>> $500 million is what it's worth. that's crazy. >> somebody's got it somewhere. >> not our government right now. that wraps it up for us. >> thanks for joining us. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> harris: fox news alert, new fallout after comments president trump reportedly made during an oval office meeting on immigration yesterday. now he's denying much of it and standing by his refusal to accept a deal that he believes would be bad for america. but at least one person who was in that room at the time says the president use language that was "hate filled, vile, and racist." we will get into it. this is "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here today, cohost of after the bell, most of francis. the editor of townhall.com, katie pavlich, commentator run fox news contributor rachel campos duffy and joining us today on the couch, fox news political analyst and cohost of the five, juan williams. and you are outnumbered. >> juan: i'm delighted to be

here. so much news on a foggy date in new york city. >> harris: we are actually celebrating fog. controversy over something president trump reportedly said during a meeting on immigration in the oval office. sources telling fox news the president use usable code language while questioning why the united states would accept immigrants from countries including haiti and some african nations. sources close to the president telling fox news the president was making a case for accepting more highly skilled immigrants, but the reports prompting major backlash. haitian-american republican congresswoman released a statement saying the reported remarks were "unkind, divisive, elitist, and flying in the face of our nation's values. this behavior is unacceptable from the leader of our nation." the president tweeted this. "the language used by me at the daca meeting was tough, but this was not the language used. what was really tough was the outlandish proposal made for a

big setback by daca." that he tweeted this, never said anything derogatory about haitians other than haiti is obviously a very poor and troubled country. democratic senator dick durbin was in that meeting. he says the reports are accurat accurate. >> to no surprise, the president started tweeting this morning denying that he use those words. it is not true. he said these hate filled things. and he said them repeatedly. he said haitians, do we need more haitians? then he went on and started to describe the immigration from africa that was being protected in this bipartisan nation. that's what he used these violent broker comments calling the nations that come from [bleep]. the exact word used by the president not just once but repeatedly. >> harris: and of course, we believed that faulty word that was used by the senator there. your thoughts?

>> juan: i just don't know how anyone at this point can give any creditability to this. but yesterday when they had every opportunity to deny the report and were given the information straight up, they refused to deny it and in fact, fox news confirmed it that the president had said this. this morning, he came back and said he didn't say it. it seems to me to compound the info that was made. it's a very troubling one. i think everybody liberal or conservative as her assistant to come to any conclusion about the president. we don't need additional static. it so much. the start of this week, we were arguing about whether or not he would fit and mentally competent to serve as president that he put the meeting on television and then at the end of the week, we are arguing about what he say and how could he say that about human beings? the country may be in bad shape but we as americans have always

taken and people who seek to have them fulfill their dreams and their children's dreams in this country of opportunity and here he is calling those people, not the country by that vulgar term. >> rachel: my understanding of it was that he talking about the country and government being not so great. first of all, i don't agree with this term. sometimes the best immigrants come from those kind of countries. they are better able to see the difference between what we are offering opportunity wise versus both countries that are often corrupt or are dysfunctional. that said, i still have a problem with people in a private meeting going out and sing with the president said. i just heard a report that said the ambassador just quit over this. he makes our country look bad. i think the democrats in this case should've used some discretion and even if he did say that, maybe for the sake of the country.

not repeated. >> harris: i understand what you're saying about the democrats repeating this. they were vulcans in that room, we have confirm that. senators graham, flight, cotton. on on the day in which the president should sign a proclamation honoring dr. king which was a beautiful moment on a day that he does that at the white house, it is complicated. it is a point of conflict if you will in your mind to try to hold both of these thoughts. and that simply if these men were there and people are talking about it, we are their voices to either defense. this was the contacts and adding their context to it. where those republican voices? >> rachel: the fact that the republicans that were in the room are not coming to his defense tells me that he probably said it. i just want to say one thing. i'm not defending the comments but this is a 70-year-old man who speaks in a certain way.

