and that's it for today. have a great week. we'll see you next on "fox news sunday." donald trump accuses "the new york times" of publishing fiction. judges and the second amendment. the latest firestorm from what he calls the dishonest press. >> donald trump spoke off the cuff and took his campaign off the ralils again. >> did donald trump cross the line? >> we will start at home with donald trump and a controversial new issue. >> let me say this to my republican party, you are letting donald trump destroy the party and you've done it from the beginning. >> he is operating in an

environment now where mrs. clinton and her campaign, the left of the media, is going to twist every single thing he says. he's got to understand you've got to be more precise with his language. >> imagine if she had said or somebody had said that about donald trump. vicariously, somebody would assassinate him. we would all be going crazy. >> you don't say stuff like that that can be seen otherwise. it's not the press, it's not the democrats, this is a self-inflicted wound. >> there can be no other interpretation. even reporters have told me, give me a break, but they're dishonest people. >> but should trump now be accusing the times of inventing unnamed sources and reporting that his campaign is flailing? or are the mainstream media just piling on? "new york times" media columnist admits it's unbalanced. that's understandable. many view him as potentially dangerous. really? influence peddling and favor seeking between hillary clinton and the state department. is that story being drowned out by the uproar of trump.

plus, nbc and other media outlets under fire for belittling or sexist coverage of female athletes at the olympics. we'll have a scorecard. i'm alan kurtz and this is "media buzz." donald trump's campaign was already awash in negative media coverage when the spotlight suddenly shifted from a major economic speech to republicans bailing on his campaign. >> bottom line, do you think he was -- it would be dangerous if he was president? >> donald trump in my judgment would make a perilous world even more dangerous. >> you just called donald trump a clear and present danger. >> well, if he governs in any way close to the language that he has used in the campaign, i fear for our future. >> that was wiped off the media air when trump went to a north

carolina rally and made this attack. >> hillary wants to abolish -- essentially abolish the second amendment. by the way, if she gets to pick -- if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. although the second amendment people, maybe there is, i don't know, but -- but i'll tell you what, that will be a horrible day. >> trump riled up the press again by calling clinton a founder of isis and then last night he said this. >> "the new york times," okay, i love 'em and they wrote a story today, anonymous sources have said -- three anonymous sources, anonymous this, anonymous that. they don't use names. i don't really think they have any names, okay? >> joining us now to analyze the campaign coverage, heidi

presbella, senior political correspondent from "usa today", lisa booth, a contributor to the washington examiner and kiers stin powers and a columnist for the "usa today." "the new york times" story that trump was calling fiction, quoted a lot of anonymous source, says he remains a crudely effective political showman but aides may think he's beyond coaching and not a plausible president. your response? >> obviously a story that was not reported overnight and it wasn't just four anonymous sources over however long they've been reporting it. this is an evolution that we've all been watching in terms of trump's advisers trying to get him to do things that maybe he didn't do during the primary campaign. that said, it comes in the midst of what is undoubtedly a media pile on. trump took this one story and is reacting to it in a very emotional way in going after "the new york times," but the truth of the matter is, howie, to report -- and you know this,

to report a story like this you have to use anonymous sources. people who are in the campaign and worried about the direction of the campaign are not going to tell you that on the record. so that's the only way a story like this can be reported. that's why i think deeper in the body of the story the times did mention that they had talked to 20 people. >> in fairness to the times, there were three trump advisors like rude did i giuliani recorded on the record as well as the campaign communications director, but trump is basically saying this is jason blaire territory, making stuff up, as opposed to saying the story isn't true. what's your take? >> look, i think "the new york times," as has most of the media, essentially discredited themselves in this election cycle. clearly there's been bias throughout a large period of time with newspapers and other publications, but i think we've seen they've been utterly transparent in their bias this election cycle. i think this is the reason why 20% of americans have confidence in newspapers. they're saying that people that are close to the campaign or have some sort of communication with the campaign. that could be anyone.

