Ratcliffe warns of China using ‘gene editing’ to boost military

close

Video

Ratcliffe warns of China using ‘gene editing’ to boost military

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe discusses China’s efforts to strengthen its military and regime on ‘Sunday Morning Futures.’

This is a rush transcript from "Sunday Morning Futures" December 6, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR:  Good Sunday morning, everyone. Thanks
for joining us.

Welcome to "Sunday Morning Futures." I'm Maria Bartiromo.

President Trump digs in, while defending the GOP in Georgia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  They cheated, and they
rigged our presidential election, but we will still win it. We will still
win it.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP:  We'll still win it.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

TRUMP:  And they are going to try and rig this election too.

No, we're -- we continue to fight. We have had some great moments. We just
need somebody with courage to do what they have to do, because everyone
knows it's wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BARTIROMO:  Coming up: a pandemic election. The China virus unleashed on
the world caused America's state to change voting procedures everywhere,
expanding the vote, littering counties with ballots. Was it legal and will
the Supreme Court intervene?

This hour, President Trump's point man on his challenge to the 2020
election, former prosecutor and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, is here.

Then: the China component, the coronavirus impact on the election and
China's plans to dominate. The director of national intelligence, John
Ratcliffe, is here on why he says China is the one nation that can kill the
American dream forever -- the threat of a potential change in policy on
China.

And the -- President Trump -- the president's legal road ahead, with active
cases in Wisconsin and Georgia, and a Pennsylvania case on its way to the
Supreme Court this week.

Plus: the FBI and the four people pulling suitcases of ballots out on
election night in Georgia -- outside legal analysis from Alan Dershowitz
and Ken Starr on the president's charges.

It's all right here, right now on "Sunday Morning Futures."

And first this morning, the Trump administration is increasing its spending
in response to the China threat.

DNI John Ratcliffe saying that the United States will shift resources in
the fiscal year '21 budget to increase China spending by nearly 20 percent,
this as Joe Biden puts together a potential incoming national security
team. Will the U.S. policy on China change? And what's at stake?

Joining me right now is the director of national intelligence, John
Ratcliffe.

Director, it's great to have you this morning. Thanks very much for being
here.

JOHN RATCLIFFE, U.S. DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE:  Hi, Maria. Good
morning.

BARTIROMO:  You wrote an incredible op-ed in The Wall Street Journal this
week that we are going to get to.

But let's start with the COVID threat and what took place in 2020 as a
result of China unleashing this virus on the world, causing change for the
election in 2020 for America. What happened?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, Maria, you talked about the op-ed earlier this week in
The Wall Street Journal. It really was more of an intelligence piece. It
was an intelligence briefing to the American people about our greatest
national security threat, China, how they're threatening us economically,
militarily, technologically.

And you just highlighted one of the ways that shows how China is a threat.
And that's this COVID-19 pandemic that the Chinese Communist Party, when
they knew about its transmissibility, allowed it to go from China to the
rest of the world.

They intentionally and deliberately downplayed it in their country,
pressured World Health Organizations, and allowed it to spread to the rest
of the world. And that didn't just have the effect of wrecking the global
economy. It didn't just have the effect of killing millions of people,
including hundreds of thousands of Americans. It also had grave political
consequences.

Here in the United States, the pandemic influenced a lot about how people
voted, but also how they had to vote. As a result of the pandemic, we saw
state legislatures as little as 90 days before the election adopting new
voting procedures. Essentially, we had universal mail-in balloting across
this country in a way that we hadn't seen before.

And to that point, almost 73 percent of the American people this year voted
before Election Day, a good percentage of those by mail. That's about an 80
percent increase over anything we have ever seen before.

So, it's little wonder that we see what's happening around the country as a
result of that, with mail-in balloting and all of the questions and the
questions that are being raised in lawsuits and by everyday Americans about
what happened in the election.

BARTIROMO:  Yes, I mean, it's interesting, because, when you put the China
impact on one side, and then you put the Democrat impact on the other side,
it's pretty extraordinary, because, when Nancy Pelosi first won the
majority in 2019, her HR-1, her number one issue -- she talked a lot about
health care.

She talked a lot about income in equality, a lot about a lot of things,
but, actually, her priority number one, HR-1, was election reform. And that
included wanting mail-in ballots, wanting voting early, all of these things
that actually took place.