it's very on pc. who among us hasn't said something like that, i get it, i don't approve of it but i don't understand why for the sake of politics you would in a private meeting go out and say. >> harris: apparently, the panamanian ambassador actually resigned 2024 hours before these comments were made. bret baier has confirm that and also getting in the conversation with the facts. the first diplomat to resign, said john feeley is his name so i just wanted to get that out there. >> melissa: i want to address something that juan said. this is the longest week of any of our lives. the whole week has been pretty much insane. i was answering his question which is the whole reason why we want people from places that are a disaster is that these are the immigrants so often that appreciate being here the most.

and work the hardest once they're here. and really understand the difference. and as we take this conversation forward and even as you try to advance the labor that we want coming into this country, the system is falling apart and people are perhaps less skilled and less educated, and i would say talk to people that run businesses and say that when you have an immigrant worker, they want immigration to be legal because these are the people who value these jobs and work very hard versus teenagers often times who don't appreciate the minimum wage job. the language is horrible, but the sentiment also needs to be corrected. >> harris: i want to go to this reporter after mlk dedication. can we take a peek at that? maybe not. >> mr. president, will you give a an apology? >> did you refer to countries a

as -- >> mr. president, will you respond to these statements? >> harris: you and i have been in scrums like that at different occasions and people shout all sorts of things out, and their wild microphones and you could hear much of what they were saying at into the president. >> katie: the questions of are you a racist, did you say the word that we are not going to say here on the air. the thing for me is there is a distinction between the people who live in a country and the governments that run it. the 30-year-old sociologist from guinea and actually agrees with the president and when it ran through a whole long list of african countries that are corrupt and the way that they treat women in the societies that they run there. that being said, the president has to realize that these kind of comments distract away from what he's trying to get done.

earlier this week, had a phenomenal meeting with bipartisan support for the first time in a year since he got inaugurated in january. they were praising him publicly on microphones outside the white house to the media and here we are now pulling all of that back as if it didn't happe happen. he has to realize that he says things in a very candid way, so that my future, some of it might not be true but it does serve as a distraction to his agenda and what his goals are. >> harris: i don't know how genuine, to further katie's point, democrats work when they said we could be close to getting a deal. i don't know how many of them would've eventually jumped on board but this is a distraction. i would question, and i hear yo you, i did not hear anybody say off the record. but i hear you on a private meeting. the complicated fact for me in that meeting is how lowbrow were the arguments such that these words were waiting to make them argument? >> juan: let's go back because what the reporting indicates as they were having a conversation

about this lottery, the diversity lottery. and so what happens in that lottery is the u.s. government can determine that there are certain countries that are underrepresented in terms of the immigrant flow into the united states, legal immigrant flow. and in order to make sure that people from these less represented countries had an opportunity, they then started this lottery program. at that point, the president trump was saying he wants to cut that program, he really wants to eliminate it but he said he's willing to cut in half and they were talking about if we are going to cut it in half, let's make sure that we have a special program to make sure that people from distressed country and talking about african, asian, el salvador. >> harris: countries are people of color. >> juan: and the president then apparently responded with this vulgarity saying why do we need people from those blank countries? speaking to what melissa pointed out, there's a difference between the country and corrupt government that was katie's point. melissa said, we need to speak to the spirit of the comet,

which is it should be so obvious. you know what, mr. president, your family immigrated to this country and that's how people spoke of those negative terms about other parts of the world and how you talk about this. and the heavy load of the racial part, people of these countries being people of color on white people from norway. >> harris: indentured servants from ireland who went through the caribbean and barbados where i just was a few weeks ago. the community very proud, but they came as indentured servants and settled there and some came into the other northeast part of this country as well and where would we be if we didn't have these immigrants? >> rachel: my husband is a irish dissent and people look out here on st. patrick's day whose parents came, they're still very proud. you can understand why other people felt very offended by the comment he made. that said, i still don't in my heart believe the president is a racist. i think he's just an old guy who

says things in a very impolitic way, and i think not being a politician has benefited him, this would've been a day were being a politician would've benefited him. i think he says things in ways that just get more. before that doesn't affect the policy. >> rachel: it does and i just talked to my husband about this. i said we were in a better place at the beginning of the week to get a deal. >> harris: two days ago, we were in a better place. >> rachel: this is now being fought on the terms of the democrats alike which is identity politics and the rationalization of immigration. >> juan: who brought identity politics into this? i think he was the president, not the democrats. >> harris: i would argue the democrats who walked out of that room and decided to repeat those words, those incendiary remarks. >> juan: why did he say it then? >> harris: you're asking the origin of the politics.

