'Fox News Sunday' on May 30, 2021

샤논 브림, 폭스 뉴스 앵커: I’m Shannon Bream, 크리스 월리스를 위해.

The White House struggling to strike a bipartisan deal on infrastructure

with Senate Republicans, after abandoning its Memorial Day deadline.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We can’t afford to fall

any further behind. Now it’s a time to build the foundation that we’ve

laid.

BREAM (voice-over): Talks at the crossroads as President Biden reaches for

top legislative priority. But the administration and Republican senators

remain far apart over the size and scope of the investment and how to pay

그것을 위해.

이것의. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO (R-WV): We believe that this counteroffer

delivers on what President Biden told us in the Oval Office that way.

BREAM: We’ll speak with Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, one the

cabinet members pitching the president’s proposal.

그때, get reaction from West Virginia Senator Shelley Moore Capito, 그만큼

lead Republican negotiating with the White House.

을 더한, the Biden administration calling for intelligence officials to

investigate whether COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab.

KARINE JEAN-PIRRE, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY: We will continue to

press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based

international investigation.

BREAM: We’ll ask our Sunday panel about the fresh look into the origins of

대유행.

모두, 지금, 의 위에 “FOX News Sunday”.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BREAM (on camera): Hello again and happy Memorial Day from FOX News in

워싱턴.

The White House criticizing Senate Republicanscounteroffer for a

bipartisan deal on infrastructure but negotiations remain alive. 대통령

Biden inviting members for another round of talks this week as the sides

are a trillion dollars apart.

그 동안에, 씨. Biden released his first budget proposal on Friday as many

Americans hit road for the holiday weekend. 그만큼 $ 6 trillion proposal

includes money for education, 연구, broadband and healthcare, 그만큼

highest amount of federal spending since World War II.

In the moment, we’ll discuss the prospects for compromise with the

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and lead GOP negotiator, 평의원

셸리 무어 카피 토.

그러나, 먼저, let’s turn to Mark Meredith traveling with the president in

Wilmington, 델라웨어 — 표.

MARK MEREDITH, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Shannon, President Biden’s budget

proposals are generating a lot of mixed reactions. 민주당, they appeared

thrilled with what they’ve seen so far, while Republicans are outraged

saying these ideas could bankrupt the country.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MEREDITH (voice-over): President Biden’s budget calls for massive new

지출, 포함 $ 2.3 trillion on infrastructure, a proposal already

being hotly debated, $ 1.8 trillion to boost and expand safety net programs,

and another one and half trillion in discretionary spending.

BRIAN DEESE, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL DIRECTOR: It’s just the president’s

core economic plan, long-term investments that will increase the productive

capacity of our economy.

MEREDITH: It also calls for funding Democratic priorities from $ 36 십억

to fight climate change, $ 2 billion to address gun violence, 과 $ 30

billion to expand housing assistance.

For Republicans, it’s a nonstarter.

대표. NANCY MACE (R-SC): This kind of spending will ensure that everybody

is paying more for their houses, their rent, their groceries, you name it.

Prices will go up.

MEREDITH: The White House insists with increased taxes on the wealthy and

corporations, its spending plan would be paid for eventually. 공화당 원

reject the premise, arguing rising inflation is already a warning sign the

economy is in trouble.

이것의. ROGER MARSHALL (R-KS): Inflation occurs when you are throwing too

many dollars at too few goods and that’s exactly what’s happening.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MEREDITH (on camera): 금요일에, the Labor Department is going to release

the latest jobs report and this could be a big indicator about where

America’s economy is heading into the summer months. It can also have a big

impact on those infrastructure negotiations with the White House and Senate

Republicans still appearing fairly far apart on a final dealShannon.

BREAM: Mark Meredith, reporting from Wilmington, 델라웨어. 표, thank

you.

Joining us now, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

비서, welcome back toFOX News Sunday”.

PETE BUTTIGIEG, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: 감사합니다. Nice to be back with

you.

BREAM: Let’s start with reaction to the president’s $ 6 trillion budget

proposal. The AP says it comes out under this infrastructure. It says this

year’s projected deficit would set a new record $ 3.7 일조. The national

debt will soon breach $ 30 일조. 결과적으로, the government must borrow

대충 50 cents of every dollar it spends this year and next.

Even a number of the Obama and Biden administration, Larry Summers, 누가

the director of the National Economic Council, has a warning.

It starts off this way: We are printing money. We are creating government

bonds. We are borrowing on an unprecedented scale.

He goes on to say that the dollar is at risk, inflation is now potentially

going to skyrocket.

Is Larry Summers wrong, 씨. 비서?

BUTTIGIEG: This is a responsible budget and, importantly, all of the

proposals for spending and investment in this budget are paid for. It’s one

of the reasons why if you look into the out years the deficit actually

starts going down.

But you can’t get something for nothing. And in the near term we know that

we need to make major investments in our roads and bridges, in our

교육, in our health. We can’t afford not to do these things because

for decades, 솔직히, we’ve been disinvesting. We’ve been cutting in the

things that make America strong.

The president is looking around the world, seeing how other countries are

not hesitating to invest in their future, and we’re watching America fall

뒤에. Just look at infrastructure, we’re not even in the top 10 anymore.

And we can’t allow that to continue.

So yes, this is a bold budget with major investments in the American people

but it’s also a responsible one because the president has put forward how

to pay for every penny of it in the long term.

BREAM: What about the critics who say, all right, the payment plans that

we’re talking about, the things that we’re going to invest in are over an

eight year window but paying for it extends actually over a 15 year window

so people are going to be paying for it long after President Biden is

대통령.