I just -- I just throw that out. I know that's not why you're here to talk
this morning.

RATCLIFFE:  But the pandemic created the opportunity to do those types of
things.

And what you saw was lawmakers in states across the country adjusting to
the pandemic, saying, we have to vote differently in this country because
of the pandemic. And we saw that. And, as a result, it's little wonder,
when you have procedures adopted as little as 90 days before the election,
that there's so much question and controversy.

BARTIROMO:  Yes. I want to ask you...

RATCLIFFE:  And, again, the result of China and the pandemic.

BARTIROMO:  You see more intelligence than anybody, have access to more
intelligence than anybody except the president.

So, I want to get your take on the intelligence around this election,
before we go deeper into China.

Chris Krebs, the former director of cybersecurity and infrastructure
security, director, said that this was the most secure election ever.

Meanwhile, we see massive videos of witness testimony, of ballots being
taken out of suitcases, of ballots being put in the machine multiple times.
What is your reaction to what the former CISA director said on
cybersecurity?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, I don't know how you can compare this election to any
other, because it's unlike any election we have ever had and hopefully will
never have again.

Republicans and Democrats agreed a long time ago that universal mail-in
balloting was a bad idea. A lot of people think we had to do it because of
the pandemic, but we have seen the results of this.

Now, I think one of the things that we did well this election was
addressing problems from foreign interference, influence campaigns from
other countries that we saw in 2016.

But people need to understand that's different than election fraud issues,
the things that you're talking about, Maria, things like postal drivers
saying they took 200,000-plus ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, tens
of thousands of ballots supposedly mailed in, but no folds or creases in
them, more votes than ballots issued in places.

These -- people pulling out suitcases and video evidence of that, with
questionable explanations for that. Those are issues of election fraud that
need to be investigated. And there's a lot of them. And it's not just one
person or one group of people. It's across the country.

And it's little wonder, because we have procedures that we haven't had
before. And so this is what the court system is for. This is why these
questions are being raised. And, again, I hope we don't have an election
where we have to utilize these procedures that everyone has agreed are not
secure.

BARTIROMO:  So, I mean, do we know if there was any foreign interference in
this election? I know that you have said in the past you don't have
evidence of any state-run campaign, but does that mean that there was no
foreign election interference?

And, by the way, you just said these answers can be -- can happen pretty
quickly. Yes, what about those four people pulling suitcases out from
underneath the table in Georgia? Has the FBI questioned those people? I
mean, this is how we're going to get an answer, right? Do you know of an
FBI investigation taking place right now?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, first, again, when we talk about election security, you
have to understand that, from the intelligence community perspective, we
did identify foreign efforts to interfere or influence the elections.

We see social media campaigns. I think we did a good job of identifying
those people. Remember, I held a press conference to warn the American
people. That served the deterrent effect that we wanted it to.

But, again, that's different than election fraud, which is a domestic law
enforcement issue. And to your point, Maria, that's something that is the
soul jurisdiction of the FBI, the Department of Justice, with the
Department of Homeland Security.

To answer your question, I assume that the FBI is being looking at all of
those things. The answers to a lot of these questions, we should be able to
get them pretty quickly. Bring in the people that are on those videos.
Bring in the postal truck driver. Bring in poll watchers and workers and
ask if all of these irregularities and aberrations and all of these
questions about fraud -- we ought to be able to get answers to those.

And I would hope that the leadership at the FBI and at the Department of
Justice would speak to those things directly to the American people,
because there is a lack of confidence out there. There are a lot of people
in this country that don't think that the votes were counted fairly, that
the processes at the state and local level weren't administered fairly. And
they deserve that accounting.

BARTIROMO:  So, does anybody think that the FBI will bring anybody into
question?

You did an investigation, a darn good one, throughout 2017 and 2018 about
what the FBI and the CIA did to take down candidate Trump and worked with
Hillary Clinton. Does anybody believe the FBI is actually going to bring
these people in to question them to find out what they were doing with the
suitcases and ballots? Do you think so?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, I mean, I guess, respectfully, I can only do one job at a
time. And, as director of national intelligence, that's not my role and
responsibility.

