>> we should go investigate, check it out. >> thanks for joining us. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> we begin with fox news alert, new reaction to president trump's legal team taking on special counsel investigation. taking it head on. the newest member of the president's team, rudy giuliani, says the president does not have to comply with the potential subpoena from robert mueller, adding he would not let his client walk into a "trap," you are watching "outnumbered," here is kennedy montgomery, herself. abby huntsman, i haven't seen you. >> good to be back. >> strategist and senior fellow for independent women's voice, very independent, lisa boothe. >> that's me. >> in the middle seat today, opinion editor and columnist for washington times charlie hunt, put a hurt on us. >> that is right. >> i like the intros today. >> i've been out for a little

bit, i'm feeling fine now. >> happy to have you back. the looking good. >> oh, thank you. >> you're "outnumbered." >> i am. thank you very much. good to be here. >> president trump's legal team taking on tougher tone to deal with special counsel robert mueller, his new attorney rudy giuliani explaining why he doesn't want the president to sit down for an interview with robert mueller. >> because they are trying to trap, you couldn't put a lawyer on the show who wants to keep his law license to tell you to testify. they don't have a case on collusion or obstruction, they are asking all kind of questions about what do you feel and think. i will walk him into prosecution for perjury? >> giuliani was asked if he believes the president could be forced to testify before a grand jury, watch what he said. >> we don't have to, he's the president of the united states. we can assert the same privilege as other presidents have. >> are you confident the president will not take the fifth in this case?

>> how could i be confident of that? >> short time ago our own judge andrew weighed in on the legal argument, watch. >> i don't blame him for making that argumenta, that's his job to make it, he's been making it extensively over the weekend, but history shows that presidents, when subpoenaed by grand jurys, one way or another, do comply. >> charlie hunt, what say you? >> charlie: you know, this rudy giuliani thing, i keep referring as the shock in all legal strategy. you have no idea what, i mean, he is all over the place, but the bottom line is, you know, he is right about one thing, he needs to prevent the president from testifying. if he walks in and sits down under oath with mueller and his team, it absolutely will be perjury trap and i'm sure the president would be delighted to go and talk to them and -- because the president always

likes to talk, but it would be very dangerous. >> you know what is interesting, lisa, the president heard this time and time again, this is not fresh information, maybe he gets credit for looking at this and reading the political landscape, i doll this, listening to people paid to tell him what he should do. >> lisa: with this, it is legal landscape you should be concerned about, less about the political optics. president trump can point to the fact this is a witch hunt. >> does that work? >> lisa: i think it does work, seeing increased evidence that potentially that is the case. look at what happened most recently with the less redacted version of the house intel report which basically shows comey and mccabe told investigators they didn't know flynn lied, yet when mueller took over, flynn pleads guilty to one count of perjury. if i'm president trump, i'm looking at that. i think if you are the american people and you are finding out new pieces of evidence, it

doesn't look good for the f.b.i. or department of justice. kennedy montgomery, the american public is astutely, they know what is important to them. is this on that list? >> kennedy: no, it's interesting because i think giuliani provides a gift for those who are fans of political theater. because he's another entertaining character, but we all know him very well, but we haven't seen him much recently. it's a different side of rudy. it is very mercurial and impulsive and entertaining. the thing i don't think long-term it will be too problematic for the president because although, you know, the press seems to get caught up on the tidbits, the press are like cats and cats aren't very smart and easily distracted. >> ah. >> kennedy: rudy is shining flashy objects and they keep pouncing to different corners of the room, but never get -- which is fine, but a lot of people

realize that the stormy daniels thing, it is a big distraction and gross, but maybe not illegal. they want their personal economies to improve, they want world peace, they want things to work out with north korea, does the giant distraction benefit the president? that remains to be seen. >> abby huntsman, entire career reduced to being -- seekers. i liked it. >> present company excluded. >> it is interesting analogy, think about the lights running around and cats following them and the latest is rudy giuliani. i think the media is jumping on him, he's giving them so much foter and so much to jump on. >> you have been in these moments and face it, everything is a campaign. even when office, you are still running. pr going on 24/7, is that what this need? >> abby: i've been saying from the beginning, the white house, specifically with the stormy daniels story, they have been behind that from the get-go.

