back the tree that he planted in honor of his wife right in front of the white house, the magnolia tree, so they have pruned it back, but it is still there. history lives. david webb is in for hannity, please watch. >> david: thank you, brian, welcome. they did keep the tree in we kept it right for you on "hannity" ." i am david webb in for sean, a lot of breaking news, president trump, this is brand-new and telling "the new york times" that he thinks special counsel robert mueller will treat him fairly, butterflies in the face of the narrative in the press. the president also saying that the investigation is making the country look bad and also tonight, house intelligence committee chairman devin nunes slamming the doj and the fbi for what he says is a failure to turn over documents related to the anti-trump dossier.wh plus, a pew research study proves just how biased and unfair the mainstream media has been to president trump.

and the president calling out china over a recent report that they are illegally selling oil to north korea. we will have a reaction to all of those stories. first, president trump closing out the year by touting his accomplishments, looking at 2018 in washington tonight with the details, ellison barber. >> hi, david. president trump is expected to meet with republican leaders early in the new year. the white house says the majority leader mitch mcconnell and house speaker paul ryan are both invited to weekend in january. >> i think that you will see the president roll out infrastructure plan in january and the president has already invited leader mcconnell and speaker ryan to camp david the first weekend in january to make sure we are on the same page about our priorities for 2018. >> sarah huckabee sanders told fox news last week that the administration is still deciding on the top priorities in 2018.d some potential items include immigration reform and infrastructure. white house officials told fox news that they are planningr

to lay out an infrastructure plan in january, officials say that they are looking at spending $200 billion in directy federal spending and easing regulations that they say will stimulate $1 trillion in public worth in investment. >> infrastructure is the easies of all. we are very well on our way. >> we are ready with a strong infrastructure bill that was put on the president's desk in january. we are still waiting. to get feedback from that. it will create 15 million jobs. >> what are we going to do into 2018? we will pick up where we left off and get back to performing these entitlements and take on welfare reform. >> president trump promised a trillion dollar infrastructure bill. democrats already have a bill as you just heard, and as he also heard from paul ryan, some republicans seem to have other ideas when it comes to the topo legislative priorities in 2018.

president trump also seems to think this year has been a legislative success, he tweeted a couple of days ago about tax reform, saying that business is looking good for next year, only to be helped further by our tax bill. he tweeted about retail sales saying they are at record levels, also tweeted and read tweeted a couple articles praising his work on things like ms-13 and the economy. david. >> david: also tonight a blue wave in the 2018 midterm election, i put the emphasis there, because we will discuss it. former speaker of the house newt gingrich saying "not so fast" in a new .com op-ed entitled "get ready for the political surprise of 2018." he explains how the republicans will shock that political landscape in 2018 because of three key factors: one,

republicans keeping their promises, voters rejecting fake news, and because americans will have more money in their pockets thanks to the g.o.p. tax bill. joining us now former secret service agent and conservator contributor dan bongino, kayleigh mcenany and former clinton pollster and our friend doug schoen, let me go right to you. the man in the center, politically, we will call you that. what do you say to speaker gingrich's prediction that there will be a shock in the republican quarters? >> well, i would say to my good friend newt gingrich, go back to 1994 when the democrats passed a tax bill with no republican support and it led to a d republican wave for america, and i think with president trump at a level of approval in the mid-30s, the democrats with an

11-point lead in the generic vote, and history suggesting that in the midterm of a first-term president, that there is an average of 24-30 odd seatt picking up in the house, it is much more likely that the democrats have the blue wave that you spoke of, david, than that there be a republican wave. >> david: is this the same environment as 1994? i've said this before, we have a generational change, change ine the electorate, you look at the change in the legislature, i understand doug's points on the history of this, but you know what, history and polls are not always right. >> that is right, democrats are singing the same tired tunes that they sang in 2016 when they say donald trump would never win, their optimism, they have

no cause for it now, because donald trump has gotten historic victories, you look at isis, fewer than 1000 now. you look at tax cuts, $1000 in american people's pockets starting in february, every single front, donald trump has achieved and every single front democrats have obstructed and distracted from the issues at the american people care about. democrats do not have cause for optimism in 2018. >> david: secret service agents are blue-collar guys, you get paid okay when you were there, but not a whole lot of money, the blue-collar economy, the blue-collar billionaire donald trump, do you think that those centrist democrats, the midwestern democrats are going to go back to the democrats over the republicans? over president trump? >> no, david, they are not, what are the democrats offering you other than that republicans hate you because you are filling the blank, the identity politics routine, seriously, what are they offering?