I have great confidence in our law enforcement authorities. I really do.
But I think they -- to the extent that they are doing the things that they
are supposed to be doing, they ought to provide some, I think, more
visibility to the American people about that, because there are so many
questions.

And folks like you, Maria, that don't see that that's happening, they
deserve an explanation to know that those types of investigations are
taking place.

BARTIROMO:  Yes.

All right, you know what, Director? I want to take a short break.

I want to go deeper into the China threat. Also want to get your take on
how China is trying to bribe and blackmail U.S. lawmakers, and then get
your take on a potential incoming new administration and whether or not
they recognize the threat of China, all that as we continue on "Sunday
Morning Futures" with Director John Ratcliffe.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BARTIROMO:  Welcome back.

We're back with the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe.

And, Director, you wrote an incredible op-ed this week in The Wall Street
Journal detailing China and why China can actually potentially takeaway the
American dream.

I know they have been stealing intellectual property for decades. Walk
through some of the things that China is doing right now, Director.

RATCLIFFE:  Yes, again, Maria that, again, was not an opinion piece.

It's really -- it's what the intelligence shows. And I guess what I would
say to folks is, the election is over. People have voted. Let's all be
honest about China, because there was a lot of politicizing of
intelligence, people saying that Russia was a greater national security
threat.

Listen, Russia is a threat. They are to be taken seriously. They have the
largest nuclear weapon stockpile from the Soviet era still left over. But
when you look at the top 10 economies in the world, the United States is
number one. China is number two. Russia is not on the list. Italy, Brazil
and the state of Texas all have larger economies than Russia.

So, China, and China alone, is the greatest national security threat that
we face. And we see them growing their military. We see them economically,
as you talk about, stealing through intellectual property, stealing through
cyber-warfare, stealing from our universities, stealing medical research,
all to gain information, which they know is what you need to dominate
technologically.

So, China is not a good actor internationally. We need to call them out for
what they are, not what they pretend to be.

And, again, going back to COVID, it's a perfect example of showing they're
not a good international actor. They're intent on dominating the entire
world, not just the United States. And the intelligence tells us that.

BARTIROMO:  And, you know...

RATCLIFFE:  So, from my unique vantage point, I want to make sure that the
American people are warned about this threat, because it's clear.

BARTIROMO:  One thing that really struck me is that U.S. intelligence shows
that China has conducted human testing on military power.

The U.S. intelligence shows that China's conducting human testing on
members of the People's Liberation Army, in hopes of developing soldiers
with biologically enhanced capabilities. There are just no ethical
boundaries to this.

In other words, they want to create new humans that can handle extreme
weather, handle chemical attacks. Is that right?

RATCLIFFE:  So, one of the things I did in this piece was to work hard to
try and get information declassified to a level that I could talk about.

And one of the things you just mentioned, it's called gene editing. It's
altering DNA. And it's one of the things our intelligence shows that China
is doing. They have got a -- the PRC, the People's Republic of China, has
two million strong in its military. And it's trying to make them stronger
through gene editing.

And that's just one of the ways that China is trying to essentially
dominate the planet and set the rules and the world order. And why it's so
important and people need to understand is, this is an authoritarian
regime. It doesn't care about people's individual rights. We have seen what
they have done to the Uyghurs. We have seen what they have done in Hong
Kong.

It's about putting the state first. And that is the exact opposite of what
has always made America great. Individual liberties, freedoms, free
enterprise, those things are all at stake if China dominates.

BARTIROMO:  In fact, Jimmy Lai, who is a media tycoon, is now sitting in
jail, because China took him in, detained him. And now the word is, he's
going to be there until his trial, April 2021.

We had him on "Mornings With Maria" over at FOX Business last week. And
it's really a disgusting story, what's happening to Jimmy Lai.

But I want to get your take on Joe Biden naming a Cabinet and expecting
that he is going to have a national security team. And here are his Obama
era picks. And I want your take on whether or not they agree with you and
understand the threat.

We have got Jake Sullivan for NSA. He sent classified e-mails to Hillary
Clinton's server. He hyped the Russiagate hoax, co-authored the essay
calling China an essential U.S. partner.

Antony Blinken for secretary of state, named in Senator Johnson's report,
was in contact with Hunter Biden and his Burisma Holdings colleagues in the
Ukraine impeachment drama.