BUTTIGIEG: 잘, that’s part of responsible budgeting. You make sure you

create permanent revenue even when you’re proposing temporary spending.

What we know is we need to make a lot of these investments upfront in the

same way that a responsible business or family might take out a longer term

loan in order to fund an immediate home improvement or investment in a

사업.

America needs to make sure we’re investing in the roads and bridges. 우리

can’t say, 잘, 15 years from now we’re going to get around to that, 또는 20

years from now maybe we’ll start doing something to build up our education

그리고 그 (ph) and make sure the Americans can go to community college free

of charge. We’ve got to do these kinds of things right away so that we can

collect the benefits of that in our lives, not just in dollars and cents

terms, in the years to come.

하지만 다시, all you’ve got to do to pay for this is for corporations and

wealthy Americans to pay their fair share. Not a crazy high tax level, 아니

even as high as the tax levels have been for most of my life.

We’re talking about resetting the corporate tax rate to what it was under

조지여. 부시. If we do these kinds of things, it’s paid for over the long

run and we can start enjoying the benefits as a country right away.

BREAM: Even President Obama warned about raising the corporate tax rate.

그의 2015 economic report he said this: “All else equal, a higher

effective marginal rate for businesses will tend to reduce the level of

investment, and a lower effective marginal rate will tend to encourage

additional projects and a larger capital stock. Increases in the capital

available for each worker’s use boosts productivity, wages, and output.

He had cautioned as well about doing that.

BUTTIGIEG: 잘, the very first words in those comments wereall else

equal,” and unfortunately, all else is not equal right now. A lot of

companies don’t pay the so-calledsticker rate,” as a matter of fact, 우리

have many corporations recently make billions of dollars in profits and pay

zero, zero in taxes. And the American people know that that doesn’t make

sense. And I think it’s one of the reasons why among Americans there is

remarkable bipartisan support for the tax polices of this administration.

공화당 원, independents, and Democrats see that, 알 잖아, a lot of

corporations aren’t paying their fair share when small businesses and

families are. And so when we’re talking about how to fund infrastructure

investments or how to pay for the president’s budget, we believe that the

time has come to be paying their fair share.

과, 다시, not a high rate. 내말은, most of my lifetime the corporate tax

rate has been 35. We’re saying it ought to be 28. So lower than it has been

most of our lifetime, but enough to get the job done so that we can get

deficits under control and, most importantly, make the investments that are

going to be required for America to thrive.

BREAM: You talk about everyone paying their fair share. It’s a popular

talking point. The president has talked many times about the fact that he

doesn’t want to raise taxes and he won’t on people who are making less than

$ 400,000 년. But even The New York Times, poring through the budget

proposal, says that’s not actually true.

Jim Tankersley writing this, 그는 말한다: “The documents forecast that Mr.

Biden and Congress will allow tax cuts for low and middle income Americans,

signed into law by President Donald J. 트럼프 2017, to expire as

scheduled in 2025.So doesn’t that practically actually translate into a

real-world tax hike for people?

BUTTIGIEG: 잘, that’s a forecast and a set of assumptions about

something that is years away and we’ll see what the policy choices are at

that time. But right now, in this moment, we have a decision to make. 뭐

are we going to do with tax rates right now? And the president is saying,

let’s not charge middle class Americans more.

Middle class Americans are paying enough right now, in the president’s

view. Let’s make sure that corporations and the wealthy are paying their

fair share. And we believe that’s going to raise the kind of revenue that

we need in order to fund the proposals that the president has put forward.

다시, you look at something like the American Jobs Plan, 그만큼

infrastructure vision that the president has put out, the entire thing is

paid for across 15 years by theby year 16 deficits going down and he

does it without asking one penny from the middle class.

BREAM: But if this budget proposal, 그만큼 $ 6 trillion budget proposal,

which encompasses those things, actually lets those tax rates expire, 그

tax cut expire, and it’s premised on that being part of the funding for

this plan, isn’t thatdoesn’t it equate to a tax hike on people making

이하 $ 400,000 년?

BUTTIGIEG: 알 잖아, I feel like there are some politicians hoping to

have a hypothetical debate about decisions Congress will make in 2025 ...에

get out of the real debate we’re having in 2021 about what tax policy ought

to be right now. The president is saying that we’ve got to make sure

corporations and wealthy pay their fair share. The American people agree

with him. And we think it’s time to get that done.

BREAM: 그래서, negotiations continue this morning on the infrastructure

package but one of the biggest itemsthe biggest item is $ 400 십억

for home health care or long term care. NPR described it this way, 때문에

services can include home visits from nurses or occupational therapists,

assistance with personal care, such as eating or bathing, help from case

managers, attendance at adult daycare centers, help with cooking, cleaning,

and other chores, transportation, and home repairs and modification.

씨. 비서, those are all good things. We all think those are laudable

goals but they don’t line up with probably the definition of infrastructure

that most average Americans would think of.

BUTTIGIEG: 보기, if you have a different category you’d like to put it in,

괜찮아. We should still do it and we should do it as part of the

미국 일자리 계획. We think of it as infrastructure because infrastructure

is the foundation that lets people participate in the economy.

과, as so many people watching this program know, when you’re taking care

of a loved one, doing some of those things because you don’t have the right

kind of care structure to look after them and you can’t even get a job

because you’re in this elder care situation, because somehow we’re one of

the only developed countries that doesn’t take care of this, that’s holding

you back the same way it holds you back if you don’t have a road or bridge

to get to where you want to go.

그러나, 보기, if somebody has a different view on the categories, 괜찮아.