they are offering nothing, it is a policy going to be next year to run against the tax cuts? in other words, we think that the government should be entitled to more of your money. here's a better one, are theyy going to run against the appeal of the mandate and say, no, we think that you should be forced to buy again next year overpriced, really crappy health insurance that nobody wants. they have yet to put a substantive platform outside the identity politics and agenda that is going to resonate in places like pennsylvania and the panhandle of florida. i think this blue wave is a fiction. i could be proven wrong, but i doubt that it is going to happen. >> david: doug, before we go to you, because you have been involved in the trenches in campaigns, and kayleigh as well, i want to go to the leadership, this is howard dean, the famous scream, talking about the democratic party, let's play this. >> i think the progressives are in the process of informally

taking over the democratic party. i think that the country has moved to the left and it is shocking to me, but the majority of americans think medicare for all is a good idea. frankly, bernie gets a lot of credit for that, he will not be the next nominee, but he could be. and i'm very much for somebody who is younger, my generation needs to get the hell out of politics and start coaching and moving up the next generation. >> david: i will put up two screens and take it from there. you know the structure of running a campaign. here are the fund-raising numbers for the rnc, all right coming out total receipts, 121 million, debt at zero, theni we go to the democrats, the democrats, 61.7 million, cash on end, 6.3 and 2.66 in debt. eventually the primaries, and you need the national party to fund the campaign to make them win. how did the democrats do this?io

>> a couple of ways, first, i do reject the notion that the democrats are progressive party that need to move to the left, if they are going to win working-class voters back, it is not by moving to the left. frankly, the best asset that the democrats have are the republicans and their lack of popularity, because sadly dan is right, there is not a centrist inclusive agenda, and i say to my friends and colleagues in the democratic party, you need one on growth, on infrastructure and it necessarily involves the republicans, as well. the individual democrats running to your question are out raising the republicans. i think there have been 35 republican retirements, the fund-raising numbers for the party committees, i believe, are running parallel with, if not in some instances, ahead of the republicans. and if the democrats stay ahead, one thing i know for sure, they

will raise all of the money that they need as they did in 2016.ha money is not the democratic party's problem, it is message. >> david: all right, kayleigh, message, money, donald trump stole some of the issues, did he steal infrastructure and blue-collar issues from the democrats and to doug's point, the party shifted hard to the left. >> undoubtedly, donald trump spoke to the factory workers in michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania, who democrats hadr left behind, if they would listen to doug, they might have a chance in 2018, but unfortunately the democratic party has floated so far left.y the party of socialism that wants to take your money and over regulate you, force you to buy health care, that is the state of the democratic party. then on top of all of that, they are the party that rigs elections for hillary clinton at the expense of bernie sanders. the party that rigs elections, the party of socialism.la that is the legacy. >> david: dan, we have gone

through the political analysis on the ground. and i know that you watch this carefully, you talk about it when you get on radio and television as well. what about the boots on the ground? the people that will volunteer to help the parties, the blue-collar folks out there. they wear out a lot of shoe leather walking for candidates, where do you see the energy? is it a little bit of both? >> i will take each side first, the democrats, no question, and it does not do republicans any good to ignore this. they are angry. and to deny the fact that anger is a great motivator to get people out to the polls, you are making a fool of yourself.to they are angry, they are going to show up and we have seen relatively high turnout in alabama. for republicans to ignore that is political suicide. but having said that, the media is doing itself no favors by constantly providing a foil and a foil and a reason to be angry for republican voters. there is a litany of fake news, false charges against the

president constantly. bad reporting, a special counsel investigation, and i do not mean to highlight anger too much, but it is a real motivator and republicans are angry, too. until it stops the witch hunt against the president, i think that the special counsel and the media and their zero credibility and collapsing, it is doing the sitting president a great favor and will be a great motivator in the midterm elections to get people out. >> david: special counsel, now we have a "new york times"t report that i mentioned at the beginning of the show, the president saying that he thinks robert mueller, i amt paraphrasing, in the 30 minute interview, saying that he believes that mueller will treat him fairly. doug, from there, breaking news, the president saying what the democrats are not, he is going to fire mueller, throw him out, or the media, whatever, and now he says, hey, mueller is going to treat me well. >> i think that that is a