president trump would benefit himself and the team in the white house, they would all benefit from him coming out, he should have come out two months ago and say, here is what happened. i'm not a perfect man, no one voted for me because i was perfect. access hollywood video came out before the election. i don't think his base is going to change based on the stormy daniels story. help himself and help his team that works for him by being up front and honest and transparent. >> back to the cast for a second, you have a point, giuliani's response is everybody's reacting to us now. and i feel good about that. charlie. >> charlie: that is not his job. but i do think you raise a very good point, that is when you look, when you compare this or the stormy daniels stuff or any of the other stuff that the media is obsessed with, it in a weird way, sort of benefits the president in that it gives them, they are not talking about thipgs he actually cares about and things he's getting done and

gives him free reign, free way to get things done under the radar that media is not talking about. >> you think this president is challenged by not getting things done? it is like niagara with a straw. >> i know that, i'm on every week. >> charlie: a lot has to do with the fact the media is not paying attention to that stuff. they are absorbed with stormy daniels or whatever. you know, i think the american people don't really care about those things nearly as much as you say, they care -- >> and is stormy daniels the death of the republic? no, but she will jiggle for tips. [laughter] >> my goodness, it is only monday. >> just calling them as i see them. >> tips, tips. >> very good. >> robert mueller's team under the spotlight. unfamiliar situation for them. stunning review, federal justice t.s. ellis iii grilling mueller's lawyers in open court, questioning their motive. judge ellis overseeing the bank

fraud case against paul manafort, judge ellis telling mueller, you don't care about mr. manafort's bank fraud, but what information mr. manafort can give you that would reflect on mr. trump or lead to prosecution or impeachment or whatever, that is what you are really interested in. here is reaction to former -- from a former federal attorney joe digenova, part of the president's legal team at one time and rudy giuliani. watch. >> i do, i believe that after judge ellis' remarks last night, there is no question that the amount of government misconduct is accumulating. it is greater than anybody realizes. >> this investigation reached level of bad faith, no longer a good faith investigation. >> all right, so is this no longer good faith investigation and was that federal judge right to call manafort's team out -- not manafort, mueller's team out, rather?

>> charlie: i from the beginning don't believe this was good-faith investigation. clearly it wasn't when we started to see the charges coming out. not all charges against paul manafort have nothing to do with donald trump or his actions with the campaign. it has to do with things from the past that okay, i'm in favor of prosecuting somebody for anything, breaking laws. so, you know, you didn't need a political investigation, special prosecutor in order to go after these things, these things should have been gone after a long time ago by regular white collar crime prosecutors. >> best lin from t.s. ellis iii, he said, he is asking for more evidence from the memo, right? >> the actual memo. >> he went back to d.o.j. saying i need evidence from the mueller team. they are saying, we have it. he said, let me be the judge of that. he may end up being a big player in this entire thing. what he's saying, what evidence

ultimately lead to where we are now. this is a real stretch. i'm looking at paul manafort for bank and tax fraud from 2005, what does this have to do with russian collusion today? this is something the trump people have been saying for a long time. this judge is not linked to trump, he is a reagan appointee. >> here is the thing, a lot of people and paul special counsel is operating with, you know, lack of transparency, they are conveniently opaque when they want to be and so that, i was talking to some parents this weekend who happen to be on the left and they still feel that because of all this and so much is because of these secret powers, that there is a huge bomb that is going to blowup in the president's face politically and legally. >> well, i think the same can be said potentially for the f.b.i. and the d.o.j., as well and to abby's point, the judge's comment underscore and gives president trump fodder saying this is a witch hunt. take a couple examples.

look at rod rosenstein, he's the guy who laid out the case for firing james comey and the one that appoints special counsel to give mueller broad authority to look at things like obstruction of justice, for instance. again, he laid out the case to fire james comey. look at the fact we know that james clapper wanted comey to sit down and brief president trump about the dossier and that meeting is leaked to the press, right? we know james comey himself was one that said the was looking for a news hook to publish the dossier. nobody could verify the dossier, including own intelligence, as well, could not verify the dossier. then the run with the dossier and from there on it has been rampant in the media about russia collusion. how can you look at some of these things and not be concerned objectively regardless what your position on the president is, that should be deeply concerning. >> like a movie trailer for what is going on. >> but it is true. where is rod rosenstein?