Alejandro Mayorkas for DHS found to have sold green cards to Chinese
nationals on behalf of Democratic donors. And then there's Neera Tanden for
budget director. She played a role in promoting the debunked Trump-Russia
claims and the dossier. And, of course, Avril Haines, who wants your job as
DNI, is the former deputy of John Brennan and Susan Rice, who were deeply
involved, we understand, John Brennan was, in the Russia hoax.

So, does a potential incoming Biden administration agree with this about
China, and will they change policy?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, these election issues, we will see who is in what seats
and whether there is a Biden administration.

But the point of what I have done here and how I have addressed this and
why it's different for a director of national intelligence to take this
approach is, I want to make sure that the American people are clear on the
threats, so that they can hold -- whoever holds these important national
security positions is held accountable, so that the things that the Trump
administration has done so successfully that is different than any other
administration has done before, sanctions against China, tariffs relating
to China, holding them accountable on the world stage, calling out
companies like Huawei and ZTE that are veneers for the Chinese Communist
Party in a way that they can obtain information.

All of those things are holding China accountable for who they really are,
and letting the world know who China really is. That has to continue,
regardless of who holds these very important national security positions.

BARTIROMO:  Yes.

RATCLIFFE:  And that's why I'm going about this the way that I am.

BARTIROMO:  The Trump administration has been tough on China, there's no
doubt, whether it's sanctions, tariffs, prosecutions, a string of
indictments this year.

I want to take a break and then get your take on what the Chinese Communist
Party is doing to Congress, blackmail and bribery.

Then we will talk about Bill Barr and a Senate about-face. After 19 months,
we still haven't heard from John Durham.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BARTIROMO:  Well, welcome back.

I'm back with the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe.

And, Director, you have said that the Chinese Communist Party is trying to
use blackmail, covert influence to target members of Congress. Can you tell
us more?

RATCLIFFE:  I can.

So, one of the things I worked hard to get at a declassified level to be
able to talk about was some of the information that I see every morning as
the director of national intelligence. I look at threat streams.

And one of the things I look at is what the called Gates information, or
Gates Procedures. And it's intelligence that we have where foreign actors
and states are targeting members of Congress to influence them, through
blackmail on derogatory information or through bribery, for overt and
covert influence.

And, as I looked at it, it was so overwhelming related to China that I had
a look at the numbers. And what we have learned is that China engages in
that activity at a level six times greater than Russia, 12 times greater
than Iran. It's a massive influence campaign.

And, really, what it's intended to do, Maria, is to influence members of
Congress to make sure that they're passing laws that are favorable for
China and not passing laws that are anti-China. And they have been
successful.

So, I briefed members of Congress on this. It was so disturbing that I made
a special trip to Capitol Hill to make sure that they're aware of that
information. And now I'm making the American people aware of that
information.

BARTIROMO:  Well, is that why we hear Senator Dianne Feinstein praising
China as a respectable nation? Is that why we see Joe Lieberman now a
lobbyist for ZTE, former Congressman Ed Royce, formerly an outspoken critic
of Vietnam's Communist Party, now lobbying for Tencent?

Do these folks not understand that China is trying to replace the United
States as the number one superpower, sir? Real quick, because I want to get
on to the next subject.

RATCLIFFE:  Well, I think what we see is why China does so well under U.S.
laws is because U.S. laws have been influenced by the actions that they
have taken.

And the American people need to be aware of that and hold their elected
leaders accountable with regard to legislation that would impact China.

BARTIROMO:  Well, let me move on.

Speaking of threats and bullying, who got to Bill Barr? I have got to ask
you your thoughts on where we are here with A.G. Bill Barr and John Durham.
It seems like it's an about-face. We were expecting a real investigation
into what took place and why Crossfire Hurricane, the investigation into
Donald Trump, still has no accountability.

Can you give us some sunlight on that?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, from my position in the intelligence community, one of
the things that -- you know, Maria, that I spent a lot of time on this
issue as a member of Congress before I game the DNI.

But one of the things I wanted to look at was, from the intelligence
community perspective, was there any intelligence at all, anything to
support the opening of Crossfire Hurricane?

And from the position that I'm in now, I'm able to tell everyone
unequivocally there wasn't. And you don't have to take my word for it. The
other officials from the Obama/Biden administration have said so as well.

One of my predecessors, James Clapper, has admitted that he never saw
intelligence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. I declassified
documents to show that not only that was the case, but that also there was
intelligence that showed those Trump-Russia collusion allegations were
created by the Democratic Party, particularly the Hillary Clinton campaign.

And that's kind of where the trail goes cold. So, you know, that
information was properly sent, I will say, by the intelligence community. I
declassified the counterintelligence investigational -- or operational lead
sent to Jim Comey and Peter Strzok at the FBI to look into those
allegations.

But those are documents that are the providence of the Department of
Justice and the FBI. And that's what John Durham is looking at. I thought,
like you, Maria, that there was going to be an interim report before the
election. I think that there should have been.

But the election is over, so it's not political anymore. I think the
American people should know what's happening in a two-year investigation
into this. And I hope that that report will be forthcoming.

I will say this, Maria. The special counsel obligations, whether John
Durham is a U.S. attorney, special U.S. attorney or special counsel, it's a
matter of semantics. The American people deserve a full accounting. But the
special counsel regulations not only require a final report. They allow for
interim reports.

So I'd like to see an interim report that talks about this, from the angle
of someone that has not only the intelligence community documents that I
have, but the law enforcement documents that show there was no proper
predicate for Crossfire Hurricane, because there certainly wasn't any given
by the intelligence community to the FBI before this illegal spying began.

And, by the way, it is illegal spying. The current FBI director has
admitted that.

BARTIROMO:  If he doesn't come out with a report to indicate what took
place, will a potential Biden administration shut him down? Will John
Durham get shut down?

RATCLIFFE:  Well, they have indicated that they plan to do that, or some
have. Chairman Schiff has indicated he thinks that the Durham investigation
should end, which is exactly why an interim report would be appropriate.

It would show whether or not there's a good-faith basis to continue. It
would protect the work that's been done. So, I would encourage my
colleagues over at the Department of Justice and at the FBI and, in
particular, now special counsel Durham to consider doing that, so that the
American people can get the full accounting that they deserve.

Look, it's not a question anymore whether or not there was illegal spying.
This idea that there was -- it was -- that there was not FISA abuse and it
was a bunch of nonsense, look, someone is going to prison over that. It's
just a question now of how wide and how deep it was.

And I know John Durham has been investigating that. And I'm confident, and
I have said that, based on what I have seen, I think there should be
additional indictments. I'm not backing off of that.

But he's the prosecutor.

BARTIROMO:  OK.

RATCLIFFE:  I'd like to hear from them -- from him in an interim report.
And I think the American people would agree with me.

BARTIROMO:  Director, it's great to have you.

RATCLIFFE:  You bet.

BARTIROMO:  The American people trust you. You have done an incredible job
on all of this.

Thank you, sir.

RATCLIFFE:  Good to be with you, Maria.

BARTIROMO:  The director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe.

We will be right back.

And we're looking at what Rudy Giuliani is calling the smoking gun of the
election 2020, Rudy Giuliani on the surveillance video he says could
overturn the results.

He's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BARTIROMO:  Welcome back.

This week, dozens of witnesses testified at five separate election fraud
hearings in four different states. Their allegations range from bogus and
backdated ballots to tabulation errors and voter intimidation.

Here is a sampling of testimonies from Michigan on Wednesday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Instead of discarding, they were just rescanning,
rescanning, rescanning, counting ballots nine to 10 times, counting votes
nine to 10 times.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  So, they were counting the same ballot, the same vote
nine or 10 times?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  From these duplicate ballots that I observed, none of
them were for Trump, none of them. And from the other two shifts or two
rounds that we did earlier, only one ballot that I witnessed from a
duplicate was for Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  When I asked one lady, where did you get trained, she
said, trained for what, because they didn't know what they were there for.
The only job I could tell there was to block the GOP people from
challenging or intimidate them and get them out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BARTIROMO:  President Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani crisscrossed the
country this week, presenting evidence in Arizona, Michigan, and Georgia.
He joins us now this morning.

Good morning, Rudy. Good to see you today.

RUDY GIULIANI, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP:  Good morning, Maria.
Good to see you.

BARTIROMO:  What a week you had and all of that testimony, pretty explosive
commentary coming out of those witnesses.

