the campaign cowboys crunching numbers as they come in. that's it for today. have a great week. and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." business network. have a great sunday, everybody. thanks. on a buzz beater this sunday, donald trump sit down with me to talk about his nasty fight with marco rubio. his use of personal insults, his past praise of hillary clinton, when he's flexible on immigration, and the harshest attack by his media's detractors. >> these are bigoted people -- >> bigoted? >> these are people who have such hatred for me. i don't know why. i don't know them. i do think it's unfair. they don't call me. i've never spoken to any of them to the best of my knowledge. you would think that if they're going to write some being me, they'd call. they'd talk to me. >> we also talked about when he'll stop showing up for televised debates. >> i think the debates are out of control. i think it's ridiculous.

i think the debates are absolutely -- how many times can you ask the same question? >> are trump's victories being overshadowed by the violence and clashes at his rallies which forced him to cancel a major chicago event? and what about a reporter's disputed charge that a top aide booed her, questioned by her bosses? with two days until the florida primary, have the media tried to push marco rubio out of the race? hillary clinton hits a pothole as bernie sanders beats her in michigan and she gets tougher questions in debates. >> if you get indicted, would you -- >> oh, goodness. that is not going to happen. i'm not even answering that question. >> is the press still portraying bernie as a hopeless long shot? plus, a jury awards erin andrews a huge sum over the nude hotel video did. she deserve $55 million? i'm howard kurtz, and this is "media buzz."

i sat down with donald trump the other day at his estate in palm beach. his a long list of media and political questions. we started when the subject that's -- with the subject that's started chatter and criticism, his tone. >> donald trump, welcome. >> thank you. >> after you won michigan and mississippi, you said, "i can be more presidential than anyone, except abe lincoln." but you're constantly under attack. that is true. i hear people say, can't he tone down the insults a little and start acting more presidential? >> problem is, i started off with 17 -- we had 17 people. all smart, all tough, you know, governors, senators -- >> you've got three opponents. >> now i'm down to three, all right. i was being attacked from every angle imaginable. i mean, it was really amazing. and his to be tough and had to be sharp and had to be nasty in some cases because they were nasty. now we're down to a few, and you know, i want to finish the game.

and look, i went to the best school, i was a good student. i'm a smart person. i can be the most politically correct person that you have ever interviewed. and i do joke. i can be the than honest abe, he'd be tough. he's the ultimate, right? but i would say this, i can be very presidential. but it hasn't been -- this is a highly competitive thing with all these people. >> you have gotten into it with marco rubio. a lot of personal attacks. you say little marco, as you call him, is corrupt, dishonest. you talk about him cheating on republican party credit cards. you were asked on "morning joe," would you consider him as vp? you said sure, he's got talent. >> i didn't say. that i said he's got talent. he's got talent, but he hurt himself badly when he tried to be don rickles, he shouldn't have done that. it didn't work for him. he was doing nicely. he wasu)%u(s)r'g policy, he cou be sharp on occasion.

hurt by chris christie. >> calling him corrupt, are you now thinking, okay, i may need to mend fences with this guy if i'm going to -- if i win -- >> i don't want to really discuss it. honestly -- >> yeah. >> it reason i don't is because we'll see what happens. but i will say this -- he was better off before he attacked. and i don't do the attacking. i mean, i'm a counterpuncher. i don't do the attacking. you look at every one -- you say they started it. >> they started it. and then they go packing. and there's something awfully nice about that. wouldn't it be nice to have that working for our country? >> in the detroit debate when talked about the size of your hands -- >> i didn't talk about it. marco talked about it. >> i was going to say, he started it, you were responding, it was a joke. i didn't have any great problem with it. it led to a tsunami of coverage including the front-page headline in "the new york times," the descent into donald trump's past. how does that help you? >> look, he made a statement that i had small hands. he made it up. he's a politician. politicians lie. i don't have small hands. have good hands -- >> let the record show.