who are these unnamed sources? i think "the new york times" has already discredited themselves this election cycle. they ran a story about women and donald trump and one of the interviewees stepped forth and said that her words were taken out of context, that it was not true, that she was misled by the reporter himself. you look at the fact that the "new york times" ran an almost 1300 page article on his second amendment comments but did nothing about his terrorist father attending hillary clinton's. they've shown their bias this election cycle. >> trump campaign insider told me, kiersten, powers, this is a case of people at least close to trump if not within the campaign distancing themselves from what they fear will be a loss in november. the fact that these leaks are taking place, we don't know who the sources are, what does that tell you about the relationship between the campaign and the media? >> well, i mean, obviously people in the campaign are panicking a little bit. we know this from other reporting, but just for this idea about "the new york times"

being so biased, look, they're not a perfect newspaper, but i wouldn't put his second amendment comments on the same level as some person showing up at hillary clinton rally with -- somebody who she basically said she didn't want his support. it's not really the same thing. >> we'll have more on that coming up. >> i've known maggie haberman for 15 years. i know her well. she's a first-rate reporter. the idea that somehow she's making up sources here is beyond preposterous and also "the new york times" i know has a very rigorous process. they don't get to just make up sources. they don't get to just say somebody said something. that's just not the way it works there. >> it could be people on the lower tier who have no involvement who haven't sat in a room with donald trump. >> a good reporter isn't going to just take an intern. >> maybe "the new york times" discredited themselves. >> i think that's character assassination against a great reporter. >> the story said four sources

had detailed knowledge of their meetings which were pretty closely held. trump told me he might yank the credentials of "the new york times." what consumed a lot of media oxygen this week obviously were the second amendment comments. you've all seen and heard it. here's an interview that trump did with hugh hewitt, in which hewitt pressed him on the nature of those comments. take a look. >> last night you said the president was the founder of isis. i know what you meant, that he created the vacuum, he lost the peace. >> no, i meant he's the founder of isis. i do. he was the most valuable player. i give him the most valuable player award. i give her, too, by the way, hillary clinton. >> but he's not sympathetic to him. >> i don't care, he's the founder. >> does anyone believe that donald trump is saying barack obama and hillary clinton

founded isis. cnn put up a banner that called trump a liar saying he isn't, meaning obama, isn't the founder of isis. what do you make of this? >> this is part of a broader change that we've had to make in this campaign cycle about covering donald trump, which is that a lot of the statements that he says that are not sarcasm because he later says this is sarcasm are incorrect. news organizations have taken to live fact checking. in this case he later came back and said, well, that was sarcastic, but he said it on so many occasions that we as the media have to report that what he's saying is literal when he tells us that it's literal in several interviews as he did. >> let's put up the tweet where trump said because he was criticizing cnn's rofr of it. ratings challenge cnn so seriously that i caused president obama and clinton the founder of isis, and mvp. they don't get sarcasm? obviously i'm being sarcastic but not that sarcastic. what is the media to make of where this falls on the sarcasm? >> the problem is cnn also

doesn't do that fact checking element when hillary clinton rarely does interviews, when she does interviews, even though we know hillary clinton has systematically and methodically lied to the american people for a year and a half throughout the investigation. that's the problem here. further, i think there was a level of hyperbole to his statement. >> of course. >> but the crux of what he is saying is that president obama left his vacuum for isis. this is something that has been reiterated by someone like leon panetta who has said on record president obama leaving iraq left a vacuum for isis. >> that's a fair -- >> that's reiterated by his own defense secretary. >> that's a fair charge. hui hi hui witt gave him the opportunity. >> he said it at least seven times so why did he not just say that at some point, what lisa just said. why didn't he in those other times just explain that. that's not what he did. then he said it was sarcasm. so i feel like the people who want to clean up his mess are