(LAUGHTER)

BARTIROMO:  Rudy, give us a status check. You have challenged these six
swing states. Where are we in each of these states?

GIULIANI:  Well, I think, Georgia, we're probably the furthest along.

Georgia, of course, had the bombshell evidence of the tape recording of the
election center, with everyone chased out about 2:00 in the morning, locked
down, five people left. Luckily, the cameras were on. They didn't know it.

And then they took ballots out hidden under a table all day. And then they
spent the rest of the night counting the secret ballots, and, clearly,
secret, phony ballots, in which they excluded all Republicans, all
Democrats, all law enforcement.

And I think that ended up being about 148,000 to 7,000, 148,000 for Biden,
7,000 for Trump. But you get a pretty good idea of how they cheated.

Georgia also has numerous situations where ballots weren't inspected,
ballots were backdated, dead people voting, people from out of state
voting, illegal immigrants voting. There are enough illegal immigrants that
voted that would change the course of the election.

They can't balance the number of ballots they have against the number of
ballots that were returned by about 11,000 or 12,000. That alone would
overturn the election. So, the state legislature there has discussed it.

And they actually have started a petition to hold their own session, which
they're allowed to do under the Constitution. They're the first legislation
to do this now. This is a constitutional role that the founding fathers
gave to our legislatures. They're the ones who are supposed to select the
president, not the governors, not the board of elections.

They're the ones who have the constitutional obligation to decide on the
electors. So, in Georgia, they are going to do that. Michigan is
considering the same thing, and they're not quite far -- as far along, but
they are drafting something right now, and so is Arizona.

So those three are three in which they could very well end up in front of
the legislature to decide who the electors are. Wisconsin has a lawsuit
where Wisconsin has a very strict absentee ballot. And it basically says,
if you don't have an application for the ballot, the ballot doesn't count.

And there are some 50,000 or 60,000 ballots without applications. They
would have to be thrown out. And that would change the election.

BARTIROMO:  So...

GIULIANI:  So, that's where we are right now.

BARTIROMO:  ... you said that you found -- you say you found serious issues
with processing of ballots, absentee ballots, in Wisconsin?

GIULIANI:  Oh, of course, yes.

I mean, what you had in Wisconsin is the same thing that you had every
place else, except they have this additional law where you have to have an
application. They excluded Republican poll watchers from watching absentee
ballots being counted and mail-in ballots being counted.

They excluded Republican poll watchers from the polls. They engaged in
backdating ballots. Several witnesses testified to how they were trained to
backdate ballots. They have registered people who weren't registered under
different names.

Each one of them has, in one degree or another, almost the same pattern of
activity, one a little bit more than others. This was a pattern that was
set by somebody in Washington, because everybody else carried it out
exactly in the same way. And they did it in the crooked cities.

They didn't do it everywhere. They did it in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh
and Detroit, in Milwaukee, in Atlanta. That's -- they went to places where
there's a lot of corruption and the courts are not exactly the fairest.
Let's put it that way.

BARTIROMO:  So, you think somebody in Washington directed this and directed
the big cities in the big swing states to do these tweaks, whether it is
the processing of ballots incorrectly or harvesting ballots, et cetera.

Who did this? I mean, that would suggest this is organized, developed. Who
is in charge? Who directed this, then?

GIULIANI:  I have no idea. I mean, I don't know who was in charge of it.

All I can tell you is, it looks like a very well-planned, very well-
executed situation. For example, at the same time at 3:30 in the morning on
the night of the election, right after the election, a truck pulled into
the back of the center in Detroit and delivered 100,000 phony ballots. That
all got counted for Biden.

At the very same time in Atlanta, they threw the people out of the center.
They closed the doors. They went under the counter and brought out about
70,000 or 80,000 ballots and counted those phony ballots, some of them
counting six and seven times. All that's on tape.

Happened at the same time in two different places. Can't tell me that
wasn't part of a pattern.

BARTIROMO:  That's unbelievable.

Rudy, this is pretty extraordinary. And, obviously, these are very, very
serious charges. How come the media does not report that you have this
evidence? I mean, we're looking at the videos of people pulling ballots out
from under a table. We're looking at the affidavits that you are
presenting.

And yet, I mean, The Wall Street Journal this morning, the title, "Trump
Uses Rally For Georgia Senate Candidates to Push Unsupported Claims of
Voting Fraud."