>> do we know enough about the parameters of this investigation? >> no, we don't. i mean, i think that is why judge ellis wants to see "the memo," and understand the scope of the investigation. and it is the political critics of the president are actually waiting in the wings, hoping the manafort investigation can yield impeachment, what happens when it doesn't? >> right. >> no accountability for the wasted taxpayer money and all of this time and all of the damage that it has done to potentially the office by becoming that shiny object that the media likes so much like to focus on. >> then the political fall-out from going after paul manafort, he wasn't a good guy. >> he wasn't a good guy. >> he may be compromised, but is it worse this obsession, this constant obsession that really does -- >> he broke the law, separately, as they are doing with michael cohen and others, separately go after him. why keep one case and not the

other? that is a very fair question. >> yeah, where is rod rosenstein, charlie, in this he he kroeted this memo that led to the investigation. >> charlie: last week he went aggressively and said they will not be extorted, basically accusing his bosses, in the white house and congress of trying to extort the department of justice, which i think is a crime, but -- >> i think extortion in general >> charlie: exactly. amazing thing to think about. >> to your point, charlie, it doesn't exactly boost confidence in the d.o.j. or the f.b.i. >> charlie: no. >> that is severely lack nothing contentuous confirmation. >> i watch your show 8 p.m. eastern and i sometimes will hear you say about, you know, where this investigation is. why do you think it is that we are at a point now where people aren't necessarily waiting or looking at the evidence, but waiting to be told? is it because there has been so

much focus on this? >> apparently, yes, so problematic and out of hand and so all-consuming and i hope everyone steps back and asks themselves, is this the function of an investigative counsel? is this what we put so much faith and money and time, endless time and money into special counsel? >> charlie: the clock is ticking, we get closer to mid-term, mueller is about to pull a comey and wind up being in the middle of an election doing this -- >> i don't know which part, leak or which part of comey? >> charlie: having a huge major high-profile investigation in the middle of an election. you don't want that. >> trying to get people to flip flop and it will not happen. president trump throwing full support behind his pick to head the c.i.a. talking about that ahead of her confirmation hearing that is happening wednesday. the white house says gina haspel is victim to bring down one of

the president's nominees. plus, president trump accusing former secretary of state john kerry of potentially breaking the law, after reports mr. kerry was meeting secretly with the iranians in an effort to save that iran nuke deal. former secretary kerry responding. >> john kerry. [booing] >> president trump: not the best negotiator we've ever seen. never walked away from the table, except to be in that bicycle race. >> this program is brought to you by lear capital.

mr. elliot, what's your wifi password?

wifi? wifi's ordinary. basic. do i look basic? nope! which is why i have xfinity xfi. it's super fast and you can control every device in the house. [ child offscreen ] hey! let's basement. and thanks to these xfi pods,

the signal reaches down here, too. so sophie, i have an xfi password, and it's "daditude". simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome. >> harris: we are back with the fox news alert, 48 hours ahead of critical confirmation hearing, president trump has come out swing og behalf of his pick to head the c.i.a., gina haspel. the president tweeting this, my highly respected nominee gina haspel has come under fire because she was too tough on terrorists. think of that in these dangerous times. we have the most qualified person, a woman, who democrats want out because she's too tough on terror. win gina. this comes after reports mrs. haspel considered withdrawing on friday. short time ago, white house source weigh nothing on that report saying haspel did discuss withdrawing, but was bouncing her concern off white house officials, who are guiding her