>> good hands -- >> did milania think that was a good place to go? >> he didn't, but i did. i was shaking hands two days later, people were saying, you have large hands. they were shocked. the world thought, why should i -- why shouldn't i say it? he lied. and i called him out. now, should i have done it? yes, i should have done it. now at least they know it was ai became nastier. it turned out to be a bad thing for him. i believe when you get hit, you hit back. >> let's talk about flexibility. word leaked of a meeting you had with "the new york times" editorial board about immigration. you say it was off the record. i take off the record seriously. i don't want to ask but that. i want to ask about the larger issue. some of your opponents think that when you make these sweeping declarations and then you talk about flexibility, maybe you are not going to carry out all the things you say you would do. >> flexibility is very important. you can't say this is the way it is -- >> to be stuck in cement.

>> i will not talk to you. i will not -- you know, an example, so the wall's going to be 40 feet, it's 38. flexibility is important. sometimes you have to give something to the other side. may be meaningless, but you call it a bone, and they take it. it's in the art of the deal. look, santa cruz a very inflexible person, i think. who knows some who knows if he is or not? when he stands and filibusters two days on the senate floor, what did he get out of that? nothing except the wasted two days. ask for more than you want, come back to you what want, make the great deal -- >> negotiating. >>ív it's called negotiating. >> in the fox debate you said you were changing and softening your positions on more visas for highly skilled immigrants. next day, you were backing off. critics say, where does he stand? >> what i was talking about and referred to -- i think it's important -- we educate people in this country. and from other countries, okay. when we like that or not, they

pay, et cetera, et cetera. but we educate a lot of people, smart people. we need those people in the country. they cannot come to the country. they go back to india and set up companies and make a fortune and employ lot of people and all of that. many people want to stay in this country and want to do that. i think somebody that goes through years of college in this country, we shouldn't kick them out the day they graduate. which we do. >> you say you're a common sense conservative. >> yes. >> who's the position that some on the right don't like is that you say don't touch social security and medicare. people paid into it, they're entitled to get the benefits. those, as you know, two monster entitlement programs that are along with medicaid driving thì% federal debt, 45% of budget when you include medicaid. do you say, i wouldn't even look at raising the retirement age? no changes what so ever? >> i don't want to change -- i tell you what, i don't want to change. by the way, the democrats aren't going to change. i watched them the other night, they're talking about increasing it. >> right. >> i'm saying -- >> the democratic position -- >> let it be their position.

>> why should -- >> then you wonder -- >> why should you and your billionaire friends be visible -- >> i would like a system where people -- i would give it up in two second. so would a lot of people that i know. somebody said they don't want to do. that i would give it up in two seconds, make it a vaoluntary basis. >> why not set an income above wage -- >> let me tell you this, people, there are people that it doesn't come into, you know, they don't know they have it. there are other people, they need it so desperately. i don't want to change it, and i don't want to change it for a number of reasons. someone because they've committed, they've paid in for years. we can make so much money in this country if we stop the waste, fraud, and abuse. if we negotiate it, if we had other people helping us -- >> speaking of your detractors on the right, national review, has come out4njju(q#ully agains you, your press conference the other night, you said these are idiots who don't have any common sense -- >> i didn't use the word idiot -- >> i thought i heard it -- >> whatever. you could use that. it would be acceptable. >> what about people fighting

for their conservative principles in which -- >> they shouldn't be attacking me. we have something unique. millions of people are going to the polls right now, and they're going and voting for donald trump. millions and millions. more than has ever happened for the republican party. they're going -- maybe in some cases, they'll vote against me. regardless. but more than have ever gone to the polls. the democrats are down 30%, 35%. >> right. >> the republicans are up -- >> you're ruining the republican party, they say, you say you're expanding it. >> i'm expanding it with democrats, independents, people who never voted before. so many people are saying, mr. trump, i've never voted before. you're the first one i'm voting. millions of people. they should embrace me, and i should embrace them. i will embrace them at the right time. what the republican -- they call what the republican -- they call elite than they -- or they call them the establishment. say the establishment. the establishment should embrace what we're doing.

