange has it says it wasn't the Russians.

MACCALLUM: I got one last question for you, Dr. Corsi. You said that you looked at that indictment, read the whole thing, and you say that you believe that they have no reason to send you to prison. But you do say that you believe that Roger Stone should be very concerned and should be taking this whole thing extremely seriously. Why? Why different for him?

CORSI: Well, first of all, I don't even think that the Mueller team is going to indict me. I'm very much less concerned about that. I think I will be a witness in Roger's case.

I know as the fact after the 40 hours -- one thing I will tell you about the Mueller team -- is they are extremely thorough. They have everything. Roger shouldn't underestimate that every communication he had, telephone, e-mail, who he met with in person, the Mueller team has spent enormous and endless resources.

So, Roger should go into this fully prepared understanding that he is not going to be able to dodge the evidence that I'm sure Mueller has.

MACCALLUM: We'll see. Jerome Corsi, thank you very much. Good to have you with us tonight.

CORSI: My pleasure.

MACCALLUM: Thank you for coming to THE STORY.

CORSI: Thank you.

MACCALLUM: So, Roger Stone will be on The Ingraham Angle tonight at 10 o'clock Eastern. You can listen to his side of this equation and THE STORY.

Coming up next, President Trump's plan to make peace with the Taliban and make good on a promise he made on the campaign that he would be out of endless wars.

Rob O'Neill, the navy SEAL who killed Bin Laden on how he sees all this playing out coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: The president sounds serious about this come about ending the 18-year war in Afghanistan. The United States and Taliban recently agreeing to a framework on a peace deal. Did you ever think you would hear that, which includes a drawdown of U.S. troops from the region and could ultimately seal the deal on a victory for President Trump as he heads into 2020? That's what he is hoping.

So, joining me now, former navy SEAL Rob O'Neill who fired the shot that killed Osama Bin Laden. Rob, great to have you back on the show. Thank you very much for being here.

ROB O'NEILL, RETIRED UNITED STATES NAVY SEAL: Thanks, Martha. Good to be here.

MACCALLUM: Eight hundred fifty-one billion, the cost of being in Afghanistan since 2001. Are we done there?

O'NEILL: Well, we were done there a while back. My first trip to Afghanistan was in 2005, and we hadn't won at that point. There was no such thing as improvised explosive devices or suicide bombers because the mission at the time was to take out Al Qaeda and just do that. And we did it, and then for some reason we decided to get into nation-building.

And to put it in perspective, when we first invaded Afghanistan in 2002, college freshman this year were infants. So, we have been there a long, long time. And there's no point. We're at the point now are we going to colonize this place? Are we going to sit there for 50, 100 years and make sure we bring in democracy?

We are at a sad point in D.C. where we argue for 24 hours about White House whoppers and what they fed to the national -- a kid in Capitol Hill grimacing, it's someone who are grinning or smirking. We are arguing about that and $5 billion for some steel.

We are not in a position to colonize anybody. So, all we need to do, which we should've done in the first place, which again is frustrating for operators that on the ground, we need a few land bases where we can maintain a presence, maintain an air force, and have some a certain three- letter agencies in certain spots, because once we hit them in Afghanistan, they are going to go to Pakistan which they did.

MACCALLUM: And those are the people that you always give the credit to --

O'NEILL: Yes.

MACCALLUM: -- for being able to finally (ph) do that --

O'NEILL: Certainly.

MACCALLUM: -- and take him out, the people who, as you say, as three- letter agencies. Dan Coats, speaking of that, spoke today about the threats that the national security threats that we face. He says there are still thousands of members of ISIS in Syria. And some people look at and say, the president is wrong. He said we were done.

O'NEILL: Yes, but we are not going to be done just like that. It's not black and white. It's not -- with border security it's not a wall or no wall.

MACCALLUM: The president said we won, it's over.

(CROSSTALK)

O'NEILL: That's not -- 95 percent of government the problem is, it's an ideology. And we did -- there's like two times left east of the Euphrates and we are surrounding them. But it's not that simple. There will be the ideology. You got to figure out Al Qaeda and ISIS and a lot of the other militants are the same ideology, and they are going to go somewhere else as they are trying to nail the Jell-O to the wall type thing.

They are going to go to Yemen, they are going to go -- they're in Egypt, they're in Libya, we have seen them there, we had Americans killed in Niger. This is a, you know, they are not going anywhere.

Again, maintain a presence. We don't need all the --

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: Admissions.

O'NEILL: I mean, but it's going to be something to do with Russia, with Iran, with the Israelis, with the Syrians, with the Kurds, with the Turks, it's not going to be, we have a few army soldiers there, it's all good. It's not going to be good.