positive development. the democrats should get off the line of saying former director mueller's removal is imminent, let this process play itself out, don't politicize it. we will see what general flynn has to say, what mr. papadopoulos has to say, and let's let the investigation play out. i must confess, the fbi and the doj have issues that have to be investigated, but bob mueller is a man of questionable integrity. his investigation has a ways to go, watergate took three or four years, this is still fournv or five months into the process. more time, more energy has to be committed. there have been four pleas already, there is more to go before we can reach a judgment. >> david: okay, water gate took three years plus, now we

have technology, we have the fbn and the doj, according to devin nunes, stonewalling on delivering documents, and flying out of the judicial lot, did the president and what he just said hand the rnc and the message of the rnc a chance to go out there and say, look, we are not trying to shut it down, we want it to go forward? what is the message? >> absolutely, the president hao always been clear, he wants the investigation to conclude and be conducted fairly. there is no trump-russia collusion, there was a conspiracy theory. one of the biggest fake news stories of the year, hard tons rank them, but taking the cakest was the fact that president trump was ever going to fire bob mueller. mueller is heading up the investigation coming to a closee and it's time for democrats to step back and accept the fact

that russia-trump collusion was only based on a little bit more than rumors and the newspapers. that is in the words of dianne feinstein, a democrat. based on a hoax to topple the american people and the personst who they chose in the 2016 election, that was donald trumpl >> david: dan, who answers in the long run with the dossier? who paid for what? we have heard the debate, who answers? is it the fbi? is it mueller? other cheif of station like -- you name it, who is it? >> you know, david, if donald trump's name was donald obama, this would be the scandal of the millennium. think about what is happening here. this is a complicated case. i get that viewers get confused at times, but boil it down to the nuts and bolts.

a president-elect was spied on by a sitting president for the unmasking technique, none of that is in dispute, the only thing in dispute is why he was spied on. david, can you answer that question? to this day, nobody can answer the question why the president was spied on. they will say it's russia collusion, where? where's the collusion? >> david: and they clearly have to present something or i hopeon that we do not see three or four years of this. >> i hope that we do not either. i do not think that we can politicize, rush to judgment, general flynn who was working closely with the russians on his own has taken a plea. we have to hear what he has to say. >> david: not during the campaign, during the transition. >> he went to russia in january of '15 and made a compensated speech cleared the vladimir putin. >> david: by the obama administration reauthorizing, i have to leave it there, but doug, always a pleasure to see you, my friend.yo

we have much more to come on this. more on president trump saying he believes robert mueller will treat him fairly, that's right, he's had it, we will get r reaction from florida attorneytr general pam bondi and our own gregg jarrett, stay with us. ♪ f us. ♪ you might take something for your heart... or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

>> david: this is a fox news

alert. in an impromptu interview with "the new york times," president trump predicting that special counselor robert mueller will "treat him fairly," ando while he is not calling for an end to the investigation he said "the sooner it is worked out for the better, the better it is for the country." we will get back to that in a moment. we will turn to a letter exclusively obtained by fox news from house intelligence chairman devin nunes to deputy attorney general rod rosenstein in which he blasts the doj and the fbi for their failure to not fully produce documents related to the anti-trump dossier. nunes writes that he wants the records by january 3rd and he wants to know by that date when the witnesses his committee subpoenaed back in august about the dossier will be available to testify. he ends by writing, and i quote again, "at this point it seems the doj and fbi need to be

investigating themselves." this letter comes on the heels from "the washington examiner"s byron york that nunes it is issuing a to david came creamer, with ties to senator mccain. joining us now with reaction, florida a attorney general pam bondi, i put the extra i in there, and the legal analyst gregg jarrett. pam, first to you, looking at this as somebody from the attorney general, with a lot of high-profile cases when you get these questions about who has ties to what, a compendium of questionable information practices tweets, what do you do when you are at the top of this? >> well, he is doing exactlyou what he should do, and i'm proud of what he did. i start out by saying, as a career prosecutor my entire

career and attorney general of the third largest state of country, there are about 40,000 great men and women of the fbi throughout this country, and there are a few bad ones in the justice department who are making the rest look bad. and that is not fair to the great men and women risking their lives every day. strzok should not be in hr, he should be fired. we have james baker allegations, we have all of these things, sol the intelligence committee, they have to take it upon themselves. gregg will agree, to do the investigation and the right waye and call for these people to be taken off who cannot handle it the right way. and the american people deserve that. this investigation should be beyond reproach.e this is the president of the united states. >> david: you know, gregg, washington is an interesting city because there is the