saying that's what he meant, but he's not saying that. >> let me read you a tweet that i showed you before we came on the air. the real donald trump account on twitter. it's a disgusting and corrupt media covered me honestly and didn't put false meaning into the words i say, i would be beating hillary by 20%. >> yeah. well, so i sat on this set and said that i thought the media was hard on trump many months ago. i cannot sit there today and say that anyone's being hard on him in this situation. he has -- >> not being hard on him or you're saying it's justified. >> unfairly hard. i think they were maybe going over board with him. when he's coming out and saying the kinds of things he's saying and then trying to tell us that it's sarcasm, it's moving into a realm that i think is getting a little crazy. >> but the point -- i think there's an important point that's missing here though. the media should be able to cover what donald trump says. i have said before that i think he overstates things, you know, so i don't completely put that on the media. >> he creates some of his own problems. >> yes, i've said that before.

they should be adept enough to cover that and simultaneously cover what hillary clinton says. there's not an equal amount of coverage for donald trump and hillary clinton. you should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. >> a mid year review and 70% of the statements by trump were falls versus 20% on clinton. >> we will get into hillary clinton on a segment later in the program. i want to put up this "time magazine" cover this week, meltdown, you see the melting face. >> great picture. >> the mainstream media have concluded not only is trump behind, creating a lot of problems, he's going to lose this campaign. i wonder if that's a trap that we are going to since it is august. >> they have accused him, take a walk down memory lane, of those exact words, melting down. time likes to push the envelope with its covers. i saw one about hillary clinton,

you know, back during the e-mail scandal that was pretty provocative before there was even an investigation. you know, that said, i think, you know, we have to wait for several more weeks of polling as well as look at other factors like the fact that he is still taking in a lot of money before we can necessarily all kind of jump on that melting down bandwagon. but i think when you are struggling like you are in the poll numbers right now, you're going to invite headlines. >> let me get a break here. we will come back with you a little later, panel. also continue the need yeah on twitter. are some pundants using the polls to prevent that trump is actually toast. later, is all the trump, trump, trump coverage overshadowing hillary clinton's latest e-mail mess? a

is the poll obsessed press starting to write off donald trump. i put that to fox business. trish regan, welcome. >> hey, howie. good to see you. >> let's start with the polling prognosticators. they say hillary clinton has an 80% chance. "new york times" upshot blog little more optimistic. hillary clinton has 86%. everybody writes off the latest polls. couldn't these numbers and the figures become a self-fulfilling prophecy against donald trump? >> i've been thinking about that a lot, howie. that's why we as journalists need to be extraordinarily cautious over the next several weeks as we get close to november. keep in mind, anything can happen. think back to dukakis, 1988, he was actually ahead in the polls

in august but wound up nowheres near the oval office. in other words, the onus is on us as journalists to be cautious about us not necessarily making this a fait accompli. >> i couldn't agree more. what about the sheer imbalance in the coverage. there's absolutely no denying it. you look at any newspaper, website, most cable shows, it's trump, trump, trump, trump. hillary is maybe the fourth or fifth story. >> part of that is because trump's selling papers, right, or landing ratings on televisions so the media likes to cover trump, but i think one thing that i find frustrating in the process is that there's not enough policy coverage. it's all just sort of what did he say lately? there's a hesitancy on the part of the media to actually dive into the nuts and bolts of what he's talking about versus what hillary clinton's talking about. instead, it becomes very much about the horse race and very much about just what the latest faux pas was.

>> or the latest insult. you set me up for my next question by bringing up policy. hillary clinton and donald trump gave major economic speeches. if you're not working for a business network, my sense is they got a half day of coverage, maybe a little bit more. is there a tendency by particularly political journalists who shy away from the details of tax plans, estate tax, marginal tax rates, carried interest because it's hard to explain particularly on television? >> yeah, i'll go a step further. i think a lot of them just don't even understand it, howie. they chose not to understand it and they deliberately shy away from getting into the nuts and bolts of tax policy because it's just, frankly, too complicated for them. i think that's a very, very sad thing. it is incredibly important that we take on the responsibility of making sure that we understand all of these policies, especially on the economy. think about it. this is the biggest issue in this election and we need change when it comes to the economic future because our economy is in