the origin happens to me when you leave a private meeting and you don't share a transcript, which is very different than sharing just certain comments and remarks. the origin of the remarks, the president. but then i asked the question again because nobody answered, i'll go to you with it, what is incumbent upon the republicans in that room to do at this point? anything? >> melissa: i don't know. i almost think that you have to be honest about what you think you heard and what you heard. you can't be in a place where you're lying about anything. we've got to come forward, talk about what happened, talk about how to fix it. like i said, answer the actual question of why it is valuable to have people from these countries? because they make this a country. they appreciate being here. they work really hard. this is what our country is all about, taking people born in horrible circumstances and giving them and their families

the chance for something better. i think underneath that point is this idea that is difficult to get people emigrating from a country that has a field government and can may be confuse those topics and terms of terror but that's not what haiti is about. >> harris: i say i agree with you as a journalist, i'm in favor of more words, not fewer. so bring forth whatever we know now that everything is leaked is helpful to get us to that next point of talking. i'm up with a kind of conversation we could have and maybe they can get back to the point where they can do a deal. i don't know. january 19th, government spending deadline and this will be part of that conversation no doubt. democrats and republicans at odds over how to move forward with congressional investigations on russia. democrats reportedly want to hear from dozens of additional witnesses. we will talk about how long these investigations should go on. and on and on. and the house minority leader nancy pelosi is facing some backlash after some controversial remarks she made

about the bipartisan group of lawmakers negotiating and immigration reform. the race came up out of her mouth. when she says that even had some members of her own political party firing back. stay close. state of the very idea that this week they're saying let's get for white guys in general kelly to come and do it. i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you.

but he's got work to do. with a sore back. so he took aleve this morning. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. tylenol can't do that. aleve. all day strong. all day long. check this sunday's paper for extra savings on products from aleve.

>> melissa: new developments into the congressional investigations into russian interference in the 2016 election. former white house chief strategist steve bannon reportedly set to appear before the intelligence committee last week. he made headlines for his new comments calling that meeting at the trump tower during the 2016 campaign treasonous. the top democrat on the committee wants steve bannon as well as dozens of other witnesses to testify. his wish list reportedly includes ivanka trump and jared kushner. former trump campaign manager cory lewandowski is also expected to appear as early as next week. he reportedly said he will not plead the fifth. meanwhile, senate house until committee chairman richard burr says he sees no reason to ask steve bannon to appear before the committee. what do you think? >> katie: it's interesting he

doesn't want him to appear before the committee because we for the opposite from democrats and based on what steve bannon set in this book and in interviews, it wasn't just about slimming president trump's family and that being a personal insult, and with the fact that he essentially implicated president trump in the russia scandal by saying he knew about the meeting that don jr. had a trump tower which is something that the white house and the campaign has denied. so in terms of where this goes, we heard both sides wrapping up and we don't know how long it's going to go. if this is the witness list when they're going to be talking about this a little while longe longer. >> rachel: when you look at the russia probe, you see democrats want to talk about trump and collusion. but the republicans want to talk about hillary and collusion. so i think we should look at both of them. if were going to look at all these witnesses, that's fine, let's keep talking about the emails and talking about the speech that bill clinton gave. let's talk about uranium one and emails that russian saw from her server and let's just keep going. if that's what the democrats want to do, fine.