bureaucratic deep state outside of party how they line up the side. but to pam's point, this has become clearly biased in some p ways, and the stalling, the c cover-up, the burying facts and data, and devin nunes, what is he smelling here? >> he smells a cover-up, there is only one reason why you would defy and stonewall and evade are lawful congressional subpoena for four long months. and that is if you are trying ts hide evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the fbi and the department of justice. it all comes down to the dossier. if it is true that it was a complete fabrication and the fbi knew it and nevertheless they used it to launch the trump investigation, that renders the entire investigation a charade and delegitimizes the mueller investigation. you have this all too cozy group of guys, comey, mueller,

weinstein, weissmann, excuse me. >> david: weissmann, bruce ohr. >> they worked together for years and years, something unseemly about that, because they appear to be ignoring illegality on the part of hillary clinton and to the fbi, and it seems to be determined to find wrongdoing on the part of president trump where none exists. >> david: pam, unfortunately you cannot separate the law ande politics when you get into either a state capital or a nation's capital. so even if ,as gregg says and lays out, and as you have talked about, they are dealing with the inconsistencies and the problems. there is a political aspect to this. how would that be resolved? is it possible? >> i have come to the conclusion now that this investigation into the president needs to end.

every day we are finding out someone else involved inga it. as gregg said, this investigation should be beyond reproach. there are so many great men and women out there who are capable of conducting an investigation with integrity.g the fbi stands for integrity, that is their motto. and that is what we have completely lost here.e. when you are an fbi agent, regardless of who it is, it should not be about politics. and clearly, they havess demonstrated, these people that we have laid out, have demonstrated such an extreme bias, but potentially criminal action by changing, and talking to comey about changing the language so that hillary clinton would not be criminally charged. this is serious stuff that we are dealing with, with a few really bad people at the top making the rest look bad who should not in our country. >> i think that most of the fbi rank and file, good hardworking

people. it is the senior management, the group of individuals, mccabe, baker, strzok, page, james comey that are suspect by the messages that they exchange, this needs to be looked at and devin nunes says that it is time that youne investigate yourself, i disagree, they cannotou investigate themselves fairly and objectively. so this demands a second special counsel to look into their conduct, the inspector general is already doing it. but he has real, no real authority to bring in a case. >> david: that is the case with the special counsel., this resistance, pam, goes a little bit deeper and a little bit wider when you look atat things like the new york attorney general, eric schneiderman, when you look at hillary clinton, you just mentioned, you cannot get her

out of the conversation, the resistance in the deep state combined, and gregg's points about them investigating themselves, does the special counsel get us where we need to be in your opinion? >> as a state attorney general, knowing jeff sessions, the united states attorney general, what i hope jeff sessions has already done, and we do not know about it, is come in, these people all work for him. he is the man at the top, and i'm hoping that general sessions has come in and has somebodyhe investigating all of them. we hear now that his resigning, mccain is going to resign. mccabe should be fired if these iallegations are true! or he is not getting the attention. he is going to resign in 2018. he should be taken out of the fbi immediately.ul so i would hope that our u.s. attorney general is investigating all of these people through a special counsel, because gregg is right, they cannot investigate

themselves. >> what ticks me off aboutes mueller and this lack of fairness and impartiality, he knew early this last summer that strzok had sent these text messages to lisa page. he knew that, removed him, but never disclosed it to congress upon their demands. he stalled for four long months, and so did rosenstein, they covered it up. if you truly care about the fair administration of justice, you do not cover that up. and to those that argue, well, he removed them, so it is okay, how much damage did people like strzok and lisa page do in the full year that they were investigating trump with the fbi investigation and then later inp the mueller investigation. >> david: we need to wrap this up quickly, but i will go to pam on this one, that is president trump and rod rosenstein, here we go again, "the new york times,"

president trump is beingng outspoken, what do you say? >> president trump knows that he did not do anything wrong, and this it has gone on long enough. and that is why president trump said what he said. h he knows that he did not do anything wrong, he knows this has gone on way too long, he is out there doing tax reform, getting supreme court justices on the bench, all of our rates ever been. unemployment is the lowest it has ever been. he is doing his job, he knows he has done nothing wrong, we need to move on.al >> david: gregg, if you know that you have done nothing wrong and you are the president, has he set himself up correctly with the mueller statement that he made to "the new york times" and what should he do about rod rosenstein, if anything, next? >> first of all, he said exactla what i would tell him to say if i were his lawyer, don't criticize mueller himself, he is