such a bad state. one of the things that hillary clinton is proposing, one of the things that donald trump is proposing and what will they mean for our economy? yet no one, frankly, other than us wants to cover that. >> but if they don't understand it or choose not to understand it, isn't it also perhaps a fear that people will turn the dial, that economic policy can be dry and abstract and let's go to, you know, the latest donald trump said. >> you are so wrong. >> hillary clinton is the founder of isis. >> they are so absolutely wrong. i can tell you, i see it every day on the show. viewers respond to substance. they really do. and it is shortsighted of members of the media to think viewers won't care about economic policy because, again, this is the thing that everybody cares about. i mean, how are you going to feed your family? how are you going to make sure that your kids have a brighter future than what you have? these are the issues that voters want information on and so, you know, ft. meade yeah to say, okay, we're not going to cover

that because we don't think it's going to rate, they're wrong. >> let me jump over the last question, about half a minute. what about the argument that some of the journalists are saying, donald trump, we've never seen a candidate like him, he's always stepping in it, therefore we need to give him a lot more scrutiny than we give to hillary clinton? >> yeah, i think they do give him a lot more scrutiny. i don't think it's because he's stepping in it, i think it's because they don't really like him. that, in fact, is coloring some of their reporting. what i would recommend is, you know, regardless of what you think of either candidate, it is up to us to scrutinize very carefully both of these folks and you can't give anyone a pass just because you may like their policies a little more. and i think that we see that from mainstream media quite a bit, howie. >> or just because one candidate has been around in the political scene for a long longer. trish regan, always good to see you. >> good to see you too, howie. >> thank you very much. >> you bet. are some media outlets being

condescending to female@lea aths winning medals. plus, the crazy climber who hijacked cable news.

arianna huffington is stepping down from the popular website she helped found 11 years ago to pursue a startup. the "huffington post" owned by verizon has become a global force with 100 million monthly visitors. doesn't fail to turn a profit. it's an undeniable success. huffington a conservative in the '90s became an unabashed liberal. huff post long ago became consistently left wing. every story about donald trump has an editor's note saying he's a liar, racist, misogynist and worse. >> closer to home, rupert mourdock who took over as chairman of fox news has just announced his new management

team. the network will have two co-presidents, bill shine. he'll now be overseeing all content at both channels. the other co-chairman jack abernethy. he'll oversee the business side. since ales's executed departure, there's been plenty of reporting in the media not just about gretchen carlson but the promotion of these two insiders and the deputies inside of them shows that mourdock wants to bring stability to the plate after this major upheaval and that the network isn't changing its direction. cable news got hijacked from a 19-year-old who climbed up trump tower. despite the apparent lack of danger, this was considered mesmerizing. >> this is 56th street and 5th avenue in new york city. it's trump tower where some guy, we don't know who, is climbing

the sides of trump tower. >> we're watching that situation at trump tower in new york city. this individual climber outside the building has made it up to the 16th floor, past the 16th floor right now. he's still moving up. police are trying to talk some sense into him. >> breaking news right at this hour out of new york city. a man, look at this, is climbing trump tower in manhattan. he's using suction cups to make his way up the side of the building. good grief. >> good grief. this went on and on. steven rogotta who was arrested and charged, said he wanted to give trump a message. he was out of state. you can be famous on tv until the cops grab you. a favor seeking environment. is that story getting enough scrutiny. later, a spectacular defense of newspapers. the noted journal lis stick champion, john oliver.

if you have medicare parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long.

it has all the elements of a big story. previously secret e-mails revealing a cozy, favor seeking environment between folks and hillary clinton at the state department. >> later, big donors at the clinton foundation paying for state department access and, yes, newly released e-mails. >> this was a pay for play operation. basically, people who solicited the clinton foundation, gave money to the clinton foundation and got the state department to weigh in on various disputes and matters. >> but the reporting on this tangled web between the democratic nominee and her top government aids and allies have paled to the tsunami of trump coverage. >> are these latest e-mails a big story and do they deserve more coverage? >> they are a big story.