but i don't like is the ceo politicization of the topic. if there's a russia probe with look at it. if russia interfered with our elections, let's look at what happened to both sides. with all the leaks that we've had, we would've known known by now. >> melissa: it seems clear to me that russia's attempt to get his fingers and absolutely everything that's going on, it is curious why we investigate one side and not the other or is it possible to look at all of these various things? i'm never satisfied. we have these hearings anyway because it doesn't seem like we make progress. you feel like you learn something, nothing ever comes of it. he heard somebody said something that is incriminating them. there's no follow-up. is it frustrating to you? >> juan: what's frustrating is understanding the impact when

the trump folks go on the offensive and they attack the credibility of law enforcement, attacked the fbi, tech robert mueller, say that jeff sessions isn't doing enough. she wants republicans to take control of the russia investigation. the people who are conducting the russia investigation are speaking to undermine him. to the contrary, what we've seen is a steady progression by robert muller's special counsel. we see people indicted. we've seen steve bannon making these statements about not only treason but suggesting that there's money laundering involved and we see that the special counsel says that he is making steady progress. to me, the impact of all the trump people think it's not trump, don't look for anything here, look the other way. look at the clintons. >> harris: we can do three

things at once. you can look at the current investigation in the trump side of it. you can look at the next investigation and the clinton side of it. i want that to be looked at from this vein. what's their bias at that fbi? was there bias at the doj mack i want to look at the case of the fbi men and one woman. in the text messages that were exchanged. take a look at that. was there any furthering of that mentality they are and what was the insurance policy that peter and this woman said they agreed upon? >> harris: hold on one second. america deserves to have it stressed to renewed news agencies that are test with not only keeping that but keeping it safe. >> juan: you must remember the democrats complain when jim comey came out with his statement about hillary clinton, not inviting her. >> harris: but when it was time to fire him, they were

disingenuous. >> juan: i think people were still critical of him. this is the president of the united states. who had a contrary view is what's going on with the russian. but the key point here is what we are talking about with the clintons with questions about text messages from fbi agents doesn't match the magnitude of the threat posed by the russians into politics. >> melissa: the issue of them being able to do their jobs without bias i think is important. and as to impute on the thousands of people who work there but who are investigating. but the people who work to pick their toe into the bias end of things. >> melissa: the immigration debate raging on just in case you haven't noticed. now president trump slamming a bipartisan deal proposed by senate lawmakers on the what this means going forward and whether democrats will force at that government shut down if congress fails to strike a deal in one week. plus, nancy pelosi's controversial comments on the

group of working on that deal. did she cross the line? we will debate that next.

the center of the how canneighborhood?r house first, mix liquid gold velveeta with the one-two kick of ro*tel's diced tomatoes and spicy green chilies. then, find space for extra parking. lots and lots of parking.

>> harris: at least one bipartisan group of senators is going back to the drawing board after trump slammed the protections for dreamers and the foreign parts of the immigration system. the president tweeted this, the so-called bipartisan daca deal presented yesterday to myself in a group of republican senators and congressmen was a big step backward. small is not properly funded, chain and lottery were made worse in the u.s. would be forced to take large numbers of people from high crime countries which are doing badly. and this because of the democrats not being interested in facing daca has taken a big step backward.

the dems will threaten shut down but they're really doing is shutting down our military at a time when we need it most. get smart, make america great again. that's not the only immigration deal in the works. there were other groups in the house and senate trying to copee up with an agreement as well. he had the four congressmen and one women who came out with the house version of this list, had that out there and got these ideas in the senate side which the president said he doesn't like. >> rachel: the people that were in his office yesterday when he made this unfortunate, and upset about the deal he put forward. these are not leadership appointed groups of senators. these are self-appointed groups and i talked to several people in the house and nobody like that deal, even the president said no deal on these congressmen were going to say no deal. i hope we get a deal but i will say that we were better off getting a deal earlier in the week then we are right now. >> harris: let me ask this because when you watch that the remarkable 55 minute live inside look, it was really interesting

earlier this week and you got to see democrats and republicans. i remember at one point, correct me if i'm wrong but i think it was dianne feinstein of california who said can we talk about a clean daca bill and separate that out from the spending bill. democrats putting that on the table. the president said we can talk about that. so why not try to get it done that way and keep the government open as of next friday? >> juan: kevin mccarthy stepped in at just that moment and said mr. president, slow down. that's not to our advantage on the republican side. >> harris: he one of the wall to come back into play. couldn't happen without certain others on board. >> katie: is making the argument not necessarily to take it out of the spending bill but the leverage the situation. singh wanted to clean daca bill away from the requirement the republicans want meaning chain migration and income a visa lottery program ending in the wall, that's what she meant. just one of the daca program to be fixed.