That’s a philosophical debate that I don’t think is as important as

(CROSSTALK)

BREAM: — but that’s not roads and bridges

BUTTIGIEG: — in doing this

BREAM: 내말은, that’s something that

(CROSSTALK)

BUTTIGIEG: — do it now.

BREAM: It is a good thing but it doesn’t meet (ph) with what average

people think of ports (ph), even water, lead pipes, repairing those things.

There’s a lot agreement between Democrats and Republicans on those things.

But where do you actually draw the line? What’s not infrastructure?

BUTTIGIEG: This is called the American Jobs Plan because it contains a

number of measures that are going to help Americans not only get jobs but

thrive in our country today. And this is part of it.

We think these things fit together. 그리고 물론, it’s not unusual in

legislation to take a number of different elements that are part of a

related theme and move them at the same time because Americans can’t wait

for us to resolve the dorm room debate over which policies belong in which

카테고리. They want us to just get it done.

It’s why the president’s Jobs Plan is so overwhelmingly popular among the

American people. Now we’re trying to get Washington to catch up and to

actually do something.

BREAM: 잘, when you start to poll them about how to pay for it and what

actually infrastructure means, those numbers change. We’re going to discuss

that coming up.

Secretary Buttigieg, thank you for your time. Thanks for coming in today.

Always great to talk to you.

BUTTIGIEG: Thanks for having me. Great.

BREAM: Reaction from the top Republican negotiator, Senator Shelley Moore

알았다, 다음.

(MERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Now for more on Senate Republicanscounteroffer to President Biden

on infrastructure, joining us from West Virginia, the lead Republican

negotiator, Senator Shelley Moore Capito.

평의원, great to have you with us this morning.

이것의. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO (R-WV): 감사합니다, Shannon. Good to be on.

감사.

BREAM: 그래서, let me ask you this. Where do we stand with negotiations this

아침?

I know you’ve been talking with the president. There’s been some public

speculation about who is really calling the shots. Even Senator Mark

워너, 민주당 원, 속담, I’ve had my calls returned quickly, I’m talking

with the legislative team, but even I’m not really sure who’s making the

결정.

What’s your impression and where do things stand this morning?

CAPITO: 잘, I think the president is making the decisions. And when we

went to the Oval Office, six of us, to talk about a bipartisan

infrastructure package, the president basically tasked us to come back with

something close to $ 1 trillion in areas and the scope that we as

Republicans feel constitutes infrastructure. 또한, we couldwe could

spread it over an eight-year period of time.

And that’s exactly what we have done. And we’ve got a great basis for this

because we just passed a surface transportation bill unanimously out of my

committee with Senator Carper as the chairman. And so I think we are

building those blocks towardstowards a really good, 고체

infrastructure package that has bipartisan support.

그래서, we’re responding to what the president has said. He told me on the

phone just the day before yesterday, let’s get this done. And I think that

means that he hashis heart is in us. We have had some back and forth

with his staff to sort of pull back a little bit, but I think we’re

smoothing out those edges.

BREAM: I’m going to play something that your Democratic colleague, 평의원

엘리자베스 워렌, had to say in response to the GOP’s $ 928 십억

counteroffer. Here’s her take.

(비디오 클립 시작)

이것의. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): I don’t really think this is a serious

counteroffer. We were in a crisis before the pandemic hit. It only got

worse during the pandemic. This is our chance to expand our idea of what

infrastructure means.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: A couple of sticking points there. One of them is the most basic,

is about the understanding of what infrastructure is. 피트 장관

Buttigieg says it should be all-encompassing because if people can’t work,

they can’t travel the roads, they can’t use infrastructure.

How do you guys define this? Can you get to some middle ground on that?

CAPITO: 잘, we disagree on the definition of infrastructure and we’ve

been working with the president to bring it back to the physical core idea

of infrastructure that we’ve worked so well on in the past. Whether that’s

road and bridges, waterways, ports, lead pipes, transit, airports, and also

the new infrastructure which we must have everywhere, a broadband. 그

are great categories I think that we can work together on.

알 잖아, I think it is so easy to say, let’s throw everything in — 그리고 나

think that’s what the president did initially. Human infrastructure, 사회적인

하부 구조, great things to talk about, things that we need to address

daycare, senior care, all those items. But that’s not what we consider

physical infrastructure on modernizing our transportation system to meet

그만큼 — 알 잖아, the next century challenges, and that’s where I think we

need to concentrate our effort at this point.

BREAM: “워싱턴 포스트” did a fact-check on this, about Republicans

claims that only 5 퍼센트 7 percent of the Biden plan is, 인용문, 레알

하부 구조. He gave three out of four possible Pinocchios on that,

saying this: To say that Biden’s plan would devote only 5 퍼센트 7

percent of its $ 2.3 trillion costand it’s moved since then — ...쪽으로

real infrastructure, is highly misleading, the kind of talking point that

tries to erase recent history and parts of the English language as a battle

begins to heat up in Congress.

What’s accurate about where you are now in getting to those core terms?

CAPITO: 잘, the president has $ 400 billion for the care economy, 그만큼

ones we were talking aboutelder care, daycare and those things. As I

말했다, great things to talk about, but not part of a core physical

infrastructure package.

He also had a large section in there on research and development and

manufacturing, something that’s not considered initially as infrastructure.

But we’re working that bill right now in the Senate floor, the Endless

Frontier Act. 그래서, we’re going to have bipartisan agreement there.

He has a part of his plan that is incentives for buying electric vehicles.