And we're looking at video right now of the people in Georgia, which you
just referred to, that, at 2:00 in the morning, they said, everybody, clear
out the room. And yet you have got four individuals here that are pulling
suitcases out from under a table.

Why is it that the media continues to report that there's unsupported
evidence here, when every day you're out talking about these situations?

GIULIANI:  Maria, I wish I knew the answer to that.

Part of it is bias. Part of it is corruption. Part of it's laziness. Part
of it is just inexplicable. How you can say this is unsupported...

BARTIROMO:  Well...

GIULIANI:  ... when there are now tape after tape after tape -- there are
tapes of those same women taking USB drives and getting information out of
the machines illegally.

Those were played yesterday in Georgia. And nobody bothers to play that. I
mean, there are 1,000 affidavits, 1,000 affidavits. This is a massive fraud
all throughout the country. There are 1,000 affidavits of people who
observed a fraudulent act.

BARTIROMO:  It sounds like you're -- yes. It sounds like you're counting on
the state legislatures to recognize this.

What about the Supreme Court? I know that Congressman Mike Kelly's suit has
reached Justice Alito. Tell us where that stands and when we might get
reaction or rulings from the Supreme Court in -- with regard to the
Pennsylvania case.

GIULIANI:  Well, I think the Pennsylvania case probably is a week away from
being put together and argued.

I don't know when it'll get decided. That case challenges the definitions
and the changes in the definitions that Pennsylvania made in its law, in
the way that it applied it, in the way it denied constitutional rights. I
think it's a very good case.

If any of these state legislatures change the electors based on their own
analysis, of course, that'll be taken to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme
Court will have to decide if it was done reasonably, rationally, or
arbitrarily. That's the standard.

The state legislature can make a choice of electors, but it has to be based
on substantial reasons of corruption, irregularities. In each case, each
one of these legislatures has more than enough of that to sustain a Supreme
Court challenge.

BARTIROMO:  Rudy, also, in terms of where this happens next, I want to get
your take on where we go from here and your timing.

Do you believe you are getting heard? Do you believe that you still have a
path to victory?

GIULIANI:  We do.

We're getting heard in the state legislatures. And once they make a
decision, we will get heard in the Supreme Court. We're not getting heard
in the public, except for occasional shows like yours, a few others, a few
interviews that we do, and social media.

No, it's outrageous the amount of blackout that's been put on this.

BARTIROMO:  Yes.

GIULIANI:  I thought, when that tape came out, I thought that would be like
a -- my goodness, look at this. People are stealing votes right in front of
us.

BARTIROMO:  Well, you called it -- you called it a smoking gun.

By the way, we just heard from John Ratcliffe, director of national
intelligence. And he said it's very easy to figure out what went on with
those four individuals. Let the FBI bring those four individuals in and ask
them, what were you doing with the suitcases under the table?

Have those people been questioned by the FBI?

GIULIANI:  No.

(LAUGHTER)

BARTIROMO:  We will get an answer right away, right?

GIULIANI:  Not that I know of. Not that I know of.

Not only that. Those people were involved in taking USBs, taking
information out of machines. They have a little history. I mean, it's not
just that. They are involved in two or three other acts of voter fraud.

And the FBI is nowhere to be found. I don't understand it.

BARTIROMO:  All right, we will leave it there.

Rudy -- Rudy, it's good to see you this morning. Of course, we will
continue following this incredibly extraordinary moment in time, this
contested election.

Rudy Giuliani.

Coming up: outside legal analysis on whether Trump does have a path to
victory, what role the Supreme Court could play in the homestretch.

Legal scholars Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr will weigh in right after
this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BARTIROMO:  Welcome back.

We just heard from President Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani on his 2020
election challenges.

Joining me right now with independent analysis are Judge Ken Starr, former
independent counsel and FOX News contributor, and legal scholar and host of
the wildly popular podcast "The Dershow" Alan Dershowitz.

Gentlemen, it's good to see you both. Thank you so much for being here.

KEN STARR, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Thank you, Maria.

BARTIROMO:  I want to get your take on what we heard from Rudy Giuliani.