this is the first bite of the apple for the framework of getting something on the table. democrats have decided to tight to the spending bill and going to have to make the decision about whether they're going to put daca recipients over the u.s. military first and i think americans know exactly which one they should. >> juan: who wouldn't support our military? >> katie: by putting it out this deadline. democrats are asking for this. >> juan: the president said he really want to support the dreamers and he said the plan ending in march, he created an artificial crisis when he untended it. >> harris: a couple of things because i want to bring into the conversation on this one. the judge recently ruled from the ninth circuit that he is going to take a relook at this and he's going to keep the program for dreamers in place. despite what the white house want to come he's going to keep it in place until either congress comes up with a

solution or he looks at it wyche looking at the docket, that would be as far along as june. it was a little bit more time to deal with this. democrats are not being genuine when they say it has to be done right now. >> melissa: there is more time to do with it but is not nice to people to continue having this out here and expiring in going on. when you talk about continuing and he sent mean to rip it away. the means to come up with a permanent solution as to what we're actually going to do. rather than politicking would be so nice of people could sit down like adults which is what that room looks like. to me, that's what makes me want to cry is that when you watch that room, democrats are working, everybody was working i sincerely believe having watched the whole thing live and organically as it was happening which is different from watching it with everybody, watching it organically, i felt like it was dawning on everyone that they

could actually get something done and they could put politics aside and say you know what, the truth is i could live with this if i could have this. where is in politics you have to say there's no way i'm going to let that happen. >> harris: do you think the camera makes people act better? would we need to do, have everything recorded at this point? does not have everybody's -- >> katie: and make sure there's accountability. when there's accountability for what people say and what their actions are, they tend to speak a little more civilly. >> harris: you tease me but that's why i like c-span. >> juan: it was republicans who are flipping out at what he said in that meeting. >> harris: you didn't get what i meant. >> juan: i would say one last thing i know we want to move along, is that he mean a wall literally for the democrats perspective or did he mean device during the campaign?

>> harris: you put a fence line while in where it makes sense. >> katie: we are going to put a ball on this topic and move along. going forward, it went over like a lead balloon, nancy pelosi's dig aimed at a group of lawmakers negotiating and immigration deal and even when fellow democrats are upset about it, you know it's a problem. here's the remark that kicked off the controversy. >> five white guys i called the them. you open a hamburger stand. that could've been done four months ago. the very idea that this and they're saying why don't we get four white guys in general kelly to come and do this, you have to understand in our caucus, we are blessed with great diversity. to ignore all of that and say where of us are going to go in a room with general kelly had come up with something, they could've

done that four months ago. >> katie: getting immediate pushback from pelosi's number two. he said in a statement obtained by politico, "that comment is offensive. i am committed to ensuring dreamers are protected and i will welcome everyone to the table who wants to get this done." pelosi's office releasing a statement appearing to walk back from the controversy saying "it's not a question of who's there, but he was not there." how do nancy pelosi's comments move the ball forward in terms of any kind of deal on daca to people that democrats came to care about? >> juan: it's so important for the members of the congressional hispanic caucus to feel like they have some input into these negotiations. i feel like they've been pressuring pelosi to say how come you have a group of only white men in the meeting had in her case, represented by hoyer. he is right to say if it's about my whiteness, that's offensive because i really care about this issue. but in terms of your point,

moving us forward, i think you're going to have to have a deal for you here from to emergent communities, especially those directly affected. >> katie: is a double standard saying it's about a group of white guys getting together to solve a problem. >> harris: it doesn't elevate the conversation. when you did have a latino crowd around her talking daca and dreamers and they were young people in the audience with their phones calling her a liar and bum rushing the lectern where she was speaking from, it isn't that diverse audience hasn't been sought out or talk to by this particular democrat, but they are hostile toward her because i don't think that she really has their back. >> rachel: i was just going to say i don't believe that when it comes to either the dreamers or copperheads of immigration reform would i see is i don't think the democrats want to deal. they love having this club, they hit republicans with limiting their biggest fear was what happened earlier in the week which is why i'm upset that the