they have been covered. they could stand to have more coverage and likely they did not get as much coverage as they should have because donald trump was making new news basically every five minutes. >> you say every hour but i think you're right. >> yeah. so he just -- he constantly is giving the media some new outrage and sort of stepping on any bad news that's coming out for the clinton campaign. >> if trump had taken a few days off there might have been more scrutiny? >> i think so. yeah. i definitely think so. it did get some coverage but there would be more coverage if there weren't more time covering trump. >> lisa, you tipped your hand. the media is intentionally playing this down or the story has been over shadowed by the controversies that swirl around trump? >> i think they're absolutely covering up for hillary clinton. >> covering up is a strong charge. >> i stand by it. i think that you look at the coverage of abc, cbs and nbc, they gave two times more coverage to the trump tower

climber than they did on the hillary clinton e-mails. she's the only candidate to have two fbi investigations, one on her e-mail server and now this new revelation that there is an investigation into public corruption charges into the clinton foundation. she has put our national security at risk but somehow this hyperbole and rhetoric gets more attention than action that has put our nation at risk. >> would you agree some news outlets, including the big newspapers, cable news networks have covered the story in some substantial detail? >> i think to an extent, but not enough. i mean, she's facing two fbi -- two fbi investigations and she's the democratic nominee. that is mind boggling to me. >> what jumped out at me, heidi, was the way there was a big donor, a foreign guy who wanted to get a meeting with someone at the state department and suddenly hillary's top aides are at it. i think the meeting never took

place. was the news coverage that there was no incriminating details? >> it's involving her aides but they are her closest aids? >> right. >> so like kristen says, definitely this merits a lot of attention, but in these specific e-mails, not only was it not hillary clinton writing the e-mails but this is not textbook pay to play in that you can't take it to its logical conclusion that there was some favor given on behalf of this donor, but the question is what more is there to come out? and the media does need to be really vigilant about this. >> there was no investigation. >> there's more e-mails that may come out from wikileaks, from the russian hackers. so we have to keep on this narrative just as strong as we are on, you know, the daily kind of like insecendiary comments tt trump makes. lisa's right. if there is pay to play but we haven't seen textbook pay to play. >> she's facing another

investigation regarding the clinton foundation. donald trump has not faced two fbi investigations. i mean, this is huge news. >> i conceded your point that we need to follow these investigations. >> she's agreeing with you. >> but it's not getting enough coverage. >> another story that has gotten a lot of chatter this week, it's been covered more on fox than any other cable news networks, is about the father of the orlando mass murderer showing up at a hillary clinton rally, campaign didn't know about it, this generated some coverage and chatter. i'm having trouble understanding why it's a story if he wasn't invited? >> i think we see it the same way. the idea that donald trump has come out and criticized hillary for this when he has all these supporters who are white supremacists and he doesn't feel any need to disavow them and yet somehow some guy showing up to a hillary clinton event, she needs to disavow him, which she actually ended up doing. >> first, you're not suggesting that many trump supporters are white supremacists? >> i would say white supremacist

websites are frequently posting stuff in favor of donald trump. they have attacked -- made antisem met particularant antisemitic comments. he has been asked about that and refuses to criticize them. the idea that he's going to come out and claim that there's a problem with a guy showing up to a hillary clinton event, she did disavow. >> she did disavow just like trump z disavow david duke. can't campaigns -- >> but the problem here is that the david duke endorsement got six times the media coverage of the terrorist father endorsing hillary clinton and attending her rally because we all know that if he had attended a donald trump rally, that would be front page news the next day when all but would completely discredit his campaign. that's the problem. >> i would have a problem with that, too. if it's not something that was invited by the campaign -- >> further to that logic, to lump donald trump in with these