알 잖아, 그 — building out the infrastructure for electric vehicles,

charging stations, we have that on our plan. But vouchers to purchase the

automobiles and other things, that I think is something we need to discuss

at a different time.

And these are hundreds of billions of dollars in his plan. We just think we

would be better off if we just looked at a core, solid definition that is

traditionally thought of as infrastructure and move that to the next

modernization to where we are the best and most technological superior

infrastructure in the world.

BREAM: 그래서, working on the definition of infrastructure, the deadline is

now blown and continues to loom on this, but also how to pay for it.

Democrats say that it makes sense to roll that cuts for corporate taxes.

알 잖아, I tried to press the secretary on whether this is also going to

mean rolling back taxes on individuals which at the corporate point, 그

said there are billions of dollars in corporate profits that are going

untaxed.

Here’s what Senator Dick Durbin had to say about the plan.

(비디오 클립 시작)

이것의. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): They don’t want to touch the wealthiest and the

big corporations who receive a generous tax break under the Trump tax plan.

But they haven’t come up with an alternative. 그래서, I hope they’ll join

us in a responsible effort.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: 그래서, are tax increases a red line for the GOP whether we’re talking

about corporations or individual?

CAPITO: The tax cuts of 2017 led to the most booming economy that we had

pre-pandemic. Here in Virginia, wages up, more diversity in the workforce,

more people working. It was working in terms of spreading out the economic

growth all throughout all sectors of our economy.

그래서, we’reI’m not going to vote to overturn those, but I can tell you,

we do have a plan. We have put over the course of the last year and a half,

trillions of dollars into COVID relief and much of that is unspent. We say

reprogram that.

The administration has already reprogrammed about $ 2.5 billion into Health

and Human Services to help with migrant children. So we know they’re not

opposed to reprogramming COVID dollars and rescue dollars.

Let’s take a lot of those dollars, 예를 들어, the unemployment that

states are no longer extending into $ 300. Let’s take those dollars and

devote them to something that’s core infrastructure. That is part of our

plan as well.

We also have user fees in there, because there’s no reason that folks who

have electric cars or hybrids, who used the roads, there’s no reason that

they shouldn’tbecause they don’t buy gasoline, don’t pay gas tax, 어느

is traditional resource to pay for those, but there’s no reason why they

shouldn’t participate.

그래서, we have laid out the ways to pay for this, and I think it doesn’t

involve raising our taxes. We all know when you raise taxes in one place,

it’s felt everywhere. And with the stagnation of our economy, we saw slow

job growth last month, let’s make sure that we get everything reopen and

the economy fully going full steam.

BREAM: 그래서, the vast majority of your proposal does include hundreds of

billions of dollars, you all say unspent COVID funds.

Here’s what the White House said about that when Press Secretary Jen Psaki

was askingasked about it. 그녀가 말했다: Here’s why that would be difficult

to be a key mechanism. Ninety-five percent of it is already allocated

somewhere else.

그래서, Democrats say that means you really only bringing about $ 250 billion in

new spending to the table. It’s trillions apart from where the White House

started.

그래서, does it represent real compromise?

CAPITO: I think we can get to real compromise, 물론, because we’re

both still in the game. I think the president told me himself that let’s

get this done.

We realize this is not easy. I think we bring every idea that’s on the

table into the negotiations to see how we can achieve this and get it

across the threshold.

But I think it’s interesting that the spokes — 대통령의

spokesperson said everything has been allocated. It hasn’t gone out the

문. We have hundreds of billions of dollars that could be reprogrammed

toward something as core as infrastructure, and I think that’s what we

should be looking at rather than put — 알 잖아, force-feeding into

certain categories where really it’s not part of COVID, it’s not a part of

a rescue package. It’s dollars that were way over-allocated that still have

yet to be spent.

BREAM: You know at the heart of the matter, Democrats may not need your

votes for this. There is a push from the progressive left of the party to

do another reconciliation package and just tonot get too wonky, 그러나

what it means essentially is they wouldn’t need a single Republican vote to

get this across the finish line. That’s what they did with the last almost

$ 2 trillion COVID relief bill.

뭐 — or what’s your assessment of where a cutoff will be there will be

no more negotiations and Democrats potentially go that route without you?

CAPITO: 알 잖아, the Democrats and the president can go that route right

지금. And there’s a reason that they aren’t, and I think that’s because they

are seeing that through our committee work, with our surface transportation

계산서, with our water and wastewater bill that we passed several months ago,

$ 35 십억, that we’re working this through the system, Endless Frontier

on the cusp of being passed in terms of our competitiveness with China.

And I think there is a hunger for bipartisanship. The president stood on

the Capitol steps and said he’s the resident of everybody, represents

Republicans and Democrats. He has expressed to me and to our group numerous

times his desire to work with us and to negotiate a package. I think that’s

what we see and, 사실로, we are inching towards one another.

I understand there’s a deadline here. I understand at some point, if we

don’t get there, 그것 — but it won’t be for trying. It won’t be because we

didn’t try.

And it’s worth it. It’s worth it to show this country we can work together.

We can reach compromise for the good of everybody.

BREAM: And I think the American people are cheering for you all.

그래서, 평의원, thank you for joining us. We’ll follow the negotiations.

CAPITO: 감사, Shannon.

BREAM: Up next, the Biden administration orders a closer review into the

origins of COVID-19, as U.S. intelligence takes another look at the lab

leak theory. We’re going to ask our Sunday panel about the science, 그만큼

politics and the bias surrounding the debate.

(MERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Coming up, renewed focus on theory COVID-19 may have originated in

a lab.