president stepped on this. early in the week, i think he had the conversation where it should be about border security in a solution for the dreamers and he even alluded to potentially solving comprehensive immigration reform which would have taken immigration off the table which was negative for the democrats. >> melissa: i have to say something really quick, it's really offensive when anyone says for white guys are five white guys come you don't get to flip it around and do it that way as well. it does it mean just because those men are white that they can't represent and haven't talked to and can't represent the needs of others. i don't like it. in this era, i was writing a recommendation for some of the other day who was a woman and said it's a time when we are putting women forward. that is not why you should promote this person. she's the most qualified person. i don't like this as you say here and put labels on people. >> katie: we are awaiting trump's decision the iran nuclear deal. sources tell fox news he will keep sanction waivers in place. whether he needs to get tougher.

and then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. he told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. and while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing.

serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®.

>> harris: house speaker paul ryan right now is that a life event in milwaukee, wisconsin. moments ago, he was asked about the president's controversial remarks. here's what the speaker had to say. >> i read those comments later last night. first thing that came to my mind was very unfortunate, unhelpful. but what i thought of right away -- >> harris: with interesting what rachel was saying is this is what politicians are going to have to talk about inside the g.o.p. today. >> rachel: instead of talking about a 44 year low unemploymen unemployment, record job numbers for hispanics, a renaissance in manufacturing, stock market, this economy is absolutely booming and we have to talk about this. this is the problem. >> katie: fox news alert, we

are awaiting a decision from president trump on the iranian nuclear deal. sources telling fox news he is likely to continue decertification of the deal and he is also likely to reluctantly continue sanctions waivers while imposing new sanctions on the government that are separate from the nuclear deal. here's what house secretary sanders said on the process. >> the president strongly believes this is one of the worst hills of all time and one of the single greatest losses is that it's restrictions leave iran free in the future to develop their nuclear program and rapidly achieve a nuclear weapons breakout capability. obviously, we see big problems with that. the administration is continuing to work with congress and with our allies to address those flaws. and we will keep you guys poste posted. >> katie: the administration is in a tough place. they seem to want to impose more sanctions. can you to list what that means for business in iran? >> melissa: what's so interesting as i heard a really good reporter on our network

breaking down this morning and saying that by staying in the deal and continuing to waive the sanctions that are within the deal but then the president can just step outside the deal and impose all kinds of other sanctions on iran which makes me wonder if the deal is even more stupid than i thought in the first place. how is that possibly -- it has felt meaningless because it felt like everybody came together on a deal, europe thought they were going to rush into the country and make a fortune in their economy and they were excited to sell iphones and diet cokes to folks and that hasn't happened. they were going to slow down a nuclear program, doesn't seem like that's happened. they are not imposing sanctions but we can step outside and impose different sanctions. it seems like it's all nonsense. >> harris: one thing has happened for sure and that's all the money that they called on the steel. people in the streets of around saying that money has been used outside of the things that they

say they need. they want a booming economy and millions and millions of dollar dollars. they said they would take that money and pump it into the tributaries of terrorism. the people on the ground are telling us how faulty that deal was also from their perspective. >> katie: based on iran's behavior whether as a our ships in the persian gulf are not giving the money that we sent back to them to the people and selling it to terrorist organizations in yemen for example shooting rockets and missiles at civilian airports, what is the justification for staying in the steel at this point based on iran's behavior? >> juan: the key point is they were supposed to limit their ability to develop nuclear weapons that they would use against israel. we had a strong interest in that and i would expand into the whole middle east region. so now you have a situation where people are saying if you impose these sanctions, you're changing the deal and what that means is consequential to your

radiance. what i'm saying to you is the europeans, western europeans but even some of the u.n. security council and others have said we want this deal because we want to take away the power to develop nuclear weapons from iran. we can have arguments about sanctions and with the money got used for, but we should not lose focus on what we're doing and that's the problem. >> katie: 's argument is we don't have evidence of a stare that they violated the nuclear agreement but we do believe that they have violated the spirit of the deal and all of the behavior around the deal is what we are trying to combat here. >> rachel: they're still building ballistic missiles, still funding terrorism, committing abuses against their own people right now. i don't think anything has changed in iran's behavior since we passed these sanctions. i know the president ran on we are going to end this agreement. i don't think the american people care whether we stay in the agreement or add more sanctions. what people want us to stop

threatening israel and to stop building nuclear weapons and i think that we should be doing some things to help them get support. >> melissa: they've been forgotten a little bit. a new study finds the mainstream media devoting wall-to-wall coverage of the anti-trump book. while downplaying stories like the new clinton foundation probe. wait till you see how the media coverage broke down. that's next. it's ok that everyoe ignores me while i drive. it's fine. because i get a safe driving bonus check every six months i'm accident free. and i don't share it with mom! right, mom? righttt. safe driving bonus checks. only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it.

>> rachel: new analysis of recent press coverage of president tram, a media research center study found that in the first week of the year, the big three broadcast networks stuff their programs with over two hours of coverage of the anti-trump boat. but just 11 minutes the new clinton foundation probe in just over 5 minutes to the dow jones breaking the 25,000 mark. as it continues, its records search under president trump and as you see here, the dow hitting yet another record high today. so melissa, this is big business news. can you imagine this happening

under the obama administration, these kind of record numbers, these kinds of record-breaking unemployment numbers, et cetera and it getting this scant of coverage under obama? >> melissa: is interesting because i feel like business and economics in those sort of thing is, that's how people vote and that's how they feel, that's who they care about, that's what you know is impacting you. not necessarily and i'm on a business channel so i hate to say this. not always what you want to watch. the popcorn and a salacious nature of things. it's interesting to me that in this world everybody is getting so deep into their own echo chamber and nothing that happens to changes in anyone's mind and just reinforces the opinion that you have and you watch the program is going to give you what you already think and is kind of a strange place to be. juan's laughing. >> juan: is true. people watch because they want their pre-existing views affirmed rather than getting information. i'm always grateful that people are going to listen to a

contrary point of view given what i do here. >> katie: we are grateful to you. >> juan: it so interesting because i thought what you said is right, the salacious materials was going to get attention but the fact is when you have people like steve bannon who was a trump acolyte saying horrible things, going to get some attention. >> rachel: i remember when obama had his recovery summer. it never happened. and i can't imagine that that had happened to donald trump. he would be mocked over that. >> katie: another network as saying under obama, there wasn't much to cover and there's just so much more to cover under trump. and it might be true that a trump administration moves at a faster pace but in terms of scandals and what was happening and the salacious nature of what happened under the obama administration, there were plenty of channels to go around. i just want to make this point about the book. although the network covered the

book far more than the economy, i do think that's a problem. however, when you have the white house and vault coming of the white house talking about the book, the president tweeting about the book and the white house firing someone over the book and then releasing that hot fire statement about steve bannon, that is news can't necessarily be ignored. >> melissa: he's driving it, he knows it, he is a media guy, none of that as a surprise. the way that the administration operates is intentional. >> katie: you can make the argument which has been made that while the media is focused on the drama of d.c., the president is getting things done like getting the regulation pushed through. transfer out distractions to cover while at the mean time, getting some significant long-term things done. >> rachel: when you're in middle america, i lived there, people don't complain about that week, i hear that all the time but they're not as obsessively

focused on it as the media is that the beltway is and i think what they're looking at is have a $10,000 bonus for my stock portfolio is doing bad. >> melissa: more "outnumbered" just a moment. he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

and when youod sugar is a replace one meal... choices. ...or snack a day with glucerna... ...made with carbsteady... ...to help minimize blood sugar spikes... ...you can really feel it. now with 30% less carbs and sugars. glucerna. >> sandra: thank you to juan williams, rachel campos duffy is hosting "fox & friends" all weekend, good for you. we look forward to catching you there. kb katie pavlich, always nice

to see you. >> rachel: are you going to watch football this weekend? >> melissa: this has been like three weeks in one week. >> harris: war of words over what the president is reported to have said in an immigration private meeting is rocking washington, let's go "overtime," i'm harris faulkner. president trump denying reports that he used a vulgar expression when talking about immigrants from different countries. the president tweeted this... later, he tweeted this...