>> i know you once gave money to hillary clinton and you went to -- it was your job to get into flicks the city. isn't it harsh to say things like this about someone you were friendly with? >> not so friendly. there was a point where as a businessman, one of the magazines said, donald trump was a world-class businessman. it's true. look at the company i built. i filed all my -- >> we're talking hillary. >> as a world-class businessman, i have to get along with secretaries of state, senators, this and that. i would support people and get along. i never knew i was going to be running for office. no, it doesn't bother me. like at job performance and what's happening with syria, you look at what's happening with so many different -- look at libya, what a disaster. look at benghazi, what a )p r(t% disaster. >> in 2012, secretary of state, you told fox she was a terrific woman, did a good job at the state department. that was b.s.? >> i'm a businessman. why should i say -- i don't say b.s., i don't say anything.

i say, why would i say bad? i have to go to the state department to get approval on some project that i'm building in some foreign country, they have to give me a letter of recommendation. why would i say that? >> it makes you sound like a politician if you change your view of hillary clinton. >> i'm not a politician. why would i say bad things about people when i never knew i was going to be doing this. i never knew -- i got fed up when i looked at the incompetence in government. when i looked at the incompetence of our country. >> more of thesçfñ trump interv later with a can dead discussion about his view of the media. when we come back, much of the media asking when donald trump could be encouraging violence at his rallies after the cancelation in chicago. is that fair?

the issue of violence at the donald trump rally surfaced at jake tapper the other night. at the rally friday, cable news went wall to wall as protesters clashed with supporters prompting trump to cancel the event and call in to the anchors covering it. the tone was strict strikingly different on different channels. >> this is not a demonstration against war or economic conditions. this is a protest as i continued against your free speech. they're using free speech. they have a right to peaceful protest to try to shut you down from your free speech. >> no. i think this is ara demonstrati against economic conditions on both sides. >> i'm close to the contention here that he wants, he wanted a conflagration this big because it's a classic strongman political technique. >> joining us to talk about the campaign coverage, senior political correspondent for "usa today." a republican pollster and contributor to "the washington examiner." and columnist for "the daily

beast." hnddi, i was watching the saturation coverage friday night. as you saw, the tone, the focus seemed to be somewhat different on fox and msnbc. what's your take? >> one day. that was a great montage. somebody will do a big expose showing a lot of montages of how the media has really helped to drive people into their ideological corners in this country. that was a great example. it's absurd to not actinot say donald trump has played -- saying i'll punch that guy, i'll pay your legal fees, promulgating racial stereotypes by picking out a black man and saying "go get a job. " it's malpractice not to acknowledge in the press that this has gone over the line. it goes from peaceful protesters standing with signs to people rushing the stage, who are making 9-year-olds cry on their way outside the event, and pushing women up against steel cagelcñ >> the "new york times" headline this morning, "donald trump's heated words were destined to stir violence, opponents say."

look, trump's rhetoric is obviously fair game. but what about the thugs who show up, who organize and punch people or try to shut down rallies? >> this is what's inexplicable to me about the strategy of trying 4%ñgeteralies that go over the line. the art of the deal. donald trump says the media loves conflict. this has been part of trump's press strategy for decades. so from his perspective, when people turn on the news l0>> it does.

and i think reasonably so. maddow, you had the maddow clip the other night. she had on a reporter from chicago who said an interesting thing. she said even holding the event at university of illinois, chicago, in the first place is probably provocative. she said, i've covered tons of events, he or she, as a chicago reporter, i've covered tons of events in the city. i've never seen a republican hold an event there. it's usually -- >> get out and go to places republicans don't normally go. if they only speak at big churches or country clubs, they're filling a narrative. >> you don't see this at cruz events or bernie events. you don't see the rhetoric that set it up, teed it off, that we've been expecting something like this to happen. >> heidi, when we have hours and hours of live coverage on all the cable newschannels, at one point trump on the with greta van test earn said, you keep playing the same footage of people punching each other over and over, and the other channels, too, you pick the most violent episodes. is there a point that the media