(비디오 클립 시작)

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS

DISEASES: Because we don’t know 100 percent what the origin is, 이것의

imperative that we look and we do an investigation. That’s how we feel

지금.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: We’ll ask our Sunday panel about the shifting focus.

(MERCIAL BREAK)

(비디오 클립 시작)

대표. 마르코 루비오 (R-FL): Why did you dismiss the lab leak theory as — 같이

신뢰할 수 있는?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: 나는

have always said that the high likelihood is that this is a naturally

occurrence. I didn’t dismiss anything.

DR. 프랜시스 콜린스, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH: I agree with

him that it is most likely that this is a virus that arose naturally, 그러나

we cannot exclude the possibility of some kind of a lab accident.

(비디오 클립 종료)

샤논 브림, 폭스 뉴스 앵커: 박사. Anthony Fauci와 박사. 프랜시스 콜린스,

director of the National Institutes of Health, getting grilled this week

over the potential origins of COVID-19.

It’s time now for our Sunday group. Former Republican Congressman Jason

Chaffetz, pollster and Fox News contributor Kristen Soltis Anderson, 과

Fox News political analyst Juan Williams.

Great to see you all on this Sunday morning.

SO what we heard there from Dr. Fauci is that he thinks the other theory is

more viable, but he says he didn’t dismiss the leak theory. Here’s what he

said inNational Geographic.They had an exclusive interview with him in

할 수있다 2020. He did talk about the other theory about this being natural. 그들

characterized the rest of the conversation saying this, based on the

scientific evidence, he also doesn’t entertain an alternate theory that

someone found the coronavirus in the wild, brought it into a lab and then

it accidentally escaped.

제이슨, a lot of folks shifting their perspective on potential theories,

whether they’re viable, whether they should get you silenced or muted or

아니. Now we’re allowed to talk about it. 왜?

JASON CHAFFETZ, FORMER CONGRESSMAN (R-UT) AND FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: 잘,

궁극적으로, I want to get to the truth, but it’sit’s disappointing that

they didn’t look at itthis more seriously a year ago. 트럼프 대통령

was saying that this was a possibility. Senator Cotton was saying that that

was a possibility. I’m guessing that the intelligence services were

suggesting that this might be a possibility. But I’m glad that the

민주당, albeit a year later, are finally coming to the game and the

realization that we really don’t know and we better darn well find out so

that it never, ever happens again.

And there has been a lack of cooperation from China. There’s been a lack of

cooperation and trust really in the World Health Organization. And that’s

problematic.

BREAM: I want to play something from David Asher. He was the lead State

Department investigator on this. I’ve talked with him about what they were

trying to do in getting to the origins. He explains what their mission was

on andand what they were finding according to him.

(비디오 클립 시작)

DAVID ASHER, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Despite the claims of our

scientific community, 자연을 뒷받침하는 증거가 거의 없었습니다.

zoonotic, 알 잖아, evolution or source of COVID-19.

The data disproportionately stacked up as we investigated that it was

coming out of a lab or some supernatural source.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: 과, Juan, those as we talked about a year ago, if you made that

suggestion, your posts were edited on social media, were banned. There was

plenty of information that there could have been numerous different

theories. Why so quick to shut that one down and why now, the media a year

later saying, 확인, it’s viable?

후안 윌리엄스, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: 잘, 나는 생각한다 “The Wall Street

일지” reported that some people got sick at that lab I think it’s in

November of 2019. 아니, we don’t know if they got COVID or they got the flu,

Shannon, but what we know now is that there were some people who were sent

to the hospital from that lab. And we also know that the military was

involved in experiments at that lab, raising the possibility of bio

무기.

But the Trump administration never was able to find a smoking gun or

produce it publicly in any case. So the urgency, 알 잖아, when Dr. Fauci

was speaking in May of last year, was about stopping the spread of the

disease here in the United States and cutting down on the death rate. 우리

were in the midst of a pandemic. 그래서, 나는 생각한다, at that point, 알 잖아, 종류

of this theory or that theory was very much secondary to what we had to

deal with as the American people, what the administration had to deal with.

과, 물론이야, there’s politics involved here. I think there were lots of

people in the Trump administration who wanted to distract from the poor job

that the Trump administration was doing with the virus in the United States

by saying, hey, the Chinese are the problem. And the Chinese, even in terms

of investigation, they’re just bad actors. I mean these people can’t be

trusted. 알 잖아, if you tell the truth over there, you could end up in

교도소. So there’s lots of politics involved in this.

BREAM: Or worse.

WILLIAMS: 예.

BREAM: 예, 확인.

So now the push is on. There seems to be some agreement, We have to get to

the bottom of this for numerous reasons. 과, 제이슨, as you said, 때문에

if this surfaces again, to prevent it or to be able to deal with things

moving forward.

Here’s what Andy Slavitt, who has been a special advisor to President

바이든, especially on this coronavirus issue, said about investigating this

주.

(비디오 클립 시작)

ANDY SLAVITT, SENIOR ADVISER, CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE TEAM: We need to get to

the bottom of this and we need a completely transparent process from China.

We need the WHO to assist in that matter. We don’t feel like we have that

지금. We need to get to the bottom of this, whatever the answer may be.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: So there’s been praise from the WHO. There’s been scorn for the WHO.

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which tracks and has been fighting on this

coronavirus question, said this, ten ways the WHO catastrophically failed

the world. One of them they said is this, the WHO panel, which was sent to

China to investigate the origins of COVID-19 was not entirely independent.

It was selected in coordination with the Chinese government and included

people who had clear conflicts of interest due to prior work with the Wuhan

Institute of Virology.