There's a lot of stuff going on, and it's not a 24-hour news cycle, there's so much going on over there. We need to maintain a presence but we also need to maintain everything. I've always had, if you really want to lose a war, get lawyers and politicians involved. You will lose it.

MACCALLUM: All right. Really quickly, the legal path 5,000 troops to Colombia.

O'NEILL: To Colombia.

MACCALLUM: Very quickly, your thoughts on what John Bolton was doing.

O'NEILL: On purpose, for sure. You don't just hold it like that. John Bolton loved the attention, he likes to get the media spun up, which if you can believe, the media gets spun up sometimes.

MACCALLUM: No, I really.

O'NEILL: Yes.

MACCALLUM: I can't believe it. Thank you, Rob.

O'NEILL: Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: Good to see you.

O'NEILL: Good to see you too.

MACCALLUM: So the Chicago River nearly froze today as millions across that area brace for extreme weather, record low temperatures. The sold could be worse than Antarctica, folks. A live report coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: Did you see this? Chicago police rescuing a man and his dog in lake Michigan in a dramatic scene that could play out elsewhere as the result of a polar vortex that is sweeping across the country. More than two -- look at this. It's crazy, right?

ADAM KLOTZ, METEOROLOGIST: It's crazy.

MACCALLUM: Two hundred million people are going to be affected by the subzero temperatures from negative 40 in Northern Illinois, to a possible windchill of 70 below in Minnesota, already reports, six people have died in this, and more than 2000 flights have been canceled.

Joining me now, meteorologist Adam Klotz. This is serious and deadly, as we just pointed out and it could get worse, Adam.

KLOTZ: Yes. This is just the very early stages of it, we're beginning to see some of those temperatures dropping down into the negative 40, negative 50-degree range, but it's all because of a cold front that's sweeping across the country. That is what you are seeing there.

Everything behind this, that's where the temperatures are going to start to fall. In the upper Midwest, in the upper plain states spots getting to the point where yes, you are at negative 40, negative 50 degrees. And this is, again, the early stages of the system.

Huge area there we're talking about, windchill warnings, windchill advisories tonight stretching all the way down to the Ohio River Valley. And this is the map I really like because it runs through the next 48 hours and you see spots falling down to negative 50 early, getting negative 50 in Chicago there early tomorrow morning.

MACCALLUM: It's awful.

KLOTZ: It never gets much warmer than negative 40 degrees. That runs you all the way into Thursday morning. So, this is going to be a frigid, frigid, frigid next 48 hours or so. It really picks up by the weekend but - -

(CROSSTALK)

MACCALLUM: Yes, but stay inside.

KLOTZ: Yes.

MACCALLUM: And if you don't have heat you have to call the police, call anybody that you can --

KLOTZ: There is warming shelters in a lot of these cities opening.

MACCALLUM: -- to help you find at someplace that is warm and go there.

KLOTZ: Yes.

MACCALLUM: Adam Klotz, thank you. We'll be watching throughout the night.

So, still ahead, supermodels facing legal backlash for telling thousands of millennials to go to a remote island for this really fantastic music festival of the century. Now the man who organized this speaking out for the first time since he was arrested.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILLY MCFARLAND, CO-FOUNDER, FYRE FESTIVAL: They are calling me all these crazy things, like showing me one thing, I say it's not true. They show me one thing, I say it's not true. I'm ready.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MACCALLUM: The co-founder of the Fyre Music Festival, defending himself after being slam -- accused of scamming thousands of millennials into a luxurious music festival that turned into a nightmare of wet tents, cold cheese sandwiches, and no water.

And now there is a legal battle surrounding this thing that could just be the beginning of high-profile supermodels and influencers involved with promoting this event.

Trace Gallagher live in our West Coast newsroom with the back story on this one tonight. Hi, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Martha. This all began as an app called Fyre, it was supposed to become the Uber of booking talent if you wanted a supermodel like Gigi Hadid to attend your event, you log on to Fyre, pay the fee, and she'd be there.

It was the brainchild of Billy McFarland who at that time was working with the rapper Ja Rule, then the Fyre app morphed into Fyre festival. A music event on a private island in the Bahamas complete with a-list performers, luxury accommodations, and five-star cuisine.

And to promote to the festival, Billy McFarland flew in Bella Hadid, Emily Ratajkowski, and Hailey Baldwin to shoot videos on a super yacht, and it worked. Within 48 hours, 95 percent of tickets were sold at prices ranging from $1,200 to $100,000.