might be feeding this a little bit? >> yeah, they're going to play the best footage of the day. by virtue of the 24-hour news cycle, not all of the viewers will see /it. but yeah, does that -- for people sitting there glued to the tv, start to feed some of that anger? absolutely. >> let me turn to the controversy involving bright bart reporter michelle fields, who alleged that trump's campaign manager, looking at footage before the incident, grabbed her forcefully. she later showed bruiseses on her arm, an effort to pull away from asking a question, what she alleges at least. he says this never happened. he tweeted that she's delusional, an attention seeker. here's what michelle fields told megyn kelly the other night? >> it feels awful. this has to be aside from my father's death the worst experience i've gone through. the hate that i have received, the e-mail messages -- >> michelle field is a former fox contributor. obviously was hurt. but initially she said she never

saw mñcohim, so how do we cover this? >> there was audio released of him talking with a "washington post" reporter in the ten-second after math where they're discussing what happened and who did it. what's clear is the trump campaign has realized if their strategy is to deny, deny, deny, even if there's evidence, they'll get a pass for it. the interview that but with donald trump earlier in the show, you came to him with quotes of things that he had said, he was like, no, i didn't say that. his campaign knows that if he just simply denies, denies, denies, and the strategy is deployed in the michelle fields situation, they can sometimes get away with it. >> on the other hand, michael breitbart, the pro-trump site, said the "washington post" reporter was the only apparent eyewitness appeared to confuse him with someone else. the video of c-span came out,

breitbart modified it. so even her own bosses aren't taking her side. >> i've never heard i don't think in the 25 years i've been doing this, i don't think i ever heard a news organization not stand by its reporter in a situation like this.ov it is an unbelievable thing to me. you know, it makes them not a news organization. makes them a trump organization. at least in this room with respect to the incident. it's unbelievable. >> let me get a we have more to say about this, of course. ahead, donald trump in that interview says why libel laws in his views should be loosened to make it easier for people like him to sue media outlets. ahead, is a person trying to shove marco rubio out of the race?

there's been a media drum beat it when marco rubio should quit the race before tuesday's florida primary, including one hotly contested report on cnn.

>> there is a division in his campaign, we're told, and very senior advisers are suggesting to him that he's not going do well in florida, and that he should get out sooner. >> wolf, jamie's report was utter nonsense. she did not contact the campaign prior to coming on the show last hour, reporting that. it is 100%, absolutely false. i think@ejz is doing a disservice to voters by airing that sort of reporting without checking with the campaign. >> that was quite a moment. chris, how damaging is it to senator rubio when every story asks is he getting out, and every interview includes versions of the question? >> i'm sure has campaign would prefer it not to be the case. and i understand why the media covers it this way. it's much more exciting to sort of have underdogs and winners and losers than to say, well, here's what the delegate picture stands, and we had a couple of contests this past week. and a few people racked up delegates here and there. that's not as exciting. that's why we've had a number of channels call -- it's going to be super tuesday number two, super tuesday number three, all the hyped excitement. means you need an underdog, it

means you need somebody who's fading. rubio's unfortunately that guy for this week. >> i understand why we report on somebody who has x number of delegates, they probably don't have a path to the nomination. does seem like there becomes this almost nudge to like why are you still in the race and so how that our role. you're right.lñ3 he has been ghuj nudged in -- been nudged in the past week. i think rubio overall got a nice ride for a longer time than he deserved to have. he finished third in iowa. he got up and gave a speech like he won. the press basically played along with that spin. then his people, remember, had been saying the three, two, one strategy. third in iowa, second in new hampshire, and win south carolina. he got drilled in south carolina. nobody said when are you getting out. the people should have been saying it then maybe. >> okay. >> yes, in the last week, it's been rough. but he got a nice ride. >> in the story, rubio's going, i was racing across town in washington to dispute it. cnn stood by the story, said it relied on multiple unnamed advisers.

okay. but the network never called the rubio campaign for comment before airing that, which, of course, started copycat stories s. that a problem? >> it is. those advisers --#< the use of anonymous snoursz washington is such a huge -- sources in washington is such a huge issue. there's variance among news organizations in terms of what's acceptable. in this case, there was one source, anonymous quoted, and we didn't know if it was a campaign official. but the bigger problem and the grievance that the rubio campaign has is they were never contacted. that is just not acceptable. you need to contact someone when they're the subject of your story to provide a response. >> okay. in the half minute we have left, to go back to the trump rallies, is there too much media focus on the things that trump says at the rallies, you know, get him out of here, and wish i could punch that guy in the face, and not enough on the people who go there deliberately to try to shut down a rally which is suppressing free speech? >> it is. but you know, trump's the story. trump's the guy that really started all this and made all this happen. and it's the energy around him

and the way he talks that -- that got this ball rolling. >> panel, stick around. let me get a break. ahead on "media ñfbuzz," jorge ramos demands pledges about deportation at the hillary-bernie debate. first, it was a hardship to be sure when i went down to florida. droump how he feels when the commentators trash him.

more from my palm beachu÷ s down with donald trump and the heavy schedule of debates. if you do well in this tuesday's primary, and you have a bigger lead than you have now, and there will by then have been 12 debates, will you be to the point where you say we don't need any more debates? >> i think the debates are out of control, ridiculous. i think the debates are absolutely -- how many times can you ask the same question?

and it's ridiculous. >> are you prepared -- >> they're good. they get great ratings. do you know why they get great ratings? you think it's because of marco rubio? >> i think i know -- >> because of senator cruz? i don't think so. look, they're making a fortune. the networks, fox, cnn, and all of them, they're making an> absolute fortune. you know, these debates used to be throw-aways, you know that. they used to be -- >> people watched, nothing like now. >> they used to be television dead land, they called it. they were forced to -- >> are you considering it -- >> i'll-z do what i have i will tell you, i think we've had enough debates. i like the debates. i've enjoyed the debates and think i've been at it. i've won every poll about the debates. yeah, i think we've had enough debates. >> you've talked about being unhappy with "the new york times" and "washington post" reporting on you. you say we should open the libel laws to make it easier. >> absolutely. >> let's go down this. you can sue now, but you would have to prove as a public figure

that journalists published something they knew was false or acted with reckless disregard for when it was false or not. how would you change that? >> "the new york times" and the "washington post," "the new york times" has written stories about me that are so false and i think they know they're false. they're so false and so defamato defamatory, the problem is the libel laws are virtually nonexistent. i could say are you x, x public figure, and it's unfair. if somebody writes falsely about a person, you should be able to sell and -- >> you can get it tomorrow -- >> you can't win. you can sue, but the laws arov set up so you can't win. they're set up that way for the papers. now, if i get in, i'm going to make the laws fair. if somebody writes a terrible, defamato defamatory, knowingly, story about me, horrible story about me and knowing the facts and putting in the wrong facts, i should be able to sue and should be able to get damages.

i'll have the laws changed. when i say that, i make it harder on myself because people will say, oh, let's go after him even more. they can't do any more. the laws are very unfair. and actually in a certain way it makes the newspapers and makes the media dishonest the way they are now. >> let me read one of your many tweets about the media. this one said, i am watching two clown announcers on fox news as they try to build up failed presidential candidate little marco. fox news is in the bag. my first question is, is there any possibility that you watched too much cable news and get -- >> no, i think fox is prone toward marco rubio. it's an amazing thing. i have great respect for roger ailes. i like roger ailes. i think i get treated poorly on fox. i think that megend in megan's people treat me poorly. she has walt and people -- no matter -- i could be 100% perfect on something and they'd

say wrong. i think -- >> you are reacting to the pundits -- >> i think it's false stuff. i think krauthammer's absolutely a disgrace when it comes to me. remember, he was a war hawk, going to iraq. he was wrong on so many subjects. i think he is -- steven hayes treats me terribly. i wouldn't -- i don't know steven hayes. >> do you disagree -- >> let me, george will, terrible. no, i think fox treats me terrible. i will say cnn treats me much bett%y$p' fox does. >> okay. i wrote a column the other day about the way in which some of the columnists and commentators are really ratcheting up the language against you. and i want to read you very harsh stuff to get your response. ruth marcus, "washington post," "trump is nixon with all the end in low maniacal willingness to abuse power." another, "is donald trump daimd david duke in a better suit?" "the new york times," "can he think about indiana besides

himself?" and another, "is there anything scarier than donald trump in a tense crisis with his sweaty finger on the ítrigger?" >> these are bigoted people. i've read -- >> bigoted? >> up against -- these are people that have such hatred for me, i don't know why. i don't know them. i see them. they don't know me at all, talking about my sweaty hands? i don't have sweaty hands. but -- and that's what i mean. you have to -- people should be held accountable. ruth marcus, i mean, i don't know who she is, treats me horribly. she doesn't know me. she knows nothing about me. brooks, i read an article the other day, was just -- the hatred. this isn't -- this is nothing to this is nothing to do with governing. this has to do with a personal hatred that is unbelievable. now maybe -- >> is there a level on which these media attacks help you? >> i don't think they help me. a lot of people do. a lot of people said, oh, that's the greatest thing that could happen. i said, no, i don't think it's

great. they may have been right because my -- my victories have been so incredible. but the numbers are biggerx?$an i thought. no, i don't think it. does people ask me that question. when guys like brooks and-eoph % marcus, ruth marcus, and others attack, cristophe, i just find it -- i don't know if it's good or bad. i think to me it's bad, i don't like it. i will tell you, i think it's unfair. i do think it's unfair. you don't call me, i've never spoken to any of them. you would funding they're going to write some being me, they'd call, talk to me. maureen dowd knows me a little bit and writes. and i really respect her. she's an amazing writer. >> she's critical of you, too, at times. >> she's critical. but recently she wrote a piece that was an amazing piece. not a puff piece. there were negative things in there. she sort of got me. these people don't know me. and they write so -- they write very personal -- i say some being somebody personally, i end one a front-page story. yet, they can say things

personally, they're the worst things you can say. no, i think it's unfair. i think they're very unfair as writers, journalist, and critics. >> thank you very much for sitting down with us in palm beach. >> thank you very much. coming up, hillary clinton gets asked about a possible indictment and jorge ramos pushes the democratic party to discuss deportation.

♪ these little guys? they represent blood cells. and if you have afib - an irregular heartbeat that may put you at five times greater risk of stroke - they can pool together in the heart, forming a clot that can break free, and travel upstream to the brain where it can block blood flow and cause a stroke. but if you have afib that's not caused by a heart valve problem, pradaxa can help stop clots from forming. pradaxa was even proven superior to warfarin at reducing the risk of stroke, in a clinical trial - without the need for regular blood tests.

and, in the rare event of an emergency, pradaxa is the only oral blood thinner other than warfarin with a specific reversal treatment to help your body clot normally again. pradaxa is not for people who have had a heart valve replacement. don't stop taking pradaxa without talking to your doctor. stopping increases your risk of stroke or blood clots. ask your doctor if you need to stop pradaxa before any planned medical or dental procedure. pradaxa can cause serious, and sometimes, fatal bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding. and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have kidney problems, stomach ulcers, a bleeding condition, or take certain medicines. side effects with pradaxa can include indigestion, stomach pain, upset or burning. don't just go with the flow. go with pradaxa, the only blood thinner that lowers your risk of stroke better than warfarin and has a specific reversal treatment. talk to your doctor about pradaxa today.

the headlines turn negative for hillary clinton this week as bernie sanders shocked the pundits and everyone else by baiting her in -- wasn't florida, why would i say florida? beating her in michigan. and at a univision debate, anchor jorge ramos inexistcivis and bernie sanders pledge on immigrants. >> if you want to be the next leader and chief, can you promise don't that you won't deport children and you won't deport immigrants who don't have a criminal record? again, yes or no? can you promise tonight that you won't deport children in children who are already here? >> i would not deport children. i would not deport children. i do not want to deport family members either, jorge. >> we're back with the panel. what do you think of the way jorge ramos pressed the candidates essentially to agree continue to deport anybody except nose with criminal records? is that the role of a journalist or advocate? >> we found a journalist crossing from a journalist trying to get an answer to his

question to someone: advocating to try and get a commitment from the candidate. you know, he was so caught up in that fervor, he actually missed the fact that she parsed her answer quite well. even though in the end, she said i will not deport children, almost bludgeoned into that, she captured a clear distinction between children coming to the border and those already here. >> sanders was in the same position. never did he mention in the debate, the univision debate, that a lot of people are breaking the law by coming here, or there are people, lots of people in this country who are opposed to illegal immigration.÷ so was this an attempt to pander to the latino audience? >> certainly, i mean, we're in the middle of a democratic primary. you want to speak to democratic primary voters. when you look at exit poll after exit poll, hillary clinton does particularly well among democratic voters who are not white. i think it is importance for me to make sure she's got her base shored up. bernie sanders continues to pose a threat to her in race after race after race. i still think ultimately she will be the nominee. she certainly feels that heat coming from her left. >> jorge ramos, who had that

confrontation with trump where he got thrown out, came back, he did ask hillary clinton a tough question about her e-mail. was it fair to say will you drop out if you're detroit indicted? >> yeah, it's fair. there's an investigation, we don't know that it's an investigation of her, we don't know what the investigation is of. that's not an unfair question. that's something people are talking about. >> i could he gets points for that -- i think he gets points for that. nobody thought bernie sanders would beat hillary in michigan, such a big state. the polls were off by 20 points. this is when you exceed expectations or fail expectations when you talk about marco rubio getting a pass. in those cases, was hepw exceedg expectations, that counts as a win. in this case, on the democratic side, we don't know what happened. is it that they got their sample

wrong, did the wait wrong? is it that democratic voters are harder to poll because they're less likely to have land lines? that could be a piece of it. lots of reasons. >> michael, you wrote a column, "eating crow," saying there was no way bernie sanders would win michigan. >> i did. i was wrong. i got it wrong. there's no evidence he can win a diverse state. i was wrong, i said i was wrong. >> i didn't think so either. to come back to the trump interview, you heard him at the end talking about what he sees as personal hatred by personal commentators,c]ñ they don't kno me. the right and the left. what do you make of that? >> you have to dissect the mead that industry. no doubt the columnists on either side of the ideological spectrum, there is a lot of anti-trump. they don't like him, they write negative columns. that is completely overwashed and balanced out by the fact that he gets so much network coverage. i look tedeg numbers. 69 interviews in the past 69 days, howie. and you know, we -- there's a perfect example this week. we had an epic upset in

michigan. none of the networks could find it within themselves to cut away from what essentially was a trump infomercial, extended 45-minute news conference where he's promoting his steaks. and here's hillary clinton and these candidates -- >> okay. briefly, when he does interviews, he's taking questions from journalists. not the same as covering his rallies. i like when candidates take questions from journalists. i think that's not necessarily a free pass. your thoughts? >> yeah. to the extent that he's a candidate that will be accessible, it will lead to more coverage. there are other candidates who want to be more closed off. but in the case of his rally, when he was hawking his steaks, that's not an interview. >> i won't put down as trump steaks customers. thank you very much for joining us this sunday. after the break, how facebook and twitter played key roles in channeling the animosity that led to the disruption of donald trump's chicago rally. later, why that erin andrews nude video never goes away.

donald trump chicago rally turned dangerous friday night, social media played a key role in organizing and channeling the anger of that moment. joining us is shana glenzer. what role did facebook play? >> facebook has become a powerful tool for organizing campaigns and events and it's easy to use and has the potential to go viral quickly. trump rally protest page was created and that was the organizing force behind the events that happened friday andand created just a week prior. >> about 11,000 people

responded. >> they came out in force friday which we saw covered broadly. >> twitter just exploded friday night with all kinds of anger on both sides. we've been looking at tweets. >> i saw some tweets on friday, one from rachel, so protesters are called dangerous but the racist xenophobic man they're protesting against isn't? isaac on the other side said it's sad when a bunch of liberals protest our front-runner because they know theirs is going to prison. >> eric, the neofascist left calls trump a racist and then sends organized thugs to stop political speech. jorge, the media is responsible for this crap, they've been promoting the fascist clown for too long. what do you make of this? >> there is a lot of hatred that's being spatted about on twitter and we saw it organized friday night around these protests and a lot of words like thugs. do i like it? no. does it make me angry at times,

yes, but i think -- i've seen how important twitter is to many americans to allow them to voice opinions if they don't feel they can voice on the other platform. >> i love twitter. it's democracy in action, no longer need a printing press to be heard, it's great. it's also serving as an echo chamber for anger and accusations and charges of racism and i find that kind of depressing. >> i don't disagree with you but i do think that, as the fact that there is a place where people can become a part of a conversation, can share their views, whether they're happy about a candidate or angry about something they can share that with others. >> even if they're shouting really loud. >> even if they're shouting loudly they can share it and it has a place and makes them feel part of a conversation. >> do you think there's a constructive side to this because everybody knows not just in the context of donald trump on the presidential campaign,

that it can be an ugly and beautiful neighborhood. is it a safety valve for people who have strong emotions, pro or against, and the thugs as some call them rather than venting it in some socially acceptable way? >> we can probably be grateful to twitter that we are not having to hear many things in person when we're out and about, at a bar. people are sharing it on twitter instead. >> is there an anonymous aspect this, a lot of people use screen names so they can say whatever they want. >> it's a lot more anonymous. facebook friends and family members are there so there's anonymity on twitter. erin andrews relived a horrifying ordeal during the trial but did that justify a $55 million jury verdict?

it was during our program last sunday we got the tragic news. we have some sad news to report, nancy reagan has died. the former first lady was 94 years old. tom brokaw and diane sawyer delivered tributes at nancy reagan's funeral friday with other prominent media members there to pay their respects. >> make no mistake, she would bop journalists, and i mean bop any journalist in this room, and we know this, if she didn't like a report you had done. >> nancy reagan got some rough coverage but in the end she won respect of journalists and in some cases their friendship. erin andrews fired suit to marriott over a creep adjacent hotel room who recorded her undressing. testimony was heartwrenching.

>> that i was naked all over the internet and i didn't know what it was and my dad was like, he thought i had been in a car accident. he's like why are you screaming? i'm just like dad, i'm naked all over the internet and i don't know what it is and i don't know where i am. >> and then there was all the media coverage. >> i saw it in "the new york post" the scandal, fox news and cbs, everybody put up that i was doing it for publicity, and attention, and that ripped me apart. >> now you might think is ancient history but not to andrews. >> this happens every day of my life, either i get a tweet or somebody makes a comment in the paper or somebody sends me a still of the video to my twitter and i'm right back to this. i feel so embarrassed and i'm so ashamed. >> marriott's defense the nude video didn't hurt her career,

implying it helped her. $55 million sounds wildly excessive. she'll never see half of it, it's supposed to come from our stalker but it sent an unmistakable message about invasion of privacy even if you're a celebrity. shana? >> i was infuriating and scary at times, having the guts to pursue this in court erin andrews' naked video was a top google search last week so this will live on forever on the web. >> this happened seven years ago it surfaced and she brought it back in the news. when she filed the suit she knew everybody would be searching for it again. >> they did, last week top google search. >> so things don't go away. >> no, that will live on forever like she said every day, and still shots sent through twitter. horrible. >> shana glennzer, thank you very much. that's it for "media buzz." we hope you like our facebook page.

stick to the media, med mediabuzz@foxnews.com. we're back here next sunday as always, 11:00 and 5:00 eastern. we'll see you then with the latest buzz.