Kristen, should we be depending on WHO at all to get to the bottom of this

지금?

KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON, ECHELON INSIGHTS, “WASHINGTON EXAMINERAND FOX

NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: The WHO has an enormous credibility problem. 과,

운수 나쁘게, over the last year, a number of experts in the scientific

and public health fields have run into a credibility problem. And part of

that is because a lot of these organizations and experts have been

incapable of saying I don’t know. Uncertainty is very hard to communicate,

especially early on and COVID when we don’t know where it’s coming from,

when we’re not yet sure of how it’s transmitted. It’s OK at that point for

과학자들, experts to say, 우리는 모른다. We think that you should be

wearing masks. We think that you should be doing x, 과, and z. We think it’s

transmitted this way, but we don’t know, because then when you really do

know, you have the credibility to come to people and say, we know where

this virus came from. We know what you should be doing to prevent the

spread of it.

I think too early on there were too many experts who said, 아니, 우린 알아

exactly where this came from or, 아니, we know exactly how this spreads and

wound up being wrong and that means that now those same experts, 언제

they’re asking us to do things like take vaccines that we know to be safe,

there are large portions of the public that look at that and go, 알 잖아,

I’m not sure I trust those experts. And that lack of credibility, both with

experts here in the U.S. and especially experts around the world, is a huge

problem for dealing with global health problems coming down the road.

BREAM: And at the end of the day this all goes back to China, the lack of

접속하다, the danger to people there on the ground who would speak out and

and try to give truth to investigators. I talked to former Secretary of

State Mike Pompeo about this, how we deal with China going forward on

금요일 밤. Here’s what he told me.

(비디오 클립 시작)

MIKE POMPEO, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: This information is in the

possession of the Chinese Communist Party and President Biden has a

responsibility to raise this every time he talks with Xi Jinping. 알 잖아,

Shannon, we’ve talked about this laboratory, this Wuhan Institute of

Virology from which the Wuhan virus may well have escaped. 중국인

Communist Party knows the answer to that. President Biden has the

responsibility to ask Xi Jinping and demand that he does this.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: 제이슨, are you confident he will?

CHAFFETZ: That’s what he should do. Hasn’t happened yet.

I think Secretary Pompeo is absolutely right. I think there was a lot of

misdirection from China early on. It did not help that the Democrats were

were charging at Donald Trump when he tried to shut off the border and

limit travel and call it all different things that weren’t true.

It hasn’t been based on science from the beginning and II’ve got to

tell you, we have to figure this out but it has to happen at the level of

바이든 대통령. He has to be the one pressing China and we haven’t seen

that yet.

BREAM: So we’re going into this first, quote/unquote, holiday weekend, 그만큼

first one in a long time, without all of the COVID lockdown and mask

mandates and things that we’ve had.

“뉴욕 타임즈” says this, the holiday weekend comes amid a national

decline in coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths. All across the

국가, mask mandates are easing, restrictions are lifting and many states

have gone back to business as usual.

Juan, where do you assess that we are on this Memorial Day weekend when it

comes to the fight against COVID?

WILLIAMS: 잘, I’m feeling optimistic, Shannon. I went to a baseball game

indoors last night. My team didn’t win, but so be it.

But if you just stop and think about it, 알 잖아, 우리 가족, if you

choose to get a vaccination, you have every reason to feel safe and

vaccinations are available. You can even win the lottery be getting

예방 접종.

You think about where we are now compared to when President Biden took

사무실. 알 잖아, infection rates are down 90 퍼센트, death rates down 80

퍼센트. That’s incredible. I mean thatto me, that’s a real

accomplishment for the American people to celebrate.

The president had talked about July 4th at a point when we could get

함께. I think many families are together this weekend. 과, 다시, 나는

think we should understand that the United States has gone from lagging in

terms of globalhow other countries, western democracies, industrialized

countries have handled COVID from lagging in that competition to now being

a leader, an exemplar of how it can be done and even offering to help other

countries in terms of getting the vaccine out to them.

BREAM: 예, and thanks to Operation Warp Speed, all of these things have

been positive developments here and around the world.

괜찮아, panel, we’ve got to take a break. Kristen, we’ll start with you

when we come back.

Up next, President Biden goes on offense against his economic critics,

while Republicans are sounding the alarm over inflation.

(MERCIAL BREAK)

(비디오 클립 시작)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: The Biden economic plan is working. 우리

had record job creation. We’re seeing record economic growth. 우리는

creating a new paradigm.

이것의. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): Your wages never go up as fast as inflation is

going up. We have got to stop this reckless spending.

(비디오 클립 종료)

BREAM: President Joe Biden and Republican Senator Rick Scott, 대단히

different takes on the U.S. state of the economy.

We’re back now with our panel.

Kristen, they clearly see things differently, the assessment of where we

are and where we’re going.

ANDERSON: 잘, there are three main themes that I see in polls around this

발행물. One is that many of the things included in Biden’s plan are

generally popular on their own when not associated with a price tag. 그만큼

second is that most of them are not viewed as infrastructure. Roads and

bridges, airports, 물론, but a lot of these other things that the

Biden administration is trying to shoe-horn in under the label of

infrastructure to make them more popular, it’s justpeople aren’t buying

그것.

But most importantly, 나는 생각한다, is when you talk about the price tag of much

of this, there really are concerns about inflation, 어느, not to date

자기, but that’s something that I havethat voters have not really

been concerned about during my lifetime. This is a problem that is

relatively new going back over decades and decades and is caused by the

type of government spending and the potential overheating of the economy

coming out of this pandemic.

그래서, on the one hand, it’s good that our economy is starting to try to come

뒤, but if we’re just putting too much government money into the system,

you’re going to have people seeing their cost of living go up and that’s a

거대한, huge problem. People know that when they’re going to the grocery

저장, when they’re going to the pump, things are costing more money.

That’s inflation. It’s hitting people in their pocketbooks. And it’s a real

problem the Biden administration needs to address.

BREAM: Juan, you and I might be a little bit older than Kristen. I remember

back to the ’70s and waiting in the gas lines and inflation worries.

Interest rates on mortgages, all those kinds of things, hearing my parents

whisper about that stuff and be very nervous and worried.

Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is predicting that President

Biden is morphing in to President Carter, who was running the country

during those times.

What do you make of that assessment?

WILLIAMS: I think that’s very political assessment, so I’ll leave it to

그를.

그러나, 알 잖아, I think this economy is taking off and it’s taking off fast.

It’s going from zero to 60. 명백하게, we were shut down because of the

pandemic and now we’re opening up in a big way.

So when you have that kind of takeoff, Shannon, you’re going to have some

turbulence. 내말은, 명백하게, something like the used car market is very

tight right now, hard to get a used car. 왜? 때문에, 알 잖아, it was

done away with pretty much during the pandemic. Lumber, housing, 알 잖아,

a lot of the lumber mills had shut down. So you’re going to get things like

그, some turbulence on takeoff. But if you talk to the mainstream

economists in the country, they all say this is temporary. They don’t see

inflation down the road as a major threat.

알 잖아, 지금, this Memorial Day weekend, there’s high demand for

gas. We didn’t have a lot of people drying around for the last year and

then we had a Colonial Pipeline shutdown with the hack.

So these things happen, but I’m not sure that they’re long term. You look

at the stock market right now, you look at the price of Treasury bonds,

inflation there is estimated like 1.5 percent over the next ten years.

That’s not a problem.

BREAM: 잘, 제이슨, I talked to Secretary Buttigieg about this, about Larry

Summers, WHO, 같이, 다시, I noted, under the Obama/Biden administration, 그

was the director of the White House National Economic Council. 그는 ~였다

sounding a warning this week in a call that was released. He talked about

the levels at which we’re borrowing. He was concerned about the impact on

the dollar, the potential that it would trigger more inflation. He’s not a

super conservative right-leaning guy.

CHAFFETZ: The Biden administration is growing government. That’s where

they’ve put all their marbles. If you look back ten years, the budget put

forward by President Biden is more than 50 percent larger than it was just

ten years ago. That’s growing government.

과, 생각해 내다, all the stimulus and infrastructure and all these other

things they want to put on top of that. The number is stunning. They what

they’re doing is growing government. And you have small businesses, 과

medium size and even large sides businesses competing against the

government because the government has made it so rich not to go back to

작업.

And so these things have got to reconcile. But I do not believe that the

government is a sole source of how you create jobs. 미국인

create jobs, not government. And when it becomes so large, approaching 25

percent of our gross domestic product, something has got to be put back in

밸런스. It is far too big.

BREAM: 잘, they’re still having these negotiations now. We talk

specifically about the infrastructure bill this morning. They’re still

약 $ 1 trillion apart at last check. This is something that Senator

Richard Blumenthal, 민주당 원, had to say about this. He says, I fully

understand the president’s instinctive desire for a bipartisan solution and

that would be the best of all worlds, but it takes two to tango and so far

they’ve refused to come to the dance floor.

Senator Shelley Moore Capito, who was with us, would beg to differ on that,

Kristen, but what about this conversation now that this may not be

bipartisan? This may be like the last $ 2 일조, 대충, bill that got

통과, the COVID relief bill. Democrats could conceivably move ahead with

trillions on infrastructure without a Republican vote, a single one.

ANDERSON: But if the Biden administration does move ahead without really

seriously trying to court Republican buy-in on something this large, 이것의

going to undercut one of the core things that President Biden said when he

was running for office and then when he took office, which is that he wants

to be someone who will unify the country.

I see in poll after poll that we are so divided as a nation that folks of

two different parties look at one another and just can’t find many places

where they get along. But the idea that we need to fix our nation’s roads

and bridges is one of those areas where Republicans and Democrats tend to

be on the same page. Even though the sticker price on a lot of this is

pretty high, Republicans have actually said, let’s do even more for roads

and bridges than the original Biden plan laid out because that kind of

spending is going to be long-term investment for us. It’s not going to be

the kind of spending that leads to inflation. Let’s get there.

And so I think if the Biden administration does get pulled too far to the

왼쪽, if the progress voices in the party are too loud and don’t allow for

some kind of gradual, incremental work on this issue that does involve

Republican buy-in, it would be a huge missed opportunity and a failure of

the administration to carry out that one big promise to be a unifier.

BREAM: 예, the progressives want this number to be much bigger, 이들

spending numbers, and they, 다시, are pressing for move ahead through

reconciliation if they have to so you don’t have to negotiate with

공화당 원. Some of them saying, just stop doing it, it’s wasting time. 그것

doesn’t sound very bipartisan despite what the president has said about

그.

방법은 다음과 같습니다. “The Wall Street Journal,” in an opinion piece, talked about

this level of spending that we’re at, getting to World War II levels based

on the president’s budget, saying this, federal spending in the World War

II era allowed the United States to save western civilization by defeating

Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. The Biden spending plan will subsidize

daycare and electric cars among other political desires. Unclear is what

미국. will do in the tragic event it has to found victory in a world war

다시.

Juan.

WILLIAMS: 잘, I think we’ve got about three weeks. 알 잖아, 나는 생각한다

Senator Capito, who you interviewed this morning, Shannon, is negotiating

in good faith. She wants a deal. What you just heard from Kirsten Soltis

Anderson is that the American people want this deal across political lines.

Republicans and Democrats, these policies are popular.

The difficulty here is how you pay for it. I think they’re — 그만큼

Republicans are clearly all about user fee, gas taxes, tolls, price on

electric vehicles, all that kind of thing. Democrats say they want to raise

the taxes on the corporations and on the rich. And I think there’s a big

divide there.

지금, the politics of this, very quickly, 이다, I think that there’s no

indication from the Senate minority leader, 미치 맥코넬, that he is

looking for a deal here. I think that he worries that this ismight be a

popular plan but he’d rather not give the credit to Biden and he also wants

Biden to have to deal with any political fallout that comes from a big

price tag. And I think you have to look at it down the road. 그 — 내말은

this is politics. This is why we aren’t having a January 6th commission.

That’s for (ph) politics and this is about politics.

BREAM: Kristen, very quickly, before we have to go. To that point about,

Juanabout polling, the administration has pointed to this quite a bit

saying it’s bipartisan. Even if you don’t get a GOP vote, they say it polls

well with Republicans. But as you’ve said, when you get into the nitty-

gritty about what it’s going to cost people, attitudes can often shift.

CHAFFETZ: This is laughable and it’s a joke to suggest that it is paid for.

ANDERSON: You’re absolutely right. People would like to see

BREAM: Let me ask Kristen to the polling point here.

ANDERSON: 죄송합니다, go ahead.

CHAFFETZ: 죄송합니다. 죄송합니다.

ANDERSON: 확실한.

당신 — I think this is a piece of legislation that without the price tag

people think isis wonderful. That there are a lot of things in it that

are great. But when you begin talking about spending tax dollars on it, 그것

becomes less popular. When you begin testing out the different ways to get

the money to pay for it, it becomes less popular.

그래서, as always, the devil is in the details.

BREAM: 그것은.

괜찮아, thank you very much, panel, we’ll see you next Sunday.

Up next, ourPower Playerthis Memorial Day weekend. A man whose made it

his life’s work to honor veterans with these 24 musical notes.

(MERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: We first met him 12 years ago sharing the story of how he’s worked

to insures all veterans receive a proper tribute. It’s become a Memorial

Day tradition here. 다시 한번, here’s Chris Wallace with thePower Player

of the Week.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM DAY, FOUNDER, BUGLES ACROSS AMERICA: When you’re playing it, it’s only

24 notes, but it’s so meaningful to that family.

WALLACE (voice over): Tom Day is talking about playingTaps” ~에서

funerals of military veterans, and he should know.

He’s the founder and president of an organization called Bugles Across

미국.

WALLACE: (on camera): 모두 말했다, how many funerals have you done since you

started Bugles Across America?

DAY: 에서 200,000.

WALLACE: Really?

DAY: In ten years. 권리.

WALLACE (voice over): It started back in 2000, when Congress gave every vet

the right to a funeral with military honors, including two uniformed

officers to present a flag and playTaps.The problem was, the military

only had 500 bugler’s, so they sent someone to play a recordedTaps” 에

boom box or an electronic device inside a bugle.

Tom Day, who played in the Marines in the ’50s, didn’t like it.

DAY: I call it stolen dignity that these veterans can’t get liveTaps

when we are out there ready to perform liveTaps.

WALLACE: So he started his organization, recruiting 400 horn players within

년.

DAY: Now we have 6,270 horn players. And we’re doing 2,200 funerals a

달.

WALLACE: It’s become quite an operation that Day runs out of his basement

near Chicago. Families can go on his website to ask for a bugler. A message

is sent to every horn player within 100 miles of the funeral. Day gives

away bugles and helps with uniforms. While he gets support from

foundations, he runs a deficit every year.

WALLACE (on camera): How do you make up for the shortfall?

DAY: I kind of make it up myself.

WALLACE: $ 15,000, $ 20,000 년?

DAY: Probably ten. You finish, 알 잖아, the last of the 24 notes, you put

the horn down and the flag has been presented, then the family comes over.

The kisses, the handshakes from these families, there is nothing — 아니

amount of money could ever buy the feeling that I get from the family once

I’ve finished the 24 notes.

WALLACE (voice over): With soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus

약간 400 veterans of World War II dying every day, there is a flood of

military funerals. Day says he wants to keep going until he dies, 그때

leave his organization in solid shape to carry on.

DAY: I want every family to have liveTapsat that going away

presentation of their veteran. And it kind of tells the Marines who are

guarding the gates in heaven, 라이브 “Taps,” we’re going to let this veteran

right in.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BREAM: What a beautiful, beautiful organization and effort.

By the way, for those who are visiting Arlington National Cemetery this

Memorial Day weekend, both the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and President

John F. Kennedy’s gravesite are now fully reopened to the public.

God bless each of you who is remembering the loss of a loved one who died

in service of our great country.

That is it for us today. I’ll see you all this week onFOX NEWS AT NIGHT

and Chris will see you right back here for next FOX NEWS SUNDAY.

Copy: 콘텐츠 및 프로그래밍 저작권 2021 폭스 뉴스 네트워크, LLC. ALL

RIGHTS RESERVED. 저작권 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. 모두

materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not

be reproduced, 분산, 전송, 표시, published or broadcast

without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. 당신

may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from

copies of the content.

범주:

i898

태그:

, , ,

댓글이 닫혀 있습니다..