But as documentaries on Netflix and Hulu point out, the festival never happened, and not only did fans lose tens of thousands of dollars when Fyre filed for bankruptcy, the locals who built the site and supply the materials were never paid to. Here is part of the Hulu documentary, a snippet. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has anyone ever called you a compulsive liar?

MCFARLAND: I've been called a lot of things since the festival.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: Yes. Billy McFarland by the way is now serving six years in federal prison for fraud. Information from him as you might imagine is hard to obtain, so now as part of the bankruptcy case, a judge is allowing the agencies that represent the supermodels who promoted the Fyre Festival to be subpoenaed to find out how much they were paid to promote the event.

The hope is to figure out what happened to the millions of dollars in ticket sales. Many of the models we should note have already gone on social media saying they never realized the festival was a giant fraud. Martha?

MACCALLUM: Trace, thank you very much. Joining me now, Mark Eiglarsh, criminal defense attorney. Mark, this is getting a ton of attention on Netflix and Hulu, lots of people watching this. You know, telling the story of Billy McFarland who is going to do six years in jail for fraud.

What about the newest wrinkle here that sort of opens up this whole can of worms about these Instagram and social media influencers, and how much culpability this -- they may have?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Martha, I have no problem with them being forced to come into court and say exactly what they were paid. There's 26 million reasons why I think the judge should continue down the path that he's already gone down.

People invested their hard-earned dollars thinking this was one thing, and Billy McFarland is a big fat fraud. You need to find out where the money went, and there is no supermodel privilege.

MACCALLUM: So, you know, I mean, they need to know how much he paid these different models, and whether or not --

(CROSSTALK)

EIGLARSH: Yes.

MACCALLUM: -- they got their money, then are they going to call it back and try to give reparations to some of these people who lost their money?

EIGLARSH: No, likely not, but we believe that they got millions of dollars, why? Because Billy McFarland said so? I wouldn't believe that. I wouldn't believe anything that flows from his lips. So, let them come into court and say yes, he paid me $255,000, Kendall Jenner will say to text out I'm going to Fyre.

By the way, she got reprimanded for that because now you got to say it was an advertisement, I wasn't really going, he was just paying me to do so. All these women have a certain level of culpability if they had any idea that this was as fraudulent as it was.

MACCALLUM: I mean I'm sure there's a lot of people out there who don't, you know, understand the extent to how much you can make being in Instagram or -- you know, an influencer on social media.

For example, let's put up. These are the top 10 influencers on social media. OK? Kylie Jenner is at the top of the list, everybody knows that she is one the young -- the youngest I think billionaire in the country. And Selena Gomez is on that list as well.

So, if these people so much is wearing a pair of shoes, she can get, Kylie Jenner can get $1 million for wearing a pair of shoes --

EIGLARSH: Insane.

MACCALLUM: -- on Instagram, right?

EIGLARSH: Insane, and all it takes is one guy, who by the way, his claim to fame was some credit card company which most people complained about. So, he was allegedly a fraudster before he started.

All he did was take people's money, buy the influence and then he sells out a festival. This is ludicrous, Martha. And I have no problem with them being brought into court to try to account for where this money went.

MACCALLUM: Just quickly, you know, it just kind of lead to more accountability with these influencers and you know, the impact that they have, or -- you know, that's Fyre everywhere.

EIGLARSH: Yes. No, it should. It should absolutely lead to more accountability, especially when there is fraud behind it. See, this is very different. You've got people who invested their money, and they've got to figure out where the money went. If it went to the supermodels, OK, there is no money to be found. But maybe he said that it went to them and it went somewhere else.

MACCALLUM: Mark Eiglarsh, always good to have you. Thank you very much.

EIGLARSH: Same here. Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM: So, it seems the top of the show on Kamala Harris' calls to abolish private healthcare plans, insurance plans struck a bit of a nerve with some of our viewers.

Don wrote this, ask Congress if they are willing to do away with their Cadillac coverage if they are willing to live with Medicare for all like every day Americans, maybe we would be ready for a conversation.

Jack wrote this, people on Medicare have a hard time finding doctors who will accept them. What happens when the whole country is on Medicare? Someone needs to ask that question.

Thank you, Jack, for writing that. And tonight, send us your comments and your thoughts. You can e-mail us at Thestory@foxnews.com. Don't forget to include your home town. We will be back here tomorrow night at 7 o'clock. Tucker Carlson is getting ready to go down there in Washington, D.C., cold nights across the Midwest, cold night in a lot of places. So, stay warm, bundle up, stick around and watch more Fox News throughout the night. Good night, everybody.

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.