And let me just say one thing that really struck me. Rudy just said, this
was a pattern that was set by somebody in Washington, because everybody
else carried it out exactly the same way. They did it in the crooked
cities. That's what Rudy Giuliani said.

Look at that, as well as anything else that struck you from my conversation
with former prosecutor Giuliani.

Alan Dershowitz, kick us off.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ATTORNEY:  There certainly is probable cause for
investigating and looking further.

Giuliani has made very serious accusations. The question is, which
institution is designed, constitutionally, to look into it? Is it the state
legislature? Is it the courts? Is the clock running in such a way that
there won't be time to look into this?

I have proposed, for the future, at least, the creation of a vote integrity
panel, VIP, that would consist of former justices, judges, neutral,
nonpartisan, that any complaint about an election, either before the
election, during the election, or after the election, could go to this
group which could then look into it, because we know the media doesn't give
it a fair shake.

And we know that everybody else is partisan. The American public wants to
know, is Giuliani correct or isn't he correct? I don't know whether we will
find that out in time for the meeting of the Electoral College votes.

BARTIROMO:  Ken Starr?

STARR:  Hi, Maria. And hi, Alan.

DERSHOWITZ:  Hi.

STARR:  The prediction of Jimmy Carter and James Baker in 2000 and their
commission has come true, and it is a bit of a nightmare.

They warned, after taking a very careful study, this bipartisan commission
warned that absentee voting, mail-in voting is a huge potential for fraud.
And that's what we have heard from Rudy.

So, what do we now do about it? I think, to be honest, we're running out of
time, because the Electoral College meets on December 14.

BARTIROMO:  Yes.

STARR:  So it's going to take an extraordinary action by legislatures and
so forth.

And Rudy has rightly pointed to the legislatures, because therein lies the
ultimate, other than the Supreme Court of the United States, ability to
have an effect on the just concluded election.

DERSHOWITZ:  Right.

BARTIROMO:  Stay with us.

I want to ask you about Wisconsin and Georgia. These are the two that they
think they have real success.

We are going to take a break and come back with Ken Starr and Alan
Dershowitz.

Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BARTIROMO:  We are back with legal scholars Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr.

And, Ken, a moment ago, you said it is the state legislatures that you're
watching. The Trump team seems to think the most promising results here are
in Georgia and Wisconsin. Your reaction?

STARR:  I think -- yes.

I think the Georgia legislature, at least that committee, seemed to be
really troubled by the evidence, not just the video, but the other evidence
of irregularities and the like.

In Wisconsin, the use of the drop boxes, that could have been innovation,
that were unmanned, in violation of state law, huge problem in terms of
potential fraud.

BARTIROMO:  Alan, you said earlier about the Supreme Court and the
Pennsylvania state we're watching, but also that we need evidence.

Do you feel that Giuliani has been presenting evidence with all of these
videos and these witness testimonies?

DERSHOWITZ:  Yes.

BARTIROMO:  You said he's got 1,000 affidavits.

DERSHOWITZ:  Yes, these are retail evidence that have to be determined to
be true by cross-examination and witnesses.

The core constitutional question that Ken correctly pointed to is, clearly,
state legislatures have the power before the voters vote to pick the
electors. The unanswered constitutional question is, do they have the
power, state legislatures, to pick electors after the voters vote if they
conclude that the voters' count has been in some way fraudulent or wrong?

That is a constitutional question we don't not answer to. And the Supreme
Court may get to decide that question if a state legislature decides to
determine who the electors should be and changes the electors from Biden to
Trump.

That will be the key constitutional question.

BARTIROMO:  And do you think that the Supreme Court would rule that it was
unconstitutional to widen the vote, have people vote before Election Day
after 8:00 on Election Day? Would those votes be null and void, even in the
face of a pandemic?

DERSHOWITZ:  I think so.

I think that there's a 5-4 vote now in the Supreme Court. And Justice Alito
seemed to suggest that that would cancel out the votes in Pennsylvania that
were received after the close of Election Day. Whether that's right or
wrong, that's the way I predict the Supreme Court would decide the case, if
it decided to take the case.

BARTIROMO:  All right, great talking to you both, Ken Starr and Alan
Dershowitz. Please come back soon.

Thank you so much, gentlemen.

That'll do it for us.

I will be back tomorrow morning on FOX Business. I hope you will join me on
"Mornings With Maria."

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.