smart enough to do that without counsel, that is what he did. liin terms of rosenstein. this is deeply troubling. he has a conflict of interest that he continues to insist that he will not recuse himself fromc the case. he continues to insist that all is well. everything is perfect. mr. rosenstein, everything is not perfect with all the people that have been removed because of misconduct in this case and a suspicion of wrongdoing. that tells us all, all is not well. >> david: thank you, pam, gregg, great to see you again al always. a shocking study from the pew research center exposing just how biased the mainstream media has become. prepare to be outraged, we will bring it to next. stay with us on "hannity." ♪ bring it to next. to

♪ >> david: welcome back to "hannity," right here on this program, sean has been warning you for years about the extreme bias in the mainstream media. and according to a brand-new study from pew research center, the media's coverage of president trump's first 60 days in office was historically negative. as you can see, just 5% of the reporting was positive, while a whopping 62% was negative. compare that to the media's coverage of president obama's

first 60 days in office in 2009 where 42% was favorable. of course, this should not be a surprise to anyone, here's a small sample of the media's coverage of president trump over the last 12 months. >> he is unhinged. it is embarrassing. >> he speaks without thought, without reason, it was devoid of fact, devoid of wisdom, there was no gravitas. there was no sanity there. >> we have an archie bunker in chief who is disrespecting american indians and making classless jokes and the podium. >> is he trying to impersonate hugo chavez? erdogan? vladimir putin? >> the president gets two scoops, everybody else aroundwo the table gets one and no word if there were sprinkles. >> at the dessert course, he gets two scoops of vanilla ice cream with his chocolate cream pie instead of the single

scoop for everyone else. >> he gains weight according to sources, does not trust people around him. not a good picture. >> he is a racist. he came proverbially as close as you can possibly come to shouting at a rally the n-word, that is what he did down there. >> donald trump again being a schmuck. >> he looked like a thug. he looked like a goon.on you look at the handshake, what a thug. >> you have somebody inside the white house at "the new york daily news" who is mentally unfit, people close to him say he is mentally unfit. people close to them during the campaign told me had early stages of dementia. >> david: i asked a simple question, where is the policy disagreement in all of these comments from the media?ed i know that they are out there, somewhere. m joining us with reaction, fox news contributors tammy bruce and deneen borelli as well as democratic pollster pat caddell,

pat, great to see you. it has been a while, so i will start with you. you have analyzed media and politics for many years, when you look at this type of coverage and you look at the what do you say to the media? are they getting the trump bump for the ratings? and do they need it or will they survive without it? >> i assume that they would survive no matter what, but they have been building their ratings on this. it did not start the early dayse of this administration. as pew says, we have had it for the entire year, headed through the entire campaign, more and more studies that show that the major networks, 90% of the stories that they have been running for the last nine months or so are negative. we see that from the media. we see all of it.mo and you do not even need the numbers to know that, all you have to do is read "the new york times" and "the washington post" and some

of the other press and watch some of the other cable networks to realize how biased, jimmy carter said the worst media any president has received. the media is supposed to begin s our system, adversarial or challenging in the sense of transparency, but this media is much worse. they are running their own narratives. it is not adversarial, it is oppositional. it has decided that it is arm in arm with the opposition of the democratic party to this president and if they do it in terms that are so incredible, as "thug, racist," whatever you want to call him. all of the things that you hear regularly, the president of the united states being called, which are unprecedented, and people say that he is unprecedented in his hostility, then they have certainly deserved it. >> david: tammy, let me go to

you on this, because i see this as not good for the country. i see this, regardless of what side you come at this from, when the media does this, they abrogate a key responsibility, like pat said, to be adversarial.d ask tough questions, but it is not good.al >> let me suggest that this is not new. it is just a little bit of a different shade, a different light has been turned on. what the media has been doing for generations. this is what is so valuableur about donald trump. we see the positive and the love for barack obama, but now what we have seen, of course normally, then you hear nothing about the republicans. you hear nothing -- part of the problem with the media is what they don't report. and that -- you cannot prove that. you can't prove a negative. but then we see with donald trump, the opposite. and this is the perfect juxtaposition that we needed the