through the process. haspel faces stiff criticism from democrats and some republicans, even in her role in enhanced interrogation procedure. love your take, kennedy, i know you have something to say about this. democracy, president trump won the election, should pick the people he wants in top positions. >> kennedy: absolutely, that is what the hearings are for, vet these people, get a sense of who they are and challenge them on past and present positions. certainly her personal history. and hiding behind the fact that much of her work histories classified is not enough. there are some very serious questions that need to be raised about those sites, particularly the ones she oversaw in thailand and two senators, whom i think are good on civil liberty, white and rand paul raised concerns about her and i hope senators take careful time and deliberation. we have, as we were just talking

about, such erosion of trust and law enforcement and with the c.i.a. we can't just say, you know, she's a woman, she's been there a long time and that is enough. that is not enough. it doesn't matter who the candidate is. if there are questions about their past, those need to be raised and thoroughly answered. >> and be taken to that hearing, this comes charlie, after admiral ronny jackson was dragged through the mud publicly. what does it say about where we are that you have a lot of public servants that want to withdraw their names before being put up before a hearing. it is sad. >> charlie: kennedy, you are right and i would like answers to the questions, as well. sadly, you could probably count on one hand the number of democrats or republicans in the senate who actually care about those things and want the answers to those questions. the real thing, they don't like her because donald trump nominated her and want to do anything they can to undermine him by stopping her.

obviously they are not doing -- haven't yet gone into any of the personal stuff the way we saw with ronny jackson, but i think politically speaking, again, setting aside the good questions you raised, the politically speaking, this is a great fight for trump to have. especially when he's in the middle of negotiating with north korea, talking about iran. major things going on. this is a great -- >> i would say that it is okay for him in your argument, to have that, but for the democracy itself, maybe not so much. >> charlie: agreed. >> kennedy: we've got open seats of more than 100, i was at the going away event for the german ambassador, what -- >> rick ranel. >> kennedy: he was thanking people for support, he waited so long to get confirmed. i agree with kennedy, we need a venue to ask about the black sites and a venue to get thoughtful questions. i don't know if a hearing will

get us further than other public hearings have. we need vetting and do it expeditiously. what granel wants to do. he will be pretty busy with germany and iran and korea and all that, pretty busy with that, but when he can, he wants to fight against a can sept everything has to go through the senate and congress for confirmation. can there be some jobs where you have thoughtful review and not have it be a political fight. >> i thought it was interesting. >> he would know, he's been through it. >> lisa, sarah sanders did say this, everyone fighting for women empowerment are hypocrites saying gina haspel can't go up. >> it makes me laugh, using democrats against them. anything sexist, if they disagree, they label you something horrific and you are likely not. i think it is kind of funny to use that against the democrats. if you are not going to support the first female c.i.a.

director, you are sexist or don't believe in women's empowerment. the trump administration has a strong case to be made here. look, gina haspel has been part of the c.i.a. since 1985, as long as i've been alive and on this earth. she's had the endorsement -- >> charlie, we feel old. [laughter] >> she also has support of every individual who served in the intelligence committee, former directors, deputy directors, as well, and i do think if democrats vote against her largely for political reasons, not like kennedy laid out and having real concerns and questions for her. it is political. we saw that play out with mike pompeo when democrats voted for him for c.i.a. director and didn't support him as secretary of state. come on. >> at least have the hearing. great point. it is on wednesday, we'll see what happens there. >> coming up on the show, final push by supporters and critics of the iran nuclear deal ahead of political dead let line coming this saturday. top diplomat is making official during a two-day stop in

washington, plus amid the good vibes ahead of historic summit between president trump and the north korean dictator, rogue nation is lashing out at the u.s., what is this about and does it put that meet nothing jeopardy? reid lamberty i won't use the rhetoric then, i'm trying to calm it down a little bit. i will not use the rhetoric.

the sun is shining so why binge in here, when you can do it out there. with this clever little app called audible.

you can listen to the stories you love while doing the things you love, outside. everyone's doing it she's binging... they're binging... and... so is he. so put on your turn on audible and binge better. searching for answers may feel overwhelming. so start your search with our teams of specialists at cancer treatment centers of america. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com/experts ...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors. new ensure max protein. with recurring constipation and belly pain if you feel like you spend too much time in the bathroom talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess.