white supremacists, then by the same logic you would have to say why isn't hillary clinton -- hillary clinton should denounce, you know, people among the black lives matter movement who have said statements like pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon. the reality is there's not an equal amount of scrutiny. >> there's no evidence that they're hillary clinton supporters. no, but that's not the same thing. >> i think it's the same logic. >> what i'm talking about are people who are attacking people making antisemitic attacks against reporters. in one case they're mad at the fact that the reporter wrote an anti-melania piece and he is asked about this and he basically says, i don't have anything to say. >> i was actually in the motorcade when this went down, in hillary clinton's motorcade, and i can tell you proof positive that they were just as shocked as everyone else that he was there because having covered, you know, 16 years of these campaigns, i know that the way these things work is that anybody who wants to wait in line for three hours and go through a metal detekdor can

wind up standing behind the platform. yes, sometimes they do put their supporters there as well, but literally the campaign was shocked to learn this. >> got to end it there. we're out of time. we'll take this off line. up next, a debate about "the new york times" columnist who's okay with the media tilting against trump because he's such an unorthodox candidate. later, "the daily beast" apologizes for a story that outed gay olympic athletes. you won't see these folks at the post office. they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

media are tilting against donald trump, at least according to "new york times" media columnist jim lewdenberg who justified it. if you view a trump presidency as something that's dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. you would move closer than you ever have to being oppositional. that's acceptable because it would be an abdication of political journalism's most solemn duty ferret out what candidates would be like in the most powerful office in the world. joining us is larry sabado. do you agree with that premise? >> yes. i don't think there's any question about that, but, look, howie, there was a media tilt

against mitt romney. there was a media tilt against john mccain. there was a media tilt against george w. bush. it has more to do with party and personal characteristics of journal lists than anything else. >> so you believe the press is generally unfair on presidential candidates. i have avenue never seen anything like this level of vitreol. here's the argument. reporters think trump is dangerous, would be dangerous as president, and it's their patriotic duty to stop him except they're not commentators, they're not activists, they're reporters. >> yeah. see, i think that's a very important distinction. if you're a commentator or pundant, can you say whatever you want and the chiron should read, analysis, that's what you're doing, or analysis on a newspaper headline. if you're a straight reporter and you're supposed to report the facts of what's happening at a particular event, then i think

it's more problematic. >> i ask you about all of this because people don't know that you have a minor degree in press criticism. you once wrote a book called "feeding frenzy." carolyn ryan is saying that trump's candidacy is extraordinary and precedent shattering and to pretend otherwise is to be disingenuous with readers. i'm not arguing for false equivalency. trump says four disputed things, hillary says one, so be it. when you talk about being close to oppositional it seems to be coming out saying publicly that some journalists, many journalists believe that they have to be tougher on trump because of the nature of his candidacy. your thoughts. >> well, the political party is the -- the other political party is the opposition to donald trump. hillary clinton is the oppositional candidate. the press is not the oppositional party and they shouldn't pretend to be the oppositional party. what they will say, and i agree

with them in part, this campaign, the trump campaign has no precedent, howie. there's nothing in american political history like it. i don't know why he doesn't adopt the theme song from the real chairman of the board, frank sinatra "my way" because he's doing everything his way. it is difficult even to adjust to if you've been covering politics. >> his way worked in the primary. he has been stepping up the rhetoric. let me tell you something he said at a rally just the other day. >> the media is unbelievably dishonest. i would actually say that the media is almost as crooked as crooked hillary clinton. >> do you think that these kinds of attacks on the press, which are intensifying, as i say, help donald trump? >> howie, they're counter productive and you know that. you've got such a long history in the press.

first of all, he makes no distinctions between and among members of the press. reporters are human beings. this will come as a shock to some people, but reporters are human beings, and while they steel themselves to a certain degree of criticism, still, it's a lot when you have a candidate pointing you out in rallies filled with thousands and thousands of activists and saying you're evil, you're crooked, you're bad and then you have individual trump supporters coming up and screaming and yelling at them while they're trying to do their job. that is wrong and he's encouraging it and he needs to stop it in his own interests. >> even as individual news organizations. fair reporters, not so fair reporters, commentators. larry sabato, great to see you this sunday from virginia. >> thank you, howie. >> have a great day. after the break, a woman wins an olympic medal and her husband gets the credit? that and more on the rio coverage next. p?p?h

so what do you think that women are different? >> more than thinking nthey enjy

watching and leaves everything on the floor, blood sweat and tier ti tears. they want to see the built in drama. it is not an episode of the bachelor or survivor. >> let me get you something. >> thank you. thank you. >> so when a woman reported wife of chicago bears defensive wins bronze. mitch cheered her from his home. they very married for two years. what? >> it is really dufifficult for some people to understand female athlete. they have to be the wife of, daughter of, mother of, she can't simply be a female

athlete. can you imagine if the same sort of language is used far male athle athlete? no one refer to michael phelps as husband of, son of. no body referred to him as the male ledecky. she is an amazing athlete and that's it. >> all right. here is another example for you. she won the gold and dan said that her husband and coach was the guy responsible for her performance. he later said it is impossible without giving appropriate credit to shame. >> and that's -- listen. was he in the pool with her? did he drag her across the finish line? i don't think so.

he was there to support her. that's about it. i just don't understand. my favorite though is from the san jose mercury. the headline read michael phelps spends evening with african american. >> so nice of him. >> i want to apologize. it is hook ups with olympic athletes but in some cases endangering them. in some cases it's illegal. our quick final question for you, sean johnson said tired of the devastating scrutiny on female athlete, how fat or thin they are, does that rez na-- >> i'm sorry. what was the question? >> whether or not the athletes were fat, thin, pretty, the

appearance question. >> we should focus on their appearance. they are not there to entertain men, they are there to compete. they are breaking records. >> right. >> they are creating historic moments. that's what they are there for. tune into a beauty contest if you're looking far beauor a bea contest. >> thank you. >> and what really helped on if you're approaching 65, now's the time to get your ducks in a row. to learn about medicare, and the options you have. you see, medicare doesn't cover everything - only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so if 65 is around the corner, think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,

they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. so don't wait. call to request your free decision guide. and gather the information now to help you choose a plan later. these types of plans let you pick any doctor or hospital that takes medicare patients. and there's a range of plans to choose from, depending on you needs and your budget. so if you're turning 65 soon, call now and get started. because the time to think about tomorrow...is today. go long.

it's hardly breaking knew but john oliver has more on why this matters from you even if you get your news from facebook or twitter or web sites. >> they are often repackaging.

watch how off tv news ends up siting. >> according to the san francisco chronical. >> the boston cloglobe. >> the pittsburgh tribune. >> and the los angeles times. >> the salt lake tribute reports. >> it is pretty obvious without newspapers around to site it would be endliless batting a ball of yarn around. >> it also means fewer reports checking up and it even effects comedians. >> when the show is mistakenly called journalism it is a slap in the face. >> but john oliver does a good imitation of a journalist. >> talking about donald trump slipping when he got a little carried away. >> in fact, give me your phone.

if i were a trump strategist i would absolutely take the phone and i would throw it away. i would dump it. >> many of you took to twitter to ask about the condition of my poor iphone. he taossed his own phone to the floor. good thing my phone was impaired and good thing i have this as a back up. blackberry is good for e-mail. that's it for this edition of media buchlzz. we hope you like our facebook page. i respond to your questions on video. mediabuzz@foxnews.com. follow me on twitter. dvr the show. got many ways we get through to you. we are back next sunday and we

hope you'll join us in this crazy campaign. it's like drinking through a fire hose. that's back here next sunday. maung on wedge. the national guard is on stand by after a night of violent protests. i'm laura ingel in for harris faulkner and this is "the fox report." it started with the death of a man who tried to run away from officers during a traffic stop and he was armed. both the suspect and