coverage of barack obama to see and the extreme difference when it comes to donald trump proving that to the adversarial position is not to new, not just for thia year, it has been exposed. i would argue that it started with walter cronkite and his coverage of the vietnam war, and there was no other alternative coverage, fox news did not exist. no talk radio. none of that to show that, but i think this has been the media's nature. it has done damage to the country for several generations, and just like the stock market, donald trump wakes up and is exposing an important dynamic, and we can do, proven and shown to the american people, we have a responsibility to look ford other sources. we know to trust our instinctshe more. the value of the variety of opinions, which you can only get on fox news, and to make sure this is what continues. it's bad in one way, but the clarity of it is very good. >> david: generally shoot, we have a new generation with technology, twitter, the president uses it, the first president to really use it. obama had an account.

trump uses his account, some say often, they wish he would sleep more in the early morning. but not only is it a way around the media, but is it helping? is the media competing with the media they can't control? >> you said the word. the word of the day is control. because the media, the liberal media is unable to control president trump. so he is able to get around the media, because the media, just like you said, will not report on what americans need to know about. what is really unfortunate is that you have so many lies and misinformation that is out there that is not supposed to be biased, but they are, and people have a tough time knowing what the actual truth is. we do this for a living, i am juggling what is true or not true before going on tv or radio, i do not want to make a fool of myself. hard working americans raising their families, they want to know what is going on and sadly,

the liberal media is really doing a disservice to americans. >> david: pat, take it, go ahead. >> i would argue, david, it is worse and more dangerous. because it is one thing for the press to say, he should not have been elected, you should not bee voting for him, he is terrible, get rid of him. that is bad enough, that we have not had, but we also have this where this thing where truth is not told. the facts, we have narratives from the liberal mainstream media, but we do not have facts. for example, they cover up, the word is cover up. they purposely dropped a steel curtain around washington as it relates to the scandals. whether the scandals in obama's administration and those that we now see in the fbi in the stories, whether it's uranium

one, whether it is a dossier, facts that they do not say, there narratives or if you raise questions about the mueller investigation, you are anti-american and trying to destroy an american institution. but they will not give the people the facts where they can then make a judgment. >> david: we have to wrap this up quickly, let me ask the ladies, you bring up a good point, and ladies, quickly, tammy first. people sourcing their own facts, they are digging, the web allows them to do that. are they doing it enough? >> i think that they are, there is a concern about issues of sources and all of that. americans make good judgment. they know when something is legitimate or not. we are doing a good job. >> david: do we need to dig deeper on our own? >> we need to do our own due diligence and not just takeee the news as face value. >> david: great to see yout all, pat, great to see you, my friend. have a happy new year. coming up, president trump putting the chinese on notice,

this after a report surfaced that they were illegally selling oil to north korea. we are going to break down the tension surrounding north korea's nuclear ambitions. don't go away. ♪

♪ ♪ >> david: welcome back to "hannity," president trump is calling china out over its actions on north korea and on twitter he wrote this, "caught red-handed, very disappointed that china is allowing oil to gg into north korea. there will never be a friendly solution to the north korea problem if this continues to happen." also in an interview witho "the new york times" that we talked about earlier, president trump said he is disappointed and hinted that his patience may end soon with china. president trump's comments follow the release of recent u.s. satellite images published

in a south korean newspaper that appear to show ships from china and north korea illegally trading oil. china denied any wrongdoing and says it has consistently followed all u.n. resolutions against the rogue nation. joining us now, author of the new book "direct fire" tony tata, and radio talk show host larry elder, great to see you. general, let me go right to you on this, when you look at the satellite imagery and you look at the release of that information and what the president said, for years i have said there is a simmering pot, china keeps fueling, bubbling, never boiling over, but the trump doctrine, where we now? in a more dangerous spot? do we see an opening? what about china? >> you are exactly right, we are in a dangerous spot, china loves

having the north korea stick in our eye as does russia, but i think what we are seeing is a persistent, constant application of inner agency elements of national power where you have department of defense, department of treasury, department of state, the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., all applying the elements of power, military and economic against north korea, and now today with the leak, the release of these pictures, we have started an information war, for lack of a better term, against china, because when you think about in chinese culture in particular, the concept of face, where china has voted three times now to have sanctions against north korea, and now the country is seen as not following those sanctions. president xi has lost face, president trump knows this.