♪ yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. linzess is not a laxative. it works differently to help you get ahead of your recurring constipation and belly pain. do not give linzess to children less than 6, and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18. it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. so say yesss! to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess. it's red lobster's create your own shrimp trios. pick 3 of 9 new and classic creations for just $15.99.

with new creations like savory crab-topped shrimp, and parmesan truffle shrimp scampi you better hurry in before shrimp trios is gone. >> harris: fox news alert now. last ditch effort by u.s. allies to influence president trump before the deadline to keep the u.s. in the iran nuclear deal. a short time ago boris johnson met with new secretary of state mike pompeo. earlier making his case for the agreement this morning on fox and friends. watch. >> the president has a legitimate point, he set a challenge for the world. we think that what you can do is be tougher on iran, address the

concerns of the president and not throw the baby out with the bath water. not junk the deal. as i say, plan b does not seem to me to be particularly well developed at this stage. >> the visit by the u.k. top diplomat ahead of the may 12 deadline for the president to decide whether he will keep the u.s. in the deal. meanwhile, a top republican is urging the president to stick with the agreement, congressman thornberry chairs the armed services committee. watch. >> the key question is, okay, now we are where we are, what happens next if the u.s. pulls out? maybe the best thing is for the president to delay a bit more, his deadline of this month, and put the french and the british up to the test about whether it is possible to get this other sort of agreement. >> harris: okay, one side, charlie, delay things and work on a contingency plan and bring more people and europe onboard.

what do you think about the reports of shadow diplomacy with the former secretary of state, john kelly? i mean, does that help our government? help our cause to have him in the back wings saying no, no, no, keep the deal and no. >> charlie: no, it is breathtaking, the idea, john kerry wants to put oar in the water on this, not because he hasn't already, he came up with a crappy deal to begin with, call up the secretary of state and lobby him. the idea that john kerry would go behind secretly negotiate with the leader of a country that wants to annihilate us, remove us from the map of the world, and secretly negotiate with them to undermine u.s. foreign policy, which is being set by the president and unlike john kerry, who tried and failed, donald trump ran for president and got elected president and gets to set the policy. >> you know what makes sense, makes him the jane fonda of the

middle east, not kidding about that. >> charlie: it is true. >> something unethical and underheadd and put politics aside, foreign policy and diplomacy is straight from domestic politics. put that aside and go ahead -- >> it is a little back and forth. >> charlie: donald trump won the election run og this issue, that is another important thing to remember, as well. >> harris: the president tweeted, he likes to do that. he did. the united states does not need john kerry's possibly illegal shadow diplomacy on the badly negotiated iran deal. he was the one that created this mess in the first place, exclamation point. back and forth and then john kerry spokesperson, very busy, i think every american would want every voice possible to urge iran to remain in compliance with the agreement that prevented a war. all right, i want to get my head around the spokesperson's response, though, lisa, it is saying two different things. it is not saying stay in the

deal, it is not just saying that, but it averted a war. talk to me. >> lisa: based on recent intelligent from israel that came to light, the intelligence community has known about for a while that the entire deal was basically predicated on a bunch of lies, right? built on a bunch of lies from iran itself. to charlie's point real quick regarding john kerry. it is a little hypocritical going back and looking at some accusations on michael flynn when he was part of an income administration talking about sanctions with the russian ambassador, pretty much standard operating procedure considering the fact he is part of an incoming administration, hypocrisy -- but for president trump, three main concerns with the iran deal, ballistic missile, verification, what they have on the ground and the sunset clauses, as well. we know that even president macron share the concerns. the question is what do we do and can we strengthen the deal.

>> harris: i don't know if concerns from macron and certainly not from the actual german chancellor, angela merkel, we know she wouldn't see it this way, if the concerns were sincere enough to drive a new deal. sure, they are there. i would add a fourth, we don't know the side deal. >> that is absolutely right. you don't know. when it comes to iran, there are no good options and talking about john kerry, this is his legacy, the iran deal is his entire baby. look back on his tenure of secretary of state, biggest thing he left behind. for him, a lot of this is personal. he's nervous the president is going to end the deal that is all he can -- during that time in office. it is ego. dealing with iran is more than ego. iran is the biggest threat to the united states for a number of reasons and no good options are on the table. either change the deal and if the president says he is negotiator and chief to practice negotiating skills. >> harris: how about everybody

else, like republicans, like thornberry, you can't step away from this deal. how about doing shadow deal building? plan b, i don't know. >> the same thing about the kind that is legal and patriotic within the walls of the congress in the united states. >> some other ideas. >> i know we're about to talk about north korea, but there are a lot of similarities here and the biggest issue with iran is not them having a nuclear weapon, it is having hedge moany and having a relationship with north korea, having stake in syria, absolutely, it is also funding hezbollah and human rights violations, among other things. you know, those elements were completely sidelined in crafting of this deal to the detriment of not only middle east, but -- >> you have people like rice who said it wouldn't be the end of the world if we did pull out. some people are pushing president trump to stay in it. it wouldn't be the end of the world.

>> that is different information, he wants to do what he wants to do. >> dream big. >> north korean lashing out at u.s. ahead of a planned summit between president trump and kim jong-un. the news agency says washington is "misleading public opinion by claiming u.s.-led sanctions pressured the regime to make denuclearization pledge," and it warns the u.s. not to deliberately provoke the north by deploying strategic assets in south korea and raising human rights issues. just days ago president trump said he's taking steps to reduce tension with the regime. watch. >> president trump: we're really doing well with north korea. we're really doing well. [applause] >> president trump: remember, they said, it's going to be terrible, they were actually saying, three months ago when the rhetoric was rather sharp. do we agree? i won't use the rhetoric, i'm trying to calm it down a little bit. i will not use the rhetoric. >> no rhetoric. >> harris: let's talk about this, kim jong-un is essentially

a sociopath, throwing a fit about the big wheel, the big gun, his nuclear program. it is not a surprise they are pushing back in this way through the state-run news agency, but does it actually, is this sort of volley that we should expect leading up to the summit or is this problematic? >> charlie: the fact there hasn't been more quite frankly, surprises me. because of course, you would expect this and you're exactly right, kim jong-un is a tyrant and you can't trust a word he says. that is why, i said, anybody in negotiations with lunatic like this, good to have like somebody like donald trump, i have more faith in him than i would say john kerry going into the negotiations. the reason is because as we saw with iran, he didn't address things we care most about, he gave them bundles and bundles of money and billions -- >> literally. not even metaphorically. >> charlie: funding terror

efforts around the world. i do believe donald trump will walk away if he doesn't get what he wants and i believe that he will go in there and genuinely try to drive a real good bargain. >> can i ask you a question? you have diplomacy in your family. >> i've lived in those neck of the woods. >> and through your dad, the ambassador. when you look at what has been accomplished so far, it still far ahead of anything we have seen. >> kennedy: historic. we should all take a step back and realize where we are at this moment. the fact that north and south korea, kim jong-un stepped foot on south korean soil, first time in decades, that is a huge deal. you have to remember what is going on in the head of kim jong-un, right? in his mind, of course he's not wanting to give president trump credit for this happening, in his mind, he's accomplished what his dad and granddad have been pushing for years and years, developing nuclear program, right? now he says we can hang with the big guys, as nuclear country, so we

are now able to open up to the west, they still want to remain that strong voice and strong power, so the president has to be careful. >> harris: can you do both? >> kennedy: i think you can. does it really matter if it was sanctions and the pressure and -- >> harris: it does to him. it does to kim jong-un. >> charlie: and to donald trump. >> kennedy: say we give him that one, kim, you can have it on your terms. burger king all the way. >> it is optics for kim jong-un, the political optics for him, he has to save faith heading into the conversation with the president. >> harris: can we just give them this one? it is interesting. >> kennedy: you did it because you are so smart and logical and love swiss cheese and obviously that is -- >> nobody likes swiss cheese. >> president trump weigh nothing on three senate primaries tomorrow, could determine the balance of power in washington. candidates in those races aligning themselves with the president and his agenda. will that strategy work in the

general election? discussed in moments. stay right here. i'm just worried about the house and taking care of the boys. zach! talk to me. it's for the house. i got a job. it's okay. dad took care of us.

>> harris: welcome back. president trump weighing in on one of three g.o.p. senate primary races happening tomorrow. the president tweeting to the great people of west virginia, we have together really great chance to keep making a big difference. problem is don blankenship currently running for senate can't win the general election in your state, no way. remember in alabama, vote representative jenkins or attorney general morrisey, blankenship telling fox news he still going to win, republicans are closely watching the primaries in west virginia, indiana and ohio, the president won all three states and

represent the g.o.p.'s best hopes of unseeding incumbent democrats. charlie, i'm hearing don blankenship is up by two in west virginia right now. karl rove says republicans can kiss west virginia goodbye if don blankenship wins, is he right? >> charlie: i don't know if he's right about that. a lot of people predicting don blankenship wasn't wane west virginia, have been wrong about a lot of things. also not forget in 2012, it was a convicted felon who was in prison who won 40% of the vote in west virginia, while in prison, against -- in democratic primary against barack obama. west virginia, predicting how west virginia will vote is not an easy thing. there is a real problem that republicans are having drafting off of the trump -- off of trump's coattails. the big problem is that, you

know, the anti-washington sentiment that got trump into the white house is still out there. so in place like west virginia, they wind up going behind guy like blankenship. >> west virginia is an interesting state, since about 2000, it's really been trending more and more red. the only reason joe manchin has been the main democrat there, he is very much in the middle. he didn't support tax cuts, he didn't support repealing obamacare. interesting to see how that plays in the general. i think he's still a very popular, he was governor of the state, if he were to lose as democrat of west virginia, i think that could be the beginning of west virginia completely being red. >> i've interviewed joe manchin and he is a strong candidate. don blankenship been to jail, probably not the best to have candidate who spent time in jail. >> did you see his campaign ad? cocaine mitch, i don't care, man, he looks like he's nervous about something. >> do you agree with charlie's assessment that perhaps it

doesn't matter who wins the primary in the state? >> i think it does matter. i think unfortunately for republicans, there are still going to be very independent-minded voters in a place like west virginia. it's different than every other state and, you know, they deserve to put their own candidates and nominees forth, i get that. still, don blankenship looks nuts. >> harris: just for a second, revisit what we saw in pa-18, district 18 with connor lamb. if joe manchin decides to even just a little bit further right, republicans are going to have a mess on their hands potentially, right? >> yeah. >> harris: you can say it doesn't matter who he goes up against, you got to be looking at who can beat joe manchin, regardless of whose coattails, whose tweets, looking that way. the attorney general, i don't know, maybe. these other men in the race benefited from the president's tweet potentially, maybe. who can really beat joe manchin

who might go a little bit right like connor lamb. that candidate might not be real down the road, but real in this race. >> spot on. >> harris: some counties in illinois are taking tip from liberal declaring sanctuarys for gun ors, will it work? is it the right way to handle this issue? stay tuned. simple goodness

is ahhhmazing! meaty morsels. a tender texture. with real meat and a blend of peas and carrots i can see. a totally new kind of awesome going on here! (avo) new beneful simple goodness. tender, meaty morsels with real ingredients you can see. you might or joints.hing for your heart... 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.

>> harris: welcome back. a controversial move by some county necessary southern illinois declaring themselves sanctuary counties for gun rights. they are pushing back against threats to target their second amendment right. taking cue from sanctuary city policies that refused to enforce federal immigration laws. authors behind the resolution admit their move is largely symbolic, but they are making a point. this is interesting, charlie, you have republicans who are basically sending a message to democratic lawmakers pushing for more gun control in illinois. question is, is this hypocritical for republicans who have been so negative, so anti-sanctuary city and state to say we'll do the same thing about laws we don't want to abide by. >> charlie: sure, it is hypocritical. do this with immigration laws

and claiming duly-passed, enacted immigration laws that are on the books and have been for a long time, we're not going to obey the laws, why don't you do it for everything. you could do it for gun laws, for, i don't know, whatever. and, it is a terrible thing. >> harris: should we do away with sanctuary cities? >> charlie: that would be a start. >> kennedy: we have to find a difference between constitutional right. this is enshrined in the bill of rights for a very good reason and it's very important issue for many americans who feel it is their duty in order to protect themselves and their families and self-defense is critical, especially in places like illinois, where parts of illinois have been, you know, riddled with the type of crime that you really don't see, except for once in a generation and they want this phased path and do it by protecting themselves and that is the

difference. immigration policy is screwed up, it is up endd and republicans and democrats have to figure out way to have comprehensive immigration so you don't have willie nilly policies in states, countys and cities. >> harris: i'm understanding this is happen nothing rural counties in the state? this underscores a point i've been making, gun control is not right versus left, it is rural verse urban. breaking down of course your thoughts, which is true, more rural individuals have guns than those that live in urban areas, but the fact you have the bulk of the rural individual have owned a gun before the age of 18 and that break down is so different than individuals living in urban areas, as well. i think it underscores this deep divide on the gun divide based on what area you live in. >> harris: when you look at the vice chairman of the board and this is a rural area effingham

county. what he is saying, they are turning the wording on its head because it provides you such a rich talking point, at that point. the word is already out there. sanctuary and it does flip it. what kennedy is saying, do you need a sanctuary for something that is constitutionally protected and do you go down a dicey road if you treat it like that? >> charlie: what really should happen, these laws should be challenged on the grounds of constitutionality and the supreme court has been very vocal that there are very, very few limits that you can ever put on this stuff because as i you say, it is constitutional right. you can protect yourself, your family and your neighbors. >> yeah. >> i think there is a difference talking sanctuary city and gun rights? >> charlie: absolutely. >> see how this plays out. >> harris: especially for people that say they have a right to be here, illegally or not and want sanctuary cities, like what they are doing in chicago, with rob

emmanual. that is not a constitutional right. i get the talking points with words and hash tagable, issues are different. >> see how that plays out in illinois. >> more "outnumbered" in just a moment, stick with us. at ally, we're doing digital financial services right. but if that's not enough, we have more than 8000 allys looking out for one thing: you. call in the next ten minutes... and if that's not enough, . grab your wallet. (beeping sound) (computer voice) access denied. and if that's still not enough to help you save... oh the new one! we'll bring out the dogs. mush! (dogs barking) the old one's just fine! we'll do anything, seriously anything, to help our customers. thanks. ally. do it right. my dai need my blood sugar i'to stay in control.en. so i asked about tresiba®. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ tresiba® is a once-daily, long-acting insulin that lasts even longer than 24 hours. i need to shave my a1c. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪

tresiba® works like my body's insulin. releases slow and steady. providing powerful a1c reduction. my week? hectic. my weekends? my time. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪ i can take tresiba® any time of day. so if i sleep in, and delay my dose, i take it as soon as i can, as long as there's at least eight hours between doses. (renee) once in use, it lasts eight weeks with or without refrigeration, twice as long as the lantus® pen. (announcer) tresiba® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins, like tresiba®, may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness,

swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness, or confusion. ask your health care provider if you're tresiba® ready. covered by most insurance and medicare plans. ♪ tresiba® ready ♪

...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors. new ensure max protein. so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships. get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it. thanks to charlie. i hope we kicked off your week right. >> couldn't have been better. >> politically mellow and a stable week? >> no. it will be a nightmare. >> is that a thing? >> wishful thinking, i guess. all right.

great to see everyone. so great to see harris. we are back at 12:00 noon eastern tomorrow. right now here is harris back in action. >> harris: fox news alert. rudy giuliani stepping up his attack on the russian investigation. go "outnumbered overtime." i'm harris faulkner. one of the new legal hires for president making waves. giuliani saying he would not rule out president trump taking the fifth. and that the president would not have to comply with a subpoena from robert mueller. >> assert the same privileges of other presidents have? i wouldn't be an attorney if i did that. i'd be living in a fantasy world that everybody tells the truth. they don't have a case on collusion or obstruction. >> harris: democratic candidate jim himes says the president cannot refuse a mueller subpoena. >> that is completely wrong.