 -- THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT.

ANNOUNCER: Starting right now on ABC's THIS WEEK, Trump's new targets -- "The Donald" trashing a top Clinton aide.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: She's married to Anthony Weiner, who's (INAUDIBLE).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tangling with the media.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Sit down. Sit down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And this morning, the new evidence his hard hits are pushing him to an all-time high.

Hillary's big slide -- the stunning poll out just now revealing Bernie Sanders is surging.

Can he grab Hillary's lead?

Sanders is here live.

And a split verdict.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He did not get freedom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The new reaction to the jury's decision in that prep school sexual assault case.

From ABC News, THIS WEEK WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS begins now.

MARTHA RADDATZ, HOST: Good morning. I'm Martha Raddatz.

We begin with that shake-up in the 2016 race. A brand new poll coming in overnight from the critical state of Iowa, showing Senator Bernie Sanders closing in on Hillary Clinton. While on the Republican side, Donald Trump is still soaring.

It's your voice, your vote. And let's take a look at those numbers.

Among Republicans, Trump leads, followed by another outsider, Dr. Ben Carson. Then nobody else breaks double digits. Ted Cruz and Scott Walker are tied for third, but trailing far behind Trump.

The biggest surprise is among Democrats. Clinton's lead now down to single digits, just 7 points ahead of Sanders. It's the first time she's dropped below 50 percent in "The Des Moines Register"/Bloomberg Poll this year.

We're taking on every twist and turn in the 2016 race this morning.

And Bernie Sanders is standing by live to weigh in.

First, ABC's Jon Karl on the dramatic difference between the leading candidates right now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's the tale of two frontrunners. For one, the best of times. For the other, well, if it isn't the worst, it's getting there. The Republican establishment fretting their frontrunner is too strong, could actually win. The Democratic establishment fretting theirs is too weak and could actually lose.

While Hillary Clinton has a comfortable lead in national polls, she's already trailing a 74-year-old self-described socialist in New Hampshire. And now, Bernie Sanders is surging in Iowa, as well, despite yet another mea culpa over her private home email server...

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I should have used two emails, one personal, one for work. And I take responsibility for that decision.

KARL: Doubts over her email account still under investigation by the FBI, are taking a toll. Sixty-one percent of voters now say she's untrustworthy, while some Democrats are urging Vice President Biden to jump in, handing out these candy bars at this week's DNC meeting.

Trump, meanwhile, is having the time of his life, riding high in the early states, riding high nationally, seemingly riding high everywhere. Top Republicans are worried he's alienating key voting groups. Jeb Bush even making his own trip to the border to trash Trump's plan to deport undocumented immigrants.

JEB BUSH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: His proposal is unrealistic. It will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. It will violate people's civil liberties.

KARL: But perhaps the biggest attack on the frontrunners comes not from their opponents, but from voters. A recent poll asking for the first words that come to mind about each of them.

For Hillary Clinton, liar, dishonest, untrustworthy.

For Donald Trump, arrogant, blowhard, idiot.

So much for great expectations for either frontrunner.

For THIS WEEK, Jonathan Karl, ABC News, Washington.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

RADDATZ: Our thanks to Jon.

Let’s go to straight to Senator Bernie Sanders.

Senator, good morning. You saw those new poll numbers. Is Hillary Clinton’s campaign in trouble?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I don’t know if her campaign is in trouble, but our campaign is doing great. You know, it’s not just in Iowa, it’s in New Hampshire. It’s all across this country, Martha. I think people are responding to our message that something is wrong when the middle class of this country continues to disappear. People are working longer hours for lower wages. And almost all of the new wealth and income is going to the top 1 percent. That is not the type of country, not the type of economy that the American people want or deserve. And I think they’re prepared to support somebody who’s going to take on the billionaire class and make an economy for ordinary people, not just for the people on top.

RADDATZ: Well, Senator Sanders, Hillary Clinton has lost about a third of her supporters since May, but the polls don’t show those supporters, a significant number, are not heading your way.

Why not, given what you’ve said?

SANDERS: Well, the polls that I saw said that there was massive enthusiasm for the message that we’re delivering and that the vast majority of the people who are voting for me in that Iowa poll -- and I think it’s true all over this country -- are not necessarily anti-Hillary Clinton, they’re pro-Bernie Sanders. And they want a candidate who is not dependent upon super-PACs, a candidate who is prepared to take on and overturn this disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision, help have the United States lead the world in combating climate change, make college affordable to all people.

I have to tell you, Martha, I think the gains that we are seeing, and the enthusiasm, and the huge crowds that we are seeing, this is not anti-Hillary Clinton. This is pro-Bernie Sanders and pro a message that says enough is enough. This country and our government belong to all of us, not just a handful of very wealthy people.

RADDATZ: Senator Sanders, this morning, again, we know you’ve voicing great concern about the middle class, the cost of college, climate change. And yet there are two issues that are entirely missing from your campaign website, and those are issues of national security and foreign policy.

Don’t you feel these are issues that a president should be very concerned about?

SANDERS: Absolutely, Martha. And we will -- you know, in all fairness, we’ve only been in this race for three and a half months. And we’ve been focusing, quite correctly, as you’ve indicated, on the economy, on the collapse of the American middle class, on massive income and wealth inequality.

But you’re absolutely right, foreign policy is a huge issue.

Let me just say a word or two about that. And we are going to spend more time on that.

You are a looking at a senator and a former congressman. And as a congressman, I voted against the war in Iraq, which I think will go down in history as one of the worst foreign -- foreign policy blunders that we have ever seen, leading to the enormous destabilization of that region right now.

But the issue of foreign policy, how we bring the world together, our allies together, not do it alone, to take on ISIS, to deal with the other threats and problems around the world...

RADDTAZ: Senator Sanders, you brought up the Iraq war. You also voted against the first Gulf war in 1991 when Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait. You did not support air attacks after chemical attacks in Syria. You did support the initial invasion into Afghanistan.

So, can you tell me what your criteria is for the use of force?

SANDERS: Yes. Good question, fair question.

Look, I think historically in too many instances the United States has gone to war, often unilaterally, when we should not have. I think my vote against the first war in the Gulf region was the right vote. I think we could have gotten Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in a way that did not require a war. And I think certainly my vote...

RADDATZ: Even though he had invaded Kuwait?

SANDERS: But the point was you had the whole world united against him, Martha. Do we need to go to war in every instances, or can we bring pressure of sanctions and international pressure to resolve these conflicts?

Look, I am supporting President Obama's effort to make certain that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon, but I get very nervous about my Republican friends who keep implying that the only way we could do that is through another war. War is the last resort, not the first resort.

So, you are looking at a guy -- yeah, there are times when you have to use force, no question about it.

RADDATZ: And is that only when we're attacked? Is that only when we're attacked? Because if you look at your record, you supported the invasion into Afghanistan after we were attacked. Is that the only time you would support it?

SANDERS: No, not at all.

You know, I think using our military is an option, obviously, that we will always have under certain circumstances, but it is the last option. And I applaud the president for trying to make certain that we stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, but we do it in a way that does not require war.

The second point that I would make is the United State cannot do it alone. In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia has the third largest military budget in the entire world. They're going to have to get in and take on ISIS as well as other countries in that region. United States should be supportive. We should be working with other countries.

But the United States cannot always be the only country involved in these wars.

RADDATZ: Let me go back to the Iran agreement that you brought up and your support of that agreement. Can you imagine Iran or Russia signing some sort of agreement in the future given your record on your reluctance to use force, because there is always that threat of force, that they may look at you and say Bernie Sanders would do anything about this.

SANDERS: Well, I think they would be making a very, very big mistake. I believe that the United States should have the strongest military in the world. We should be working with other countries in coalition. And when people threaten the United States or threaten our allies or commit genocide, the United States with other countries should be prepared to act militarily.

But I think when we look at our recent history, again especially the war in Iraq, I think history will record that is a terrible mistake which had led to massive destabilization and many other problems.

So, yes, there are times when you have to use military force, no question about it. I am prepared to do that. But that is the last resort.

RADDATZ: Would you do away with the drone program? Would you do away with the drone program because you have clearly had problems with that. You didn't vote for CIA director John Brennan because of the drone program and how it was run.

SANDERS: I think what you -- Martha, what you can argue is that there are times and places where drone attacks have been effective, there are times and places where they have been absolutely countereffective and have caused more problems when they have solved. When you kill innocent people, what the end result is that people in the region become anti-American who otherwise would not have been.

So, I think we have to use drones very, very selectively and effectively. That has not always been the case.

RADDATZ: OK, thank you very much, Senator Sanders.

Now to the Republican side, and maybe the biggest question this morning, will frontrunner Donald Trump run as a third party candidate or pledge to remain a Republican? This weekend, he revealed some new hints.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: As far as third party is concerned, the Republican Party has been treating me very, very fairly. All I ask is fairness. And I'm leading in every poll by a lot. We're leading in every state by a lot. And a lot of things are really happening.

In terms of victory, that would certainly be the best path to victory. And we're going to make a decision very soon. And I think a lot of people are going to be very happy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: Joining us now, Louisiana governor and presidential candidate Bobby Jindal. He's in New Orleans to mark the 10th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. Governor Jindal, good morning. Let's start off with Mr. Trump's comments. It sounds like he's going to keep on what he believes is the winning track, remaining as a Republican. If he's the nominee, would you support him?

GOV. BOBBY JINDAL (R-LA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Good morning.

Well, obviously, look I think I'm going to be the nominee. I think Donald Trump has done a great job tapping into the anger, the frustration that voters feel, Martha, not only with President Obama but with the Republican leadership as well.

But what the polls tell me is that nobody has any real votes right now. I think after we get past this summer of silliness and insults, the voters are going to begin to look at who is prepared to do the job. Who has the intelligence, who has the courage, who has the experience. I believe I'm the candidate best able to do this job on the first day.

And I'll give you one example, right now the American people are saying we've got to shrink the size of the government, grow the American economy. I'm the only candidate, there are not two, I'm the only the candidate that has actually reduced the size of government, and I think that experience matters.

RADDATZ: But Governor Jindal, your campaign does not seem to be catching fire at all.

JINDAL: Well, look, I disagree with that. We're seeing great momentum in Iowa. We're seeing, you know, standing only crowds. We're going to every country, 99 counties, doing town halls answering their questions. What I see is that voters haven't committed to any candidate yet. In Iowa, in these early states, they're kicking the tires, they're asking the tough questions. This is a wide open race.

Well, they certainly seem to be attracted to Donald Trump.

I want to go back to Donald Trump if we can. In the last 24 hours, we have heard him basically accuse Hillary Clinton's long-time aid Huma Abedin of breaking the law by passing secrets to her husband, former Congressman Anthony Weiner who as you know was caught up in a texting scandal. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: She receiving this very, very important information and giving it to Hillary? Well, who else is she giving it to? Her husband has serious problems. And on top of that, he now works for a public relations firm.

What she did is a very, very dangerous thing for this country, and probably it's a criminal act.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: Did Donald Trump cross a line there with those accusations?

JINDAL: Well, look, Martha, I think there's a broader question in terms of how Hillary Clinton has handled not just her but her staff, how they've handled classified information.

What's clear is this, if a private in the military had done what they're accused of doing, there would be real consequences. There shouldn't be a different set of rules for Hillary and her aides than others in the military, than others that deal with classified information.

With Hillary Clinton, it just seems to be one scandal after another. She’s literally one e-mail away from going to jail. She’s sworn to a federal judge she’s turned over all of her work-related e-mails. What I fear is that maybe we’ll have to go the Chinese and the Russians to actually see her e-mails. Those hackers may be the only ones --

RADDATZ: But should -- should Donald Trump be saying things --

JINDAL: -- that truly have all of her e-mails.

RADDATZ: -- like that? Should Donald Trump be saying things like that about Huma Abedin?

JINDAL: Martha, look, I think the bigger issue here, the bigger scandal here, is the fact that Hillary Clinton seems to think what difference does it make? She seems to think the same rules don’t apply to her that apply to the other -- that’s the real issue. I don’t think we should get distracted by others.

I think the real issue here is that she’s not above the law. The real issue is that if any private in the military, if any other government official, had handled classified information the way she is said to have handled classified information, there would have been a court martial, there would have been even criminal prosecution. There would have certainly been consequences. She shouldn’t be above the law. There shouldn’t be a different set of rules for our elected leaders than for the rest of us.

I think that’s one of the reasons voters are so angry. I think one of the things Donald Trump has tapped into, and other candidates have tapped into, is the frustration the American people have against this permanent political elite who think the rules don’t apply to them.

RADDATZ: I want to turn to immigration. I know your parents were legal immigrants, but growing up a child of Indian parents, you had to have experienced being an immigrant, unlike some of the other candidates, most of the other candidates. Is there any part of you, when you hear things being said, derogatory things, being said about immigrants, that troubled you as a child of immigrants?

JINDAL: Martha, I think a couple of things. Look, as a child of immigrants, my parents have never taken this country for granted. Every single day they are grateful to live in the greatest country in the history of the world. And I think this election is largely about the idea -- the idea of America is slipping away in front of us.

When it comes to immigration policy, what I’ve experienced and seen is that a smart immigration policy makes our country stronger; a dumb one makes us weaker. We’ve got a dumb one today. Yes, we need to secure our border. Stop talking about. I think we need to insist that folks who come here come here legally, learn English, adopt our values, roll up our sleeves and get to work.

As the son of immigrants, what I’ve seen with my parents --

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: Wait -- I’m sorry, but what do you mean by adopt our values? What values don’t immigrants have that you believe Americans have?

JINDAL: Look, what I worry about is you look to Europe, the contrast is -- you’ve got second, third generation immigrants that don’t consider themselves part of those societies, those cultures. We in our country shouldn’t be giving freedoms to people who want to undermine the freedom for other people. I think we need to move away from hyphenated Americans. We’re not African-Americans or Asian-Americans, Indian-Americans, rich or poor Americans: we’re all Americans.

And the reason this is so important: immigration without integration is not immigration; it’s invasion. My parents are proud of their Indian heritage, but they came here to be Americans and they love this country. They wanted to raise their children as Americans.

We don’t make people come here. If they want to come here, they should want to be Americans. Millions of people across this world want to come here. A smart immigration policy allows people to come here legally that make our country stronger. That’s just common sense.

RADDATZ: Governor Jindal, I want to turn to Katrina. You’re standing there in beautiful Jackson Square. And just your thoughts this morning on 10 years. And could there be that kind of devastation and destruction again in New Orleans? Are you prepared for another Katrina?

JINDAL: Well, look, three things. First, I think that these last 10 years have shown the resilience of the American people. Even when Katrina and Rita knocked us to our knees, we got back up. We can go through anything.

Secondly, it showed us -- these last 10 years have shown us that the American people love each other. And that seems like a very odd thing to say on a political show on a Sunday morning, but the reality is we were helped by people from all 49 states. They rushed to our aid; they came here; they didn’t wait for government permission. Churches, civic groups, school groups, they’re still come to this day. We live in a very generous country.

In terms of what could happen again, look, our levees are stronger than they’ve ever been before but we must not become complacent. We are better prepared. We’ve got generators, we’ve got evacuation plans, our healthcare facilities are fortified. People have their game plans in terms of evacuation routes and shelters, but we must not become complacent. After previous storms, that has happened in our country’s history. We still have work to do to restore our coast. We’ve got a bipartisan plan with scientific support to restore our coast. There’s still more work to be done --

RADDATZ: You sound pretty confident there --

JINDAL: And we better prepared than ever before.

RADDATZ: Governor Jindal. I’m going to wrap it up there, but it’s great to see you standing there in that beautiful square.

Thanks very much.

Coming up, analysis of all the 2016 twists and turns. And Jorge Ramos on his tussle with Trump and why the frontrunner is still talking about him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Actually the reporters were mostly on my side because they all had their hand up and this guy starts screaming. I actually got a lot of a credit for the way we handled him. I didn’t do anything like -- I didn’t do anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: And new reaction to that swift verdict in the prep school sexual assault case. Was justice served?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: Now our Closer Look at the split verdict in the prep school sexual assault case, where a former student was accused by a freshman girl. And perhaps the biggest question being asked this morning, was justice served?

Here's ABC's Gio Benitez.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Guilty or not guilty?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Guilty.

GIO BENITEZ, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Nineteen-year-old Owen Labrie broke down in tears Friday when a jury in New Hampshire found him guilty of misdemeanor charges for having sex with a minor.

But Labrie was acquitted of more serious felony sexual assault charges.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Not guilty.

BENITEZ: At the crux of the case, who was more believable, the 15-year-old accuser, who claimed she was violated...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I didn't kick or scream or really push, but I did say no. I said no three times.

BENITEZ: Or Labrie, seen in this mug shot from last year.

OWEN LABRIE, DEFENDANT: I thought to myself, you know, maybe we shouldn't do this.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The jury disbelieved portions of both the victim and the defendant's testimony. They believed the 15-year-old victim that sex did occur. They also were not convinced that it was not consensual.

BENITEZ: The case revealing salacious details of the senior salute, a ritual here at St. Paul's, the elite boarding school with alumni like John Kerry, where graduating seniors proposition younger schoolmates.

(on camera): What does this verdict tell you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They concluded that these were two teenagers getting together for a consensual encounter.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We still feel betrayed by St. Paul's School, as they allowed and fostered a toxic culture and left our daughter and several other students at risk of sexual violence.

BENITEZ: The school here, St. Paul's, sending a letter to parents saying the lessons it has learned are critically important to their growth as a school community.

(voice-over): Adding, "It is our responsibility to ensure that our students live and learn together in a community that is built on respect, caring and support for one another. Anything short of that cannot and will not be accepted."

Attorney Cathy Harris has been dealing with sexual harassment on school campuses for years.

CATHY HARRIS, ATTORNEY: If you're a parent and you think that your child is protected because that's not the school or your school is doing such and such, you're just sorely mistaken.

BENITEZ: With classes set to begin here in less than two weeks, a much different road for Labrie this fall, also convicted of a felony for using a computer to seduce a child. He's facing possible prison time.

For THIS WEEK, Gio Benitez, ABC News, Concord, New Hampshire.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

RADDATZ: Our thanks to Gio.

And ABC News chief legal analyst, Dan Abrams, joins us now.

He's been following the case from the start -- Dan, was justice served here?

Was this a compromise verdict?

DAN ABRAMS, ABC NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, I think you can make a very strong argument that justice was served. This was a very tough case for prosecutors from the beginning. You had these messages that she sent after the fact that were both friendly and flirty.

She told a nurse that it was consensual. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, but it means that it was a very tough case for prosecutors.

And yet, the jury was also convinced that he lied about whether they had sex.

And so he's facing a series of charges related to the fact that he was 18 and she was 15. And he's convicted of all of those, charges he never would have faced if these prosecutors and this jury didn't think that there was more to the story.

And so I think you are seeing a sort of compromise verdict and he's facing real time, the possibility of real time behind bars.

RADDATZ: And, Dan, one of the things that's interesting about this, he did face a felony charge, as -- as Gio reported, for enticing a minor on a computer.

Explain that.

Is that what that law was about?

ABRAMS: Well, look, he's now facing up to three and a half to seven years. That's the most serious count he's facing now. But of course, this wasn't the scenario that they had in mind when they enacted this law.

I mean think about it, if every senior who sends any message on a computer to a freshman who they're trying to have sex with was to be charged and convicted on that crime, we'd have a lot of people behind bars.

But the reality is, in this case, with these facts, these prosecutors believed they could make an argument on it. And clearly, these jurors accepted it.

I think if you were to ask all these jurors, in other cases, do you think this kind of law should be used to prosecutor every 18-year-old, the answer would be absolutely not. But if you were to ask them in this case, do you think it's proper to use this law to prosecute this 18-year-old?

Why?

Because I think that these jurors were convinced that Owen Labrie behaved terribly. That doesn't mean that they had enough...

RADDATZ: Dan...

ABRAMS: -- evidence to convict him of the most serious charges.

RADDATZ: Dan, just quickly, if you will. We have about 15 seconds.

The statement from the victim's parents clearly critical of the school and the environment there.

Are schools doing enough to prevent this?

ABRAMS: Look, I think schools -- I think schools are going to start doing more as a result of a case like this. But I should say that to those who say a case like this is going to prevent rape victims from coming forward, I think it's just the opposite, which is to say, even if someone doesn't do everything that they should have, even if they did things wrong after the fact, they can still get some amount of justice, as was the case here.

RADDATZ: OK.

Thanks very much for joining us, Dan.

Coming up, more on THIS WEEK'S big 2016 drama, including new insights into the Clinton email investigation.

Plus, the remarkable new face of New Orleans a decade after Hurricane Katrina.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: Back now with Hillary Clinton and that email firestorm. The FBI investigation ongoing. She spoke about it again this week. And while Clinton has adjusted some of her wording about whether classified information was in her emails, perhaps more noticeable some distinct changes in her tone since the story broke.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RADDATZ: At that first press conference back in March, Clinton was resolute, defiant.

CLINTON: The laws and regulations in effect when I was secretary of state allowed me to use my email for work. There is no classified material.

RADDATZ: By July, a slight change in response, but not the tone.

CLINTON: I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received.

RADDATZ: Then, she turned to humor.

CLINTON: You may have seen that I recently launched a SnapChat account. I love it. Those messages disappear all by themselves.

RADDATZ: Then sarcasm.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you wipe the server?

CLINTON: What like with a cloth or something?

RADDATZ: Now this week a more contrite tone, but no apology.

CLINTON: It clearly wasn't the best choice. I should have used two emails: one personal, one for work. And I take responsibility for that decision.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RADDATZ: Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar joins us now. She's a Hillary Clinton supporter and author of the new book "The Senator Next Door."

Senator Klobuchar, I want to get to those emails in a moment, but first we just have to talk about that poll and those numbers. Mrs. Clinton's lowest support in Iowa in any poll this election cycle. Smallest lead in any Iowa poll this election cycle. The pollster is saying it feels like 2008 all over again. That is certainly not good for Hillary Clinton.

I want your response to those polls. What's happening to that campaign?

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR, (D) MINNESOTA: Well, thanks Martha.

Being that we're in Minnesota and we can see Iowa from our porch and I've been down there for Secretary Clinton, I have to tell you her campaign is so much different than 2008. It has energy. It is organized. It is a grassroots campaign. And when I look at those numbers I think about races like one of our Minnesotans Michele Bachmann in 2012 was surging at this point. We've got back in 2004 Dick Gephardt was surging. It's six months ahead.

And she is still ahead in these polls. I think she's running a strong campaign. She was just in Minnesota. And I was in the room and saw these delegates from all over the country inspired and enthusiastic and cheering.

And so I think you have to look at her energy, how she is responding to these 17 opponents that, you know, basically are attacking her daily.

RADDATZ: But wouldn't the campaign be worried about losing one-third of their support?

KLOBUCHAR: Well, again, I think you have heard from her directly from the very beginning that this is not a coronation, that she expected that there would be other candidates in the race. And if you go back and wind back and look at those statements, they meant it.

You can't just waltz in and win a Democratic primary. We've seen many people in the past think they could do that, and that's not what happened.

I think she approached this with a vigor from the beginning, having been through this before, that she was going to be scrappy, that she was going to be out there meeting people, talking to people in a grassroots way.

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: OK. Scrappy, scrappy is not one of the words that they describe her in the Quinnipiac poll. The language describing Hillary Clinton, let's go through this. Number one is "liar," followed by "dishonest," followed by "untrustworthiness."

KLOBUCHAR: Well, as someone that has known here since I've been in the Senate, that's just not how I see her. And I think we have to step back a little. These debates are coming up. Americans are going to have this opportunity to see her in a debate format very soon. They're going to have a chance to see her when they…

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: But clearly -- Senator Klobuchar, this is clearly about the emails in some way. Somebody has to be -- if they're saying "liar," "dishonest," "untrustworthy," that takes you back to this issue of the emails that keeps dogging her.

Should she apologize? Should she handle it differently?

KLOBUCHAR: Well, I really appreciated the tone she had when she was just down in Iowa, you played that, where she talked about how she took responsibility. I think that is the proper way to talk about it.

There's a lot of partisan stuff going on that's not fair to her. But in this case she had to take responsibility for what she did. And she did. She said she should have had two different email accounts, that she should have done this differently.

And she also said, which I think is significant here, Martha, is that she is going to be testifying at a public hearing in October. Her arch enemies in the House of Representatives can ask what questions they want.

And I think that will give the American people another opportunity to look at this, because when I'm at the Minnesota State Fair, what people are talking about are their jobs, they're talking about can they send their kids to college.

They're talking about the work when they ask me about her…

RADDATZ: Senator Klobuchar…

KLOBUCHAR: … the work that she has done on an…

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: … speaking of fair and speaking of jobs, Joe Biden yesterday was at the Democratic Jamboree in Delaware. What does that tell you? Do you think he'll jump in? Quickly here, please, if you will.

KLOBUCHAR: Well, the last time I checked, Joe Biden is from Delaware. I think it's great he's at the Democratic Jamboree in Delaware. And I think that Vice President Biden is going to make his own decision. We all love him. He'll make the decision that is best for him and his family.

RADDATZ: OK. And I have to ask you one question about your book. It is called "The Senator Next Door." As you've said, it is not called "The President Next Door," but any interest from you in a vice presidential spot?

KLOBUCHAR: I love my job right now. That's why I wrote this book about the need for more people from normal backgrounds to get into politics. It's a very personal memoir about how I got where I am from being a car-hop at the A&W Root Beer stand to the United States Senate.

RADDATZ: And I've got to tell you, I read the entire thing. It's a great read. Thanks very much for joining us.

KLOBUCHAR: That's very nice, Martha. Thank you very much.

RADDATZ: The "Roundtable" is here now; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; ESPN's LZ Granderson; AP White House correspondent Julie Pace; and ABC's Cokie Roberts.

And, boy, do we have a lot to talk about.

(LAUGHTER)

And I hate to keep going back to it, but Senator Klobuchar was clearly not going to criticize Hillary Clinton or question what's going on in Iowa. Cokie, I want to start with you.

COKIE ROBERTS, ABC POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it's obviously a big problem for her if she loses a third of her support from May until now. However, the same poll shows her with a 77 percent favorability rating among Democrats. That's nothing to sneeze at, and 61 percent saying they don't care about the emails.

Now the emails…

RADDATZ: Democrats.

ROBERTS: Democrats, exactly. And the emails are going to be a drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, as they already have been. And you can't even read all the stuff about, you know, this one, that one, the other one.

But -- and I doubt that many people have, but it has led to what you said, "liar," "untruthful," all of that. And it has led to a lot of people speculating about Joe Biden.

RADDATZ: And, Julie, you heard Bernie Sanders talking about support for him, not against Hillary Clinton. I also was astonished by one of the other numbers in that poll that Hillary Clinton is getting trounced by Sanders by 23 points with younger voters.

JULIE PACE, AP WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It's really fascinating, this Iowa poll, the latest poll out of Iowa shows that Sanders is picking up support from the people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 when he defeated Hillary Clinton in Iowa.

The question for Sanders is going to be, could he take these young people, people who haven't caucused previously, and have a lot of enthusiasm for his message, and turn them in caucus-goers?

That takes an enormous amount of organization. It takes, you know, playing within the system, which isn't something that Sanders has done. But clearly there is momentum and enthusiasm behind him, which any presidential candidate at this stage of the game says they don't want that would be lying to you.

RADDATZ: LZ, what do you think, does Sanders take this forward? Does that momentum work for him without Democratic insiders, without just what we were talking about?

LZ GRANDERSON, ESPN COMMENTATOR: Well, I think the real question is, how long will the media allow -- be characterizing him as a liberal Democrat versus a socialist, which is how he has characterized himself and what his policies all say.

And once you start looking at the fact that he's a socialist, people are going to ask themselves, OK, can a socialist win the general election? And that's when you'll start to see the tide turn.

Right now it's just a good feeling about the policies he's talking about, income inequality, these are all really positive things for his base. But when they're going to start in about the -- when they start thinking about the general election, that aspect of Bernie Sanders is going to be quite problematic.

RADDATZ: And, Mr. Speaker, I want to go back to the email issue. I think you have said that she shouldn't even be a candidate because of the email issue.

NEWT GINGRICH (R), FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It's an absurdity, except in this city. Two CIA directors who did less than she has done, a national security adviser (INAUDIBLE) in the Clinton administration stole from the Archives…

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: Let's do mention the fact that she says nothing was marked classified and they were later classified, although nobody can pass on classified emails if they're marked.

GINGRICH: You look at Huma having multiple jobs while serving the State Department. You look at some of the emails in which Huma is representing clients on the emails to the secretary of state about trips to Dublin.

This is such a total conflict of interest by a family whose practice has been, at least since the early '90s, to have conflicts of interest, and then stonewall, and then hope they can survive.

I think it's very hard to win the presidency. And the thing that characterizes both the Sanders campaign and the Trump campaign and the Carson campaign is authenticity. The American people know the system isn't working.

They are sick of politics as usual. And by the way, Biden should look at this. Biden is a very popular person. He's also about as much Mr. Insider as you can be. He's not going to take any votes from Sanders.

In the long run, you have authenticity versus the old order.

RADDATZ: I want to just stay on the emails for one minute.

GINGRICH: All right.

RADDATZ: A column from David Ignatius in The Washington Post on Thursday said this. "After talking with a half dozen knowledgeable lawyers, I think this so-called scandal is overstated. Using the server was a self-inflicted wound by Clinton, but it's not something a prosecutor would take to court."

GINGRICH: How does David Ignatius know?

RADDATZ: Well, he said he talked to several CIA…

(CROSSTALK)

GINGRICH: In Washington, everybody says, so why is it different?

(CROSSTALK)

ROBERTS: Today The Washington Post did their "Pinocchios," right? And she got "Two Pinocchios" on her statements about the emails. Not the "Four" that would be liar, liar, pants on fire.

But this is -- the fact is, is that it's parsing. And so the question is how voters respond to that.

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: And can I just do very quickly around the table, and we're going to be back, as you know, does Joe Biden get in? We saw him at that Jamboree yesterday. I know he lives in Delaware, but very quickly, one word answers.

ROBERTS: I don't think so. I think the response out of the DNC this week was pretty discouraging for him.

RADDATZ: Julie.

PACE: Several people close to him say it's probably unlikely at this point.

RADDATZ: LZ.

GRANDERSON: No.

GINGRICH: I just think it's the wrong year.

RADDATZ: OK. Thanks very much.

(LAUGHTER)

RADDATZ: Coming up, the Republican race -- can anyone break Donald Trump's growing lead?

Plus, we're live with the reporter who took on Trump, Jorge Ramos is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: OK, who's next?

Yes, please.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Excuse me. Sit down. You weren't called. Sit down. Sit down.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: Sit down. Go back to Univision.

Then all of a sudden this guy gets up and starts screaming at the top of his lungs and it was unfair to the other reporters.

He was totally out of line. He was screaming and ranting and raving.

When this clown, Jose Reas (ph) or whatever the hell his name -- oh, he's a baseball player -- Ramos. He actually seemed like a nice guy after he (INAUDIBLE).

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RADDATZ: Donald Trump just won't stop talking about Jorge Ramos, anchor at our sister network, Fusion, after that testy exchange over immigration.

And Jorge joins us now. Good morning, Jorge.

JORGE RAMOS, UNIVISION/FUSION CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

RADDATZ: Donald Trump is not backing down. He says he got a lot of credit for the way he handled that. Trump seems to think he benefited from that confrontation.

Do you think he benefited among his supporters?

RAMOS: Well, I don't know exactly. But I think it is very important that as journalists, we challenge those who are in power. And I think it is very dangerous that he wants to do the largest mass deportation in modern history, that, by the way, would cost more than $137 billion. And I think it's very dangerous that he's promoting in his speeches bigotry and hatred against immigrants and Latinos.

And let me just give you a quick example. After I was expelled from that press conference -- and in 30 years, this is the first time I've been ejected for asking a question -- I saw a man, a Trump sympathizer, who told me, get out of my country," interesting, because I'm also a U.S. citizen.

But this happened just seconds after he told me go back to Univision.

So those messages of hatred and bigotry, that's precisely what Mr. Trump is promoting and that's what he's allowing to come out.

RADDATZ: Jorge, did you want a confrontation?

We've all seen that video. You stood up. You kept talking, you kept trying to get your question in.

Is that what you wanted, a confrontation?

RAMOS: No, what -- what I wanted was answers. As you know, I am just a reporter asking -- a reporter asking questions. And I sent him a note requesting an interview and instead of responding to that note, he published my cell phone on the Internet. And, of course, I have to change my cell phone.

So I -- he wasn't going to call me. What happened is I allowed two reporters, two reporters asked questions before me. Then I said, I have a question on immigration.

Nobody said anything. He -- he stayed silent. And when I started stating the premise of my question, which is that he can't deport 11 million or build a -- build a 1,900-mile wall or deny citizenship to the children born here, he clearly didn't like my question.

So he -- he did something very strange with his mouth. He signaled his bodyguard to take me out of the press conference and that's exactly what he did.

RADDATZ: Jorge...

RAMOS: But I wanted...

RADDATZ: -- Jorge, you -- you've been...

RAMOS: I asked one question. I want answers and he just didn't give me answers.

RADDATZ: OK. You have been very open about being an advocate for certain things. You said to George this week, "We have to denounce that he wants to deny citizenship to children being born here.

You're saying much the same this morning.

Does that put you in a difficult position covering the campaign?

RAMOS: I don't think so. I think that, as a reporter, many times, you have to take a stand. When it comes to racism, discrimination, corruption, public life, dictatorship and human rights, we have -- we have to take a stand.

And the basic examples of journalism that I have -- Edward R. Murrow against McCarthy; Cronkite during the Vietnam War; or "The Washington Post" reporters forcing the resignation of Richard Nixon, that's when reporters challenge those who are in power.

And I think it is our responsibility to do that. It is -- I find it ironic and fascinating that I'm being criticized by other reporters for asking questions.

Isn't that the essence, exactly, of what we do?

RADDATZ: Well, Jorge, I -- you are an enormously popular anchorman. We -- the most well known Spanish language anchor in America.

So tell me what effect this will have and what you are saying and what you are advocating for?

What effect will this have in your community and those who watch you?

RAMOS: Well, I just want to say that if he, Donald Trump, wants to change this country the way he is proposing, he has to be challenged. And this is what's going to happen. Latinos won't forget this. Sixty million Latinos will go to the polls next year. And just to put it in perspective, that number, President Barack Obama won by less than five million votes.

So in other words, Latinos could define this election. In -- in a year from now, I'm truly convinced that both parties, including Republicans -- and Donald Trump is a creation of the Republican Party -- both parties will be pleading for Hispanic voters, because no one, at the same time, no one really can make it to the White House without the Hispanic vote.

RADDATZ: OK, Jorge, I'm going to -- I'm going to thank you and stop you there.

But thank you very much for joining us this morning.

RAMOS: Thank you.

RADDATZ: And I am going to take that -- I saw you nodding your head, Cokie Roberts.

ROBERTS: Well, he is an absolute icon in the Hispanic community. I mean he is a very, very big deal. And, you know, he's also sort of a -- someone they swoon over. And but the...

RADDATZ: But let's go to this question...

ROBERTS: But...

RADDATZ: -- about the vote.

ROBERTS: About Trump.

RADDATZ: He can say -- he can say anything. He can...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: -- among his supporters.

ROBERTS: He can say anything but he can also hurt the Republican Party big time.

RADDATZ: And does he hurt the Republican Party big time, Mr. Speaker?

GINGRICH: I doubt it.

RADDATZ: Could he be the nominee?

GINGRICH: Yes.

RADDATZ: You think -- you have to know he could be the nominee?

GINGRICH: Absolutely. I don't think he -- I think he also could be the president.

RADDATZ: How does he do it?

GINGRICH: Well, first of all, if you're ahead everywhere and you -- and your lead is increasing, as it is in Iowa...

RADDATZ: Among the Republicans.

GINGRICH: Among Republicans, which started with the nominee. First, you have to become the nominee. I think you might be surprised...

ROBERTS: But how does he win?

GINGRICH: -- how hard...

ROBERTS: How does he win without the Hispanic vote?

How does anybody win without the Hispanic vote?

GINGRICH: Well, first of all, Jorge Ramos, who's clearly his opponent. Now, he's not -- he's not a...

ROBERTS: No, no, he's an advocate.

GINGRICH: Here's his -- he is the opponent of Donald Trump. Every night on Univision, he opposes the Republican Party, every night. So let's start with...

(CROSSTALK)

GRANDERSON: I think he opposes bigotry. I don't think he opposes the Republican Party.

GINGRICH: Well, he opposes the Republican Party and he gets to define bigotry.

GRANDERSON: Well, I think it's a...

GINGRICH: -- a simple question...

GRANDERSON: I think it's the Webster dictionary version of bigotry that he's using.

GINGRICH: Well...

(CROSSTALK)

GINGRICH: -- but wait a second. Let me give you an example.

I happen to believe that the United States has both a moral and legal obligation to control its border. I think we have an obligation to stop terrorists. I think we have an obligation to kick out, for example, the gang from El Salvador...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: I want to...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: -- I want to...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: -- I want to move on...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: I want to move...

GINGRICH: Jorge disagrees.

RADDATZ: I want to move off immigration and -- and just really look at some of these numbers, too.

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: And some of the descriptions of Donald Trump. "arrogant," "blowhard," "idiot," "businessman," and "clown." This was in the Quinnipiac Poll.

What does that tell you?

Can a guy with those kind of descriptions be president, be the nominee?

PACE: I think it's hard to imagine him being president and getting through a general election with those qualities. Certainly, though, there is something appealing in those -- in those negative descriptions there is also something appealing to a lot of Americans. And it's this authenticity, it's this unscriptedness. It's the fact that he's not beholden to the system.

We were talking earlier about Ben Carson and him...

RADDATZ: And let's -- and Scott Walker, you have to look at the...

(CROSSTALK)

RADDATZ: But what do they do to try to catch up?

GRANDERSON: Well, Scott Walker was very thin (ph). Let's just face the facts. He came -- I remember when you interviewed him and he was ready for the first question, but he didn't have anything for any follow up questions. He was extremely thin. And I think that's why you see him, you see Senator Rand Paul, you see others starting to fall by the wayside, because they came out as people who were into policy, but once you started diving into it and doing a little bit more, you know, surgery into what their policy was, you realize they were really thin.

ROBERTS: But I think you really do have to be paying attention to Ben Carson.

RADDATZ: Oh, we're paying attention to Ben Carson, believe me.

OK, we're going to cut this off for a minute. Up next, the Gulf Coast 10 years after Katrina after this from our ABC stations.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RADDATZ: And we are back with some final reflections on 10 years after Katrina. I think it sounds just remarkable that it's been 10 years, hard to believe. But Cokie, I -- we have about a minute, and I want (INAUDIBLE).

ROBERTS: Well, I was there overnight on Friday and I brought back the newspaper from yesterday: resurrection. And that's really true. The city is back. It's got a lot of good things going on that have never been true before. Business community involved in public schools. More African-American males graduated from high school than the national average. And there are a lot of really wonderful things happening.

There's still a ways to go for the very poorest of the poor. And the companies and the foundations and the foreign countries that have been there helping need to stay.

RADDATZ: And just very quickly, your own family was devastated.

ROBERTS: Well, my own family, yes, on the Gulf Coast. We lost 14 houses, my cousins and my aunts. And they have not rebuilt, because it's just way -- one cousin did -- but they're still there.

RADDATZ: We're glad so many others have.

And thanks to everyone. That's all for us today. Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out “WORLD NEWS TONIGHT”. We leave you back on the Gulf coast. Have a great day.