this was a very deliberate move that was part of an information campaign and is a warning to china to stop and get with the program.s you owe us one now. this is what i see happening right now. >> david: larry, to add to that and the point of information and face, as the general puts it. some other things not talked about. north korea now has actual internet reaching more and more people. they have an active black market. this means we can get information into north korea where the leadership certainly does not want it to be. face, north korea information. are we breaking down the walls? are we showing this for what it really is? >> well, i hope so. we have had a mess for a very long time, republican andl, democratic presidents. under bill clinton, he sends jimmy carter, the former president, over to negotiate an end to the north korea nuclear program. he leaves the room and they

doubled over laughing and continue to take the concessions, but they continue to develop weapons. they are getting better and better at developingnt intercontinental ballistic missiles, and then one could hit any part of the 48 states. this is very, very dangerous and donald trump has recognized that. the north koreans that went to school on libya, recall that when we invaded iraq in 2003, he was so scared that he turned over his nuclear program and now they are under lock and key in tennessee, but for reasons that escape me, the obama administration joined to bomb libya and get qaddafi out of power, it would've been a different decision if it was a wmd power holder. that is but north korea is looking at. that's what the iranians are looking at, that is a very dangerous situation, president trump is realistically trying to do something about it. >> david: general, and larry just mentioned part of my next point, because north korea, china, and iran have a dangerous connection. back in the mid-2000s, it was

china that facilitated the transit of materials between iran and north korea. they have a codevelopment program, we see that clearly, iran is present in their aspirations in the middle east. by developing a codevelopmentth program with north korea. so those three elements together, china has investments in the middle east and they work in iran, how does the president navigate that triumvirate, or frankly, the triad? >> it is chess, david, if you recall, north korea and iran are two of the original members of the axis of evil that george w. bush talked about as a security threat to the united states, now we are partnering with israel to counter the iranian power in the region. we are doing that to counter the nuclear program to make sure that iran does not develop nuclear weapons, if you recall the 1994 clinton-perry nuke deal

with north korea has led us to where we are now, and obama's deal is very much like that deal, we can look 20 years ahead and see where we might be with iran, and secondly you have0 -- hezbollah and hamas working very closely with our allies in israel and perhaps, jordan as well, and saudi arabia, but we are going to begin to take efforts underway to counter on masse in a way, i can remember when i was in the '90s, we were able to follow the outlines of weapons and money all the way back to tehran, they have been a stateut sponsor of terror for decades now, and the iranian nuclear deal is the craziest thing that i've ever seen, i'm so glad that president trump has the foresight to undo that and block that and work with our allies in the region periods going all >> david: less than a minute

left. i know you know about hard way, but does economic power become a greater weapon for us? >> well, it does, but the bottom line is simple, once a country becomes a nuclear power, like a rogue state, like north korea, your options are very, very narrow. you are left with a military option, because it appears that china is not going to abide by the sanction, they've been cheating for a long time. donald trump outed them. they were cheating during thein obama administration as well, because it is in their best interest to have the rogue nation poking out of us. they do not want it to collapse, because they will have a refugee problem. once you allow a country to become a nuclear power -- >> david: i have to wrap it to hear, larry, time is upp against us. general, larry, thank you both. coming up, more "hannity" after the break. stay with us. stay with us. ♪ stay with us. ♪ or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor,

and call 844-234-2424.

>> ♪ >> ♪ >> welcome back to "hannity." that's all the time welcome back to "hannity." unfortunately that is all the time we have this evening. don't forget to set your dvr so you never miss an episode of "hannity." before we go tonight, this be the "hannity" hotline is coming back. if you have a question or comment for sean, whether it is nice or mean, leave him a message on the number on yourn screen. he isth back next week, featurig some of your calls. thank you for joining us tonight. you can listen t to my radio sh, monday through friday, 9:00 a.m. eastern, on sirius xm, patriot 125. don't forget about my biweekly columns at thehill.com. i want to say on a personal note

to all of you cover the staff, cameramen, all of you in the room and the producers, you make it happen. we don't do this alone. thank you, have a happy new year. jason chaffetz filling in life for laura ingraham. you. i am jason in for laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle." the news never takes a break. we have a packed show. my former colleagues will join us to discuss an intriguing new development with the russian dossier and an ultimatum delivered to the justice department by the house intelligence committee. it was california governor jerry brown and new new york governor pardoning immigrants. how far will they go to undermine president trump's immigration policies?