and i feel great! i think the horse has worked. i'm going to go now and take a nap. >> you do that! jesse: that is it for us tonight. follow me on facebook, instagram and twitter. just as with judge jeanine is next. remember, i am jesse watters and this is my world. >> hello and welcome to justice. i am jeanine pirro. thank you for being with us tonight. and thanks to all of you for once again making justice number one last weekend. we have a big show on deck with kellyanne conway, mark levine, michelle -- and mike huckabee coming up. but first, my open.you know, i have had a change of heart. unlike everyone on the right, i don't want the mueller investigation to end so soon. i wanted to keep going on and on and on! because every day, it gets closer to proving russia

collusion. the collusion however, with russia and team obama. not trump. whether it is hillary is reset button, the sale of 20 percent of uranium to russia with $145 million pay back to the clinton foundation, or the fact that the obama administration watched as russia annexed crimea and invaded ukraine while barack obama whispered in that moment quote - tell vlad i will have more flexibly after the election. or whether you even believe that barack obama told putin to knock it off or when obama weapon eyes to the community -- the truth is, every day, we get to watch the evidence of the framing of donald trump

exposed. this week the hill, solomon broke at another explosive story advancing trump conspiracies. will know hillary clinton and the dnc gave millions to an opposition research firm, fusion gps. then hired christopher steele to create dirt on donald trump. in order to surveilled his campaign. this day, we still have not heard why a judge would even consider signing a surveillance warrant based upon this fraudulent document. but what no one seems to be talking about, is that this same dossier is the basis of the mueller investigation itself! right after his election, mind you, after donald trump 's win. the head of fusion gps mates with a top justice department official, bruce ohr. two days later, bruce ohr, rod rosenstein 's right hand takes

the information from fusion and gives it to the fbi.setting off the beginning of the mueller investigation. now, russia collusion criminal investigation. christopher steele of course terminated by the fbi for leaking information to the media. yet, even after the election, and his dismissal, he continues to meet and speak with bruce ohr, who takes this information from a source he is not allowed to work with. then launders it, needs it to justice and the fbi and then he amazingly tries to get the discredited steele into the fbi as a human source. so why would ohr after back stealing information with steele, work so hard to get steele back into the fbi?

think about the timing. there is only one reason steele is one person who supports the in accurate, unverified dossier. even james comey said it was unverified. but in order to get the department of justice and fbi interested in a new criminal trump/russia collusion investigation, it was essential that steele be back in the good graces.by the way, if you think peter strzok and lisa paige hated donald trump, folks -- meet christopher steele! a discredited fbi source trying desperately to get on robert mueller' destroy trump team. peter strzok, and another trump hater, noticed that there was no there there, also seeks and gets on the team. so, team mueller, have on it!

the more you investigate, procrastinate and fail to find evidence of trump/russia collusion, the more you become hoisted by your own regard. bob, my questions to you -- how could you possibly be investigating donald trump when there is absolutely no credible basis for your investigation? and what the hell have you and your trump hating prosecutors come up with in the last 19 months other than a tax evasion case that does not involve donald trump, russia or collusion of any sort? and should be prosecuted by a regular u.s. attorneys office. and not you! but more important, bob, is what you are hiding. and protecting. as you continue with your fraudulent investigation. permit me. in 2009 a russian oligarch named derek -- was asked by the fbi to give millions of his own

money to find and fbi operation. the man running the fbi, bob, you! the man courting the russian oligarch for money was andrew mccabe, deputy director of the fbi. now, since fired. now, bob, in spite of the fact that derek had been banished by the united states three years earlier in 2006, because of his organized crime affiliations, your fbi asked him to fund one of your operations? more important, after donald trump was elected, he is asked by the fbi to help corroborate this steele dossier? he himself stopped at the idea that they collude with russia. quote you are trying to create something out of nothing. fast-forward nine years later. and you indict paul manafort.

but one name is left out of that indictment. your indictment makes no mention of him even though you have evidence that paul manafort wanted to invite him to a trump campaign briefing. my question to you is as follows. are you using the christopher steele, dossier as a basis of your investigation? what crime are you investigating? did you know bruce ohr and christopher steele communicated directly although surreptitiously after steele was fired? was bruce ohr working with you getting information to you? and of course, you know bruce's wife, nelly was getting paid and working for fusion gps. have you investigated that conflict? speaking of wives making money off of their husbands in doj

and fbi have you investigated andrew mccabe 's wife from the money she took from the clinton connected -- for her campaign? which money she could keep if she did not spend it? and why did you give a special security clearance to peter strzok? allowinghim to declassify information . why did it take us four months to find out why you fired peter strzok? why would us, for millions of dollars from a russian oligarch, banned from the united states, to fund and fbi operation? should you even have asked the oligarch for tens of millions of dollars and for his services? because that is a crime, isn't it, bob? i'm sure you know the antideficiency act. it prohibits you as a government agency from accepting voluntary services. and if it came out that you took money, bob, from an russian oligarch whose name you

intentionally left out of the indictment, that would be an embarrassment, wouldn't it? is that why you never put his name in the manafort indictment? and by the way, isn't this a classic conflict of interest? and when derek poska lasted the idea of trump collusion with russia, was that information to give to the fisa court? are you worried that your prior actions with derek poska are worthy of its own grand jury investigation? speaking of the fisa court, is in your whole investigation premised on the fake dossier paid for by hillary, created by a man that hates donald trump and used two con a fisa judge? bob, i really think it is time for you to give up your phony investigation. and get yourself your own criminal defense attorney. that is my open.

if you love my opening statements you will love my new book, number one new york times bestseller, liars, leakers and real girls. the case against the antitrust conspiracy. joining me now with reaction to my open and all of developing news this week, counselor to the president, kellyanne conway. good evening, it is nice to have you on set tonight.you are usually in washington. and we're not even in the new studio anymore. we are thrilled to have you here. i want to ask a question. the president tweeted today that the big story that the fake news media refuses to report is lowlife, christopher steele 's many meetings with the deputy bruce ohr and his beautiful wife, nelly. he talks about the department of justice and the fact that the department of justice is not giving andrew mccabe text messages, to judicial watch of the appropriate government agencies.

the fbi he says will not even give one -- i may have to get involved. what are they hiding? mccabe's wife took big campaign dollars. what is the president, would he sing is what is the fbi giving this information to congress and to judicial watch? >> i don't want the public to think this is normal or necessary. all of this conduct. many people very high up in president obama is fbi, even after president trump is elected unexpectedly and undesirably. by the folks in the fbi.we don't want people to think this is everyone in washington does this. everyone in washington doesn't do this. in fact, the only dirt i researched for hillary clinton was five foot two, eyes of blue, what corruptions she would say and do. it was all right there in hillary clinton. never looked outside of her statements, her lies, the problem she had with the truth with the problem has with her.

i want to make the point emphatically. if you're investigating russia collusion and somehow people playing dirty pool and a trump campaign to help them get elected, it simply did not happen on my watch. i was out there every day saying with the strategy was to the president most important, our best asset. and the vice president our second-best asset. out there every single day, connecting with people directly and promising them to do everything they are doing now. >> this is my question -- why are they giving these text messages to the proper government authority? congress is trying to do this own thing. it tells me if he is doing a tweet like that, he doesn't have confidence in christopher wray. neither do i to be honest with

you. christopher wray from day one, i don't know who made the recommendations. but from day one, he danced with congress. >> is not what he's saying. the president directed the fbi director last week to go in front of the briefing room and tell the country along with the secretary of homeland security and others, what the ministration is doing with respect to cybersecurity and election security. a heck of a lot more than the last ministration. i will not go there but i would say the presidents frustrations when shared by many americans. because people want to make sure all sides of this are being investigated. i would note that since the department of justice and the fbi started the turnover with more of the emails and more of these unredacted documents, look at everything that has come out. >> judicial watch is the one -- they are suing. that's my point.and the president knows it which is why he tweeted. it's a big story, why is the fbi given the information? the president is tweeting that. it is not about what's come out. >> the president, i spoke to

this week several times.two short days ago. we discussed some of this. he is very pleased that more information is coming out that you can now connect more dots between the people who were trying all the shenanigans. even after he was elected. always trying to do this. but i agree with you two. as the investigation goes on, let's make sure everything is investigated because what people are saying right now, why are they still talk about 2016? why can't they get over it? because you are still talking about it. we know nobody was colluding and it changes -- when the deputy attorney general announced last month 12 indictment against russia, he made very clear that there is no evidence, a single vote was changed and that it did not affect the outcome. >> when this corruption the need to be consequences. there is no reason to move on. people need to be prosecuted. >> and let's talk about the

manafort trial. no russia, no trump, no collusion. excuse me, the judge said it doesn't stop everyone to say this is who paul manafort was this is who rick gates was. >> thank you for being with us to appear for insight into this witchhunt, no one better to ask than the host of life, liberty and levine. right here on fox news. the one and only, mark levine. take a look. >> mark, thanks for being with us tonight. we're delighted to have you on justice for the first time. let's go right to the quick here. under the constitution, you say that the president cannot be indicted. what is the point of all that's going on with robert mueller and his team? >> percival is an honor to be with you. you are a great lawyer. >> thank you. >> a couple of things on the

constitutional level. no, robert mueller, cannot on his own and that a sitting president. i've talked about this for 18 months. even professors who show up on fox comprehend what i'm talking about podesta position of the department of justice and there memos. the question is can they subpoena the president? they can subpoena whomever they want the issue is how does the president respond to a subpoena and the president should respond to the subpoena depending on what the subpoena says. if the subpoena seeks information from the president, either personal or otherwise, it raises questions about president he must not reply. a prosecutor appointed by deputy attorney general is acting attorney general and subordinate of the president. it doesn't get to question the presence prerogatives and the president exercises those prerogatives. that's right cannot be obstruction of justice. judge, they for a second. if the opposite were the case, then a president can be hit time and time and time and time again with threats of charges against him for obstruction.

because he fired somebody. you have an fbi director who can theoretically politically blackmail the president of the united states. if even thinks about firing him or cia director anyone of the sort. >> i believe it is already going on because james comey was the head of the fbi. if there is a problem he could've started an investigation. he is fired and then decides he needs to leak and get investigation. get things on the public square. if robert mueller were to subpoena, to what end is the subpoena? >> to no end. robert mueller has nothing. he thinks the president is martha stewart. he is not martha stewart, he's president of the united states. i want to make this clear, mr. mueller is nothing but a single prosecutor. with thousands of prosecutors in the country. we want president of the united states. he ran again 16 or 17 other republicans in primaries. people came out in various states and voted for him.

he participated in debates. he participated in the electoral process. he went to the general election. he won the general election. the american people knew who they were 44. he won fair and square through the constitution. you cannot have a single prosecutor accountable to no one, elected by nobody, having the power to take down a sitting president of the united states. >> okay. it is even worse than that. with all due respect, what they are looking at are the actions that president trump took while he was in office. you cannot and that the president and given that they are looking at things he did as president, it means every time the opposing party feels like it, if they can get somebody in the justice department to say we need to investigate the president for doing this, i mean it is nonsense! there is no end. the subpoena, what for? so they can create an impeachment document? it is lunacy. should the president fire mueller?

>> i would not fire him or not. i think he has him on the ropes believe it or not. >> why? >> he wraps himself in constitutional prerogatives and he duked it out. the fact is mr. mueller shouldn't be met issuing any subpoenas. if you really want questions answered by the president to fill gaps in his massive investigation of nothing, then that is one thing. but he doesn't have that. what we have here which is different than every other case the president has been involved in as far as i know, we have this broad effort to ask broad questions to catch a president. it is not how this works. it is not how it is ever worked in the past. they are supposed to be very narrow related to some conduct of the president of the united states. there has been no conduct of the president of the united states that merits any criminal investigation. you want to know how i know that, judge? because when mr. mueller was appointed, there was no

criminal statutes cited by mr. rosenstein and his appointment in the first place. >> rosenstein is another one that apparently, there were members of congress who wanted to impeach. leadership would not let them go forward with it.it is almost as of the establishment is in line with the democrats based on a false dossier paid for by hillary clinton. she is at the genesis of all of this. let me ask you this, you and i both know that the president and we know that he does want to talk. and if every lawyer around him was saying, this should not be done. not just because we want you to or don't but constitutionally itshould not be done. what do you think the presidents base wants here ? >> i think his political base wants the president of the nice tasty fire everybody. and he better not do that. >> why? >> because every democrat in the house and one third of the republicans in the senate will vote to impeach him. what's the point of that?

when i think he can win it duking itout through the system . if it comes to the point where he needs to fire people then by god, he has the right to fire people. >> of course!

are you ready to take your wifi to the next level? then you need xfinity xfi. a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome. originate after chilling threat

against i.c.e. a dispute a messages man arrested this week in connection with tweeting a murder for hire solicitation. to kill xxxtentacion agents for $500. with reaction to this and more, we have the -- host, we talked about on this show a few weeks ago, michelle wolf and parity on netflix. it is no bitterest presentation american values right now than i.c.e. and as an equal opportunity employer we expect all levels of experience low to very low in those diagnosed with other anger issues. it was funny them but now we have people actually trying to get individuals to kill i.c.e. agents. murder for hire.

>> yes there's a climate of hate in this country and it stems from the radical left and antidrug resistance, judge. you know, for a long time that we've had a war on cops. we had a war on the border patrol and now we have a war on i.c.e. agents. all of these law enforcement and immigration enforcement officials have dedicated their lives to defend the country and we have an out of control run amok democratic party that now wants to win the midterms by calling on abolishing i.c.e. it is as we can see, in incitement to violence. when you marry this domestic call going out across the country, with the official call by ms-13, which happened over the last several months and years now, for green lighting. and everyone in law enforcement knows exactly what i'm talking about. these are assassination hit orders by ms-13 gang leaders. what we know and have been warning about for years is that

it is not just a border problem. it is a national problem. >> but michelle, here's the problem. when you haveunited states some senator saying that abolishing i.c.e. shouldbe a top security when the democrats flip the ice house and senate, it is anarchy by people that we are electing. >> it absolutely is. that's why i'm telling everyone listen, they have the power at the ballot box to make a difference. these midterms and the 2020 elections are revolving on a fundamental question, you support immigration anarchy or do you oppose it? and we get to the ballot box. not only oppose the radical progressives who believe the open borders agenda and undermining our public safety, national sovereignty and economic self-determination but we also oppose the big business

chamber of commerce forces that are every bit as opposed to donald trump as a radical left? >> michelle, it will be an interesting midterm. michelle malkin, thank you for being with us tonight. >> you bet. >> coming up, the second part of my interview with mark levin and the liberals. but first, ready to square off in the all-star panel, next.bac

jeanine. >> welcome back to justice. let's get to it with my panel tonight. -- we were just talking about i.c.e. and the abolition of ice that how first it was a joke with michelle wolf and now people are actually offering money to have i.c.e. agents killed. during the break i did a quick count. there are about 35 democrats in

congress who support the abolition of i.c.e. 133 democrats would not take a position on a resolution. chris, do you think the winning position, do you think it is a winning position for the democrats in midterms? >> they do not want to eliminate border security. >> they want to abolish i.c.e. >> no. they might want to change i.c.e. and might want to change the way work at the borders. we are not separating children from their mothers as they cry and seeking asylum here. they do not want to eliminate or get rid of border security in the country. obviously immigration laws need to be enforced. democrats believe that peer but there is a different ideas on how it should be done. i think it is what it is easier to say to eliminate them but is not a winning strategy. >> wow, eliminate a federal law enforcement is easier to say

then give me an idea of what they want. >> judge, this is why it does not matter whether nancy pelosi is a democratic leader or not. a growing number of democrats say they will not vote for her for speaker. you take around for someone else and, he still got a democrat who wants a socialistic healthcare system. will look to get rid of the presidents tax cuts, looked up at regulations back on the economy. and make workers and job creators have to work under a mother may i system of economics. it is why does it matter who the democrats put in as leader. they're all for the same march to socialism that nancy pelosi preaches. >> i'm talking about abolishing i.c.e. i have 35 people in congress that voted to abolish i.c.e. all right? they want i.c.e. gone. 133 voted on a resolution to support it and they just did

not vote. is this winning for the democrats? >> no, it is not winning for the democrats. you know that, judge. >> i do but i'm asking your opinion. he gave his opinion and now you have to give yours! [laughter] >> judge, if david thinks he can win on the issues, maybe he should abandon the lazy strategy that they use for 15 years. he already has the ads in the can about nancy pelosi. maybe abandon the lazy strategy -- >> no, no, no! the president came out and said -- >> here's the deal, it's worked! every time americans have the choice between nancy pelosi being speaker were not being speaker, they vote for republicans. you see as much as i do.there is not a congressional district, a competitivecongress district in the country where nancy pelosi has a positive -- >> denotes going to be hilarious? if sometime in october, nancy

pelosi, after you've made all of these ads with her face merging with the candidate you are running the ads against. if sometimes she decides is my last term in congress and you have to go back to your donors and try to get money for new ads and issues when you don't have any answers on the issues! which is why you run the attack ads. >> chris, here it is. the president tweeted do not distance yourself from nancy. she is wonderful. her ideas may be babbage deftly given the woman 1/4 chance. she's trying very hard and has every right to take you democrats down if she veers too far left. >> you know what mr. president? she did beat you in the budget negotiation last year. and it is probably why david and others are so mad at her. but that's what happened. >> chris is talking so wacky, he something he is trying to be -- for the presidential campaign.

>> just because you look like does not mean i support him for president. >> listen, i really think that the abolish i.c.e. is really going to work. for us. [laughter] david avella, chis hahn, thank you for being with us tonight. coming up, mark levin takes us on the state of liberalism in america and the mainstream media.

>> now for the second part of my interview with radio and t.v. host, mark live-in, i asked his thoughts on the mainstream media versus trump and his take on liberalism these days. >> the press claims to represent freedom of the press.

the press does not represent freedom of the press. no one is attacking freedom of the press. they have a first amendment right. unlike obama the president has not stuck the fbi on an individual reporter or news operation or anything of the kind. the press is free to be bombastic and they have many drama queens in the press who really are not reporters. their big mouth, trying to promote themselves. you know what they are doing? you're making it more difficult for the people to get the news. to get information and they're making it more and more difficult for the administration and the republic to function. they're not contributing to society in a positive way. i'm not saying you have to agree with the president but day in and day out to trying to sabotage the president and making it impossible for him at times to govern, it is unacceptable. it is not a free press. these are radicals dressed up as reporters who have as their purpose to monitor mine the president. as for liberalism, it is not liberalism anymore. it is state-ism.

you want to impeach a president of united states? the day he is elected? the day he is inaugurated? it is not with the impeachment clause says. know what that's about. the framers discussed it at the constitutional convention. not just get to impeach a president because you disagree with him. or you put a bunch of phony arguments together. the left was to reduce the outcome of the last election. they do not like the election of -- the outcome. question everyone that voted to put donald trump in the oval office. how does this all end? >> well, i'm not sure. but i do know this, if they succeed in impeaching the president and they will not remove it because they will not have the votes in the senate. but just impeaching the president you have over 60 million americans who voted for the president who will be furious. you cannot have what i have been calling the silent coup

take place they have the phone impeachment issue, you cannot reverse the votes, disenfranchise over 60 million americans and act like it is no big deal and pretend there was a basis for it. this divide we have in the nation, we often have divides in the nation, i do not think it is something that can be fixed quickly. because you're disenfranchising the american people. you are then attempting to remove a president because not agree with him for that is not america that is a third world country south of the border. >> finally, when you talk about resolution. have you ever seen it this bad? >> the civil war was bad. i mean, with riots in the 1960s it was bad. what's different here to make, is the institutionalization of the status progressive agenda. which means, you're not allowed to elect a president from the outside who wants to change

what's going on in this country. even if the american people want to change it. the left felt they were going to have the third term of barack obama. they were 100 percent sure donald trump could not win. he wins and now they spent 24/7 trying to destroy him undermine him. by the way, destroy and undermine his supporters. the media in the country and democrat party in the country are attacking a big faction of the american people, day in and day out. calling us nazis, cultists, racists. it is almost not even aimed at trump. it is aimed at tens of millions of americans that finally stood up and done something to the government, with the government that we think is very effective. and the left cannot tolerate it. >> mark levin, so great to have you. >> thank you.>> you can catch his show, life, liberty and levin at 10:00 p.m. right here on the fox news channel.

coming up, