around the world with one for every 1 million people on earth. have great week. we'll see you next "fox news sunday."00000000000000000000000 eastern on the fox business channel. have a great sunday, everybody. on the buzz beater this sunday, donald trump in a wide-ranging interviews, unloads on the mainstream media. >> they don't want to cover me accurately. i see such dishonesty. a couple sites, like replied ko, totally dishonest. they say things that are unbelievably wrong purposely. talking about his rivals. >> marco has had tread problems with his credit card. he's not handled his financial affairs very well. and key campaign issues as well, but "new york times" insists he's wearing out his welcome with the media. is that true? just two days for the first democratic debate,

hillary clinton and bernie sanders insist they won't attack each other. >> i like hillary clinton, and i respect her. >> i know bernie, i respect his intense advocacy of his ideas. >> all that respect, will it drain the drama from the face-off? and lots of chatter about the democrat who won't be in there. is this feverish speculation out of control? plus virtie all the pundits were wroefr about kevin mccarthy and somehow started peddling trashy rumors. >> >> kevin mckaert is in a prime position to lock this up. he's the heavy father right now. >> mccarthy sending shockwaves throughout washington. this is a huge shock, a bombshell that nobody saw coming. >> this is not anything that i ever thought i was going to report to you. >> shocking.

i'm howard kurtz, and this is "mediabuzz." it's been three months since i sat down with donald trump. he's youth lasted the doom and gloom. i spoke to the republican front-runner at trump tower. >> donald trump, welcome. >> thank you. >> you say again and again most political journalists, not all, are dishonest in the way they cover you. why do you think there is? >> there's great dishonesty in the media. i -- you know, i've only been a politician now for three months, but they don't want to cover me accurately. i see such dishonesty. a couple sites like politico, it's totally dishonest. >> in fact you tweeted about politico the other way, you don't i why they don't do something about the clowns. another tweet, you called

politico pure scum. >> they are dishonest. they write things that are not true. they never even call us. very rarely call. they will say things that are unbelievably wrong, purposely. they'll estimate the size of a crowd as being a tiny fraction. everything i do, i sell out. you know the crowds as well as i do. we had 20,000 the other day in oklahoma, 35,000 people in alabama. >> you think that's dligt? >> totally. somebody said they're a liberal site -- is by the way, i know nothing about them. i hear they're losing a lot of money, whether that's true or knot -- but "the washington post" is interesting. they've been starting to capture my campaign. bob is really very professional. i find "new york times" is very mixed. i have some that are fabulous. maggie is great and a couple,

and then outliers. >> they generate decrease the bottom pasting seems to be wearing out your welcome. >> the funny thing, the reporter wanted an interview. and they've actually apologized for it. because it was a wrong story. look, the reason you're interviewing me is you're going to be higher ratings, i don't know why, maybe double and triple ratings. >> you're also the front-runner. >> well, maybe, but even maybe without that. o'reilly and gressa the same thing, hannity the same thing. they get much bigger ratings. >> you had your go-arounds with fox news, ripped on cnn occasionally. a lot of times it seems to do with polls. these and other organizations prefer polls on random phone

calls, that show you ahead. isn't that legitimate disagreement? >> well, i'll give you an example. nbc does a poll and cnn does a poll. i'm leading in a poll, but nbc is better. they say, wait a minute, you people paid for a poll that's an nbc poll -- >> but i believe it was an online survey. >> i don't know whether it was not. i was leading by a lot, and by the way, on cnn i was leading by a lot, but it wasn't quite as good. nbc used the cnn poll. i had during the interview, just out of curiosity why aren't you using the nbc? not your own poll? >> i think at the same time you have been great, o'reilly is tough as hell every time i do it, but he's great. he's fair. somebody sid thin-skinned or not, i don't mint being criticized if i sder is it, but

some are brutal on fox. >> conservative commentators may disagree idea logically -- >> well, that's different. i was surprised when don lemon asked you are you a homophobe? and some people may receive you as racist. were those fair questions? >> i was not bothered by it. i want you're more racist than i am, and i found him to be very fair. i find many of the people to be incredibly talented and generally fair. the people i don't find to be fair, the pundits, anchors tend to like me. the ones that are brutal are the pun ditsds who come from nowhere, and they have -- another i must say many of them are coming around. when i started, first, nobody thought i was going to do it, then after i did it, they said he'll never file, and then i filed. >> last year you were beaten up

on sleepy-eyed chuck todd, and you've done "meet the press" several times. does your opinion of them rise if they like you? >> no, they were fair. i didn't think he was fair to me initially. i was a novice. i've only been doing this for three moptsds, but for almost three months i'm at the top when you think of it. when they compare me to herman cain, michele bachmann, they were there for like one week. >> very, very different. >> it's been a long run. >> let's drill down to government spending. it's a long question. conservative tax foundation said your plan would cost $10 trillion. i know you dispute that. you said you don't want to touch social security, medicare, medicaid. together they're 1.7 trillion. i know you want to go after waste, fraud and abuse, but if you slash taxes and put half is

the budget is sack ro saint, likely you' likely. >> i'm the only one that can do this. >> but there is math involved. you want to build up the military. >> you know how many jobs we have lost? we're going to bring our jobs back, bring our manufacturing back. with, as an example social security, medicare, you sign up for social security, that's a lifetime -- that's your contract. you have signed that contract. it's there. if you can't do anything about it, but in my case i can. i'm going to grow the economy to a level nobody thought possible and bringal our jobs back. >> to some extent you're saying trust me. >> you look at the hard numbers, it is heart to have it ought. >> well, i think one of the reasons i'm doing well is i built a tremendous company. i started off actually with a

father who was great. you grew up in brooklyn or queens. a lot of people say my father different shi this beautiful league. >> automatically translates into -- >> i took a tiny beautiful little company started by my father and i gained tremendous notion from my father, because he was a great negotiator, and i built it into a massive company that is now worldwide. we are here on the best location in the world. without doing that good job, and as part of it, without such a great job, and you say my financial statements. but without doing their job, you wouldn't have the same credibility. i'm saying this, howard. i'm going to take jobs back from china and all these countries that have ripped this country off. >> on this question as well, you've got counter punching against marco rubio. one of the things that you've said about the senator is that

he hasn't got much money. is being a middle-class guy raising his kids as opposed to having your name on a building a disqualifications? >> no, but he's had tremendous credit card problems, he is very weak on illeap immigration, as far as he's concerned the gang of eight was a disaster, friends with chuck schumer and -- >> but he's not in your league. >> i'm not saying that. i'm saying he has not handled his financial affairs very well. i want he was a lightweight, but you have to remember this, he started with with me, and about two weeks ago he started hitting me. i didn't start with him. everybody who's started hitting me goes down in the polls. i hope that translates into running a country. you haven't spoke late le about jeb bush. is he no longer a threat? >> i went after him, because he went after me, but i went --

he's out there pitching. don't forget, when i started, i was never going to run, and jeb bush had it made, rand paul had it made, and you think bush walker who is a nice guy also. >> he's gone. >> he's gone also. they were one of the three that were going to one. >> a few weeks ago you go into it with ben carsing. lately it seems you have a mutual nonaggression pact with ben carson. >> i like him. he's a nice man. >> that being said, i don't know that he's the guy to negotiate with china, which i do all the time. the largest bank in the world i. i i got it all from china. i outdid them. so, you know, negotiating is a great art and a great talent.

>> so why are you questioning carson's ability to be president? >> i don't question anything. i tell you, i respect him and i like him a lot. he made a statement, and he withdrew it immediately. he absolutely said the press talked him into it, and we know the press. >> he said it to me. >> was that statement originally made to you? >> no, no, when i interviewed him, he said it was a mistake to take the statement and he apologized. >> honestly that shows a great man. i was all set to go wild. now i can't go wild. i'm saying i wish he had hit me. >> you sound frustrated. >> no, he's very smart. he's got to hit me. "new york times" tells me it's not aware of anyone apologizing, and it was a good and fair story. and politico's ceo said this -- our journalism and are amazing, we're making american journalism great again.

let me know what you think about the media coverage and our interview. when we come back, donald trump on iraq. just how early did he oppose the war? and with kevin mccarthy bowing out, some of the media are painting this as a republican armageddon. later in the program we'll show you what the donald said about the coverage of his is a wife milania.

donald trump, beginning with iraq. you've said many times that you oppose george w. bush's iraq war, but ed this more than a year in, when you said it was

pretty clear the occupation was a mess. >> i opposed it all the time. listen, when i opposed it, i was a business guy. >> you weren't required to make a public statement. >> i wasn't a politician, but it was lucky in a way that i found a big art in routers, 2004, headline -- trump opposes the war. i was about two years before that, i totally opposed the war. i said it would destabilize the middle east, and iran would take over. iran -- they fought for years. >> i'm not questioning your feelings on it, but there seems no public record. >> it made sense. when the world trade center was knocked down, they didn't send their families for iraq, they sent them to saudi arabia. >> but you you would agree that it's easy to be critical when it becomes a quagmire.

>> you saw my statements when everybody was for it, i'm the only one that was opposed, and i'm more militaristic, but you have to know when to use it, and you have to build a military that's strong so you don't have to use it. our military is in shambles, the general who just retired was a very good man, said we are the least prepared in the history of our country. that was a pretty big statement. it didn't get much coverage, which is amassing. he said we are the least prepared. that's a terrible statement, especially now, i think we have just about bigger problems than ever before. if i get the opportunity to serve, we will do a great job. i told somebody, you want the money? absolutely not. aside from funding my campaign, this is not a profitable situation. i want nothing when i win. >> the first went kind of

haywire when you told chuck todd if my numbers go south, i'll go back to my business, a lot of commentaries that show he's not in it for the long term. what was your reaction to that kind of commentary? >> he asked me a very good question. he said is there any time you would maybe get out? so instead of saying it like, phony if you asked rand paul who will get out, if you asked one of these guys, they would is a absolutely not. i believe in being honest. i want, chuck, if for any reason i start doing terribly, you don't call me, nobody calls me, i'm dying here and i'm not going to make it, i would get out. it ends up being a headline -- trump maybe -- my wife thought it was an amazing answer, so i gave a truthful answer. >> you know what else?

i'm going to win it and i'm not getting out. okay? that can't be any dispute. i asked a more personal question. we'll have that later. up next, carly fiorina accuses "the washington post" of being out to get her. and later the press pounces on a report that joe biden leaked a heart-wrenching story about himself. when i went on to ancestry, i just put in the name of my parents and my grandparents. and as soon as i did that, literally it was like you're getting 7, 9, 10, 15 leaves that are just popping up all over the place. yeah, it was amazing. just with a little bit of information, you can take leaps and bounds. it's an awesome experience.

joining us with some thoughts on the trump interview is molly ball, a reporter for "the atlantic." anything jump out at you about what trump said about his treatment by the media. >> it's interesting he now feels like he's a victim of the media, and a lot of critiques that the media is what has kept his campaign afloat.

he's right. i think the media correctly perceived he isn't a regular candidate and treated him as more of a celebrity, but that's a double-edged sword. you don't have to buy any tv ads, but when people start torts board and move on, you have to create a spectacle to get yourself back into the news. i think that's a bit of what he's done. >> "new york times" piece sake he's starting to move on, i'm not seeing that. he's been everywhere all week. on the other hand he seems to feel that a lot of the coverage of him is dishonest, and then you press him on the specifics, and he talks about polls, crowds, things like that. >> he doesn't seem to like it when he gets covered lie a regular candidate. when he gets tough questions, that's when he diverts the questions. there have been attempts to really cover him the way you would a regular candidate.

look at his background, look at conflicting statements he's made in the past. do what you did on iraq and really press him on, can he prove where he was where he says he wasn't. he doesn't like that. he would be rather talking poll numbers, picking fights with police, starting feuds, the people at politico don't even know what they did to make him this angry. >> i don't think he minds tough questions, but he does feel very deeply he's not getting a fair shake from the media. most politicians are used to taking knocks from the immediate . "the washington post" front-page story this week on carly fiorina, about slur 20-- r 2010 california senate race, and she didn't pay off the dead until some years later, and she took exception to that. here she is with megyn kelly.

>> is it true you did not pay off the debt? >> no, the debt has been paid off, which "the washington post" doesn't indicate. they didn't write that article hillary clinton's debt 40 times the amount carried over many years. i don't recall rachel mad do you being outraged about that. >> does carly fiorina have a legitimate beef. >> she's not telling the truth. the article does say she paid it off, she paid it off about when she was getting ready to launch her presidential campaign. the article also mentioned hillary clinton's debt. the difference is fiorina paid herself back first and left all these vendors high and dry for years and years, one of these a grieving widow. if you know anything about politics, you should pay back the grieving widow. >> but at the same time many losing campaigns have debt for years. i do think the tone was pretty

negative. it's fair game, absolutely, but at the same time i think there wasn't a front page story about hillary clinton not paying off debt. ben carson is getting hammered by the media this week, for saying on "fox & friends", if he faced a mass shooter like the situation in oregon, he would get -- i would not let stand there and let him shoot me, is the media making too much of that? >> i think it's that and the comments about nazi germany. he's got every right to have these inflammatory views, but people have a right to be upset. >> is it inflammatory for ben carson to say here's what why have done? >> there's an obvious implication that that's what he thinking the victims should have done. >> some people take it as he was

denigrating those who died. >> peopler grieving for their children and friends and parents who died in the shooting, and he's saying it could have been prevented had he just attacked the guy. that's pretty rough stuff. >> i take your point. i will say this. every time the media beat up on some controversy krall statement of ben carson, he seems to go up in the polls. it seems to becoming a pattern. is the house have a meltdown or or does it just look that way? and will that

sxwlo kevin mccarthy's decision has thrown the house into an uproar. some lib regard commentators

seem to be taking some glee. >> history was made today. >> it was stunling and amazing. who runs the republican party? who knows? who gets to decide? say it with me now -- nobody knows. joining me here in washington, betsy woodruff, the atlantic's molly ball is still with you. in los angeles, fred francis, a former nbc news senior correspondent now with the firm 15 seconds.com. that said, they're not totally wrong. it is chaotic. people were floored, even

mccarthy's biggest foes, members of the freedom caucus, so the fact that the media sees this as something crazy, wild and unprecedented makes sense, because in a little way, it sort of is. >> fred francis, great story, great political intrigue, we don't know who will run or be the speaker, but for the media to treat a beltway leadership fight as some kind of gop civil war? >> it's stunning to me that so many reporters covering this stories, hundreds of reporters. this is the best of times if you're a hill reporter, and then to miss it, to get waylaid by it? it was so startling, i saw one report grabbing someone from the gop, dana bash unfortunate cnn, coming out of a caucus, and she didn't know who the congressman

was, that's how stunned people were, so this is a stunning development, it is political civil war, and i think it's just the first battle. >> i can count on the former pentagon correspondent to go with the war metaphor. molly ball, kevin mccarthy didn't help himself on the questions on hannity, where he talked about the house benghazi committee knocking down hb's poll numbers, making it look all political. . they were picked up on red state, a much better know. >> this is absolutely poshly. is it fair to report this? >> i think it's -- first of all it's our job to tell people what

the story is, so if we think these rumors, and we do, were a part of what led to this very surprising decision to step down, then how do we report that story accurately while ignoring the elephant in the room. >> we don't know how much of a factor it was, and it makes me really uneasy it's become part of the political discourse when in fact there's no proof, there are there are no photos to show that these two people had an affair, and yet it's become journalism has run with it. >> it's not just journalism, though, this rumor was getting to republican congressmen in their e-mail boxes. they were talking about it. i agree, it makes me uncomfortable, we have to make it clear there's no proof this is the case and when the information is available to readers, because they can get the -- do we ignore it and pretend it's not there, when people know about it?

>> or do we use our megaphone to blast it out to people who maybe haven't seen it. >> i think the probably way to handle this is explains as fred said, that everyone was waylaid by this decision, including the house republican caucus. so as reports when we're approaching this story, we don't exactly now how mccarthy's decision came together. so putting this rumor as one possible motivation i think is the appropriate and responsible way to do it. i think deliberately ignoring something whether or not it's true mattered and probably had some sort of impact, at least in republicans' inboxes from a powerful republican donor, ignores that i think would have been unfair. >> a brief comment on this? >> yeah, i think when it's a question of character, with the leader of the republican party, i think you're compelled to report it, even if there is no real evidence, because everybody is reading it. in this day and age, when

everything is a public report almost instantly, you have to comment on it. >> unfortunately in my few that's also a formula for smearing people without facts, and i feel like the media here were complicit. let me move to the democratic race, and we're still going through this chatter about the vice president of the united states and whether he is going to run for the top job. take a look at what some people are saying. >> sources close to vice president biden tell me that he is likely to clearly signal his intentions be early next week whether or not he is going to be in this race. >> sources tell cbs news that biden is likely to make a decision within the next week, and is leaning toward running. >> okay, now, joe biden may announce as early as this weekend if he's running for president. >> are you a little tired of all this restlessness? he's in, he's out. some say they're not.

he'll decide be this would week. >> i would advise them to go to sleep, take a nap and we will know reading the twitch of an eyebrow and when the man himself doesn't know, it's hard to read him. we'll call that eyebrow journalism. with was the source of a maureen dowd column in august that talked about his late son beau and while he was dying, he urged his dad to run for president. >> we talked about it on the show. who else will be the source for

that? nobody else was in the room for that conversation. of course it came from joe biden. it would be total by bizarre and insane for her to report that if it hadn't come from joe biden. >> francis, the reaction, at least among biden detractors, this was cold and calculating, as opposed to he's known her for a long time and he was just grieving, which he has been doing quite publicly. >> howie, the leak of washington in the coin of the realm. shocking that the vice president would leak his own story. the back side of this story is, quite frankly, was it a calculated moving? and what has he been doing in the last two months? very calculating. history may show this was all part of a plan to slowly get into the race. the cynic in me could believe that story. i'd like not to believe it, but -- >> whether calculating or not, we don't know at this point.

historical irony, is in 1987, maureen dowd helped knocked -- by reporting the truth that he had plagiarized material from a british politician that would been leaked to dowd by something on michael dukakis' campaign that got fired as a result. donald trump on the snarky coverage of his wife melania, but first hillary and bernie say they won't attack each other. will it turn into a tepid aff r affair?

about her e-mail fiasco. a prime topic when she did a "today" show town shall with savannah guthrie. >> some might wonder how genuine is that a policy? >> it's actually both. i'm sorry i made a choice that has resulted in this kind of, you know, situation, and i've said i made a mistake.

fred francis in los angeles, just when you think the media might be stretching out this e-mail story comes the feds are seizing four computers at the state department, three foreign countries tried to hack into hillary's private e-mail. someone at the server company warned this whole thing seems shady, all fueling the narrative this is a big problem for the former first laid,in. >> it's a problem for several months, it would get worst, connell pounded by the benghazi hearings, where she'll have to come in with a flak jacket, but at the actually had a pretty good week. i want to throw a dart at my former company. that was a one-our infomercial with the exception of one or two hard questions. it was a big fat sloppy wet kiss for hillary. with that, and "saturday night live" she actually had a pretty good week considering, you know,

there's still incoming with the e-mail server situation. she didn't have a bad week. >> there were a lot of solve was questions from the audience. nobody has gotten a town hall from nbc, so the "today" show now says it will do donald trump next. there was a question -- let me quickly play this. what would have been your reaction, hillary clinton if this had involved a republican like dick chen yes and private e-mail? >> i never would have done that. look at the situation they chose to exploit, to go after me for political reasons. the death of four americans in benghazi. >> do you agree with fred today that hillary had a good week and this was a wet kiss. >> i think she definitely had a good week. it's kind of funny that savannah guthrie asked that question, because as written in the "the washington post," we know what hillary clinton would do.

hillary said they were shredding the constitution, so the fact that nbc poses a hypothetical, when it's very much not hypothetical is, you know, just another added bonus for hillary here. >> to my ear, molly, whatever good week she had, was at least neutralized if not overshadowed by the e-mail investigates, but with cnn versus the first democratic debate on tuesday, do you expect this to carry over -- ark ark says he's one of the two main moderators, but the e-mail has to come up, right? >> i think it has to. she continues to have trouble addressing is in a forthright and comprehensible way. and there continue to be they -- i do think she had a good week largely because of kevin mccarthy. >> that was a gift.

>> and she wrote about it, and this is help her make her case. i think the best-case scenario you hear from the clinton people is this constant drip drip becomes background noise to people and they shutting out the new revelation. >> hillary clinton and bernie sanders have made clear they're not going to personally attack each other. they haven't done it on the trail, it sounds like the kind of high-minded debate that americans say they want, but if that is the way it goes, could it draw an audience of 22 or 23 millions as the fox debates? >> no, it's going to be happen that. there are three others on that debate stage who will try to make the most of it, raise their profile, but it really is still about hillary and bernie sanders, and will be a love fest. if they're not going to attack each other, there will be a lot of clicking of channels in america.

>> very briefly, do you agree with that? >> i disagree on viewership. i think people disagree -- the extent to which they'll tune in. i think the ratings will be better than half. >> love fest though? >> i've interviewed bernie sanders, when you ask about hillary, he's not afraid to go there. 6 he will go after her on policy and will highlight the areas where they disagree. >> but he complains the media are always trying to get him to attack her personally. molly ball, betsy woodruff, and fred francis, thank you for joining us. after the break, "new york times" driving melania trump as a trophy spouse. i asked donald trump for his

before i left trump tower in new york i had a final question for the donald about his wife. i've written and spoken about the coverage of your wife melania. "new york times" profile says her twitter feed reflects a seemingly isolated life of beauty rituals, and if she wasn't married to you says the "times" her life might resemble any number of trophy wife. how do you feel about that? >> she's a great woman, she has a tremendous heart. she's grot outer beauty and inner beauty. she did really well before she met me. >> was the article unfair? >> i don't know. i don't know what to think. >> are you worried that as she plays a greater role she gave an interview to "people" magazine, people will deny great her.

>> "people" magazine was so respectful of her and me. she's got a tremendous warmth and a tremendous heart. and i think when it comes to women's health issueds and other things she'll be a standout. i will say somebody wrote on a tweet, i don't care if you're president, but she's got to be the first lady, which was pretty cool. maybe i shouldn't be telling you that. >> she's more popular than you are. >> she's going to be great and a great renni ivrepresentative of country. that i can tell you. >> thanks. still to come, our twitter fe feed blowing up. and cbs is pushing back hard.

politics atop the news this hour. it is decision time. we're told paul ryan of wisconsin is taking a long holiday weekend to consider one of the biggest decisions of his career. our producer on capitol hill with an inside scoop has been telling us that ryan hopped a flight friday to be home with his family and watch the packers' game this weekend. and for those watching and wondering, what is the big deal about filling the speaker of the house job, quite simply, without a speaker the lower chamber of congress is not allowed to conduct any official business. this is a live look at capitol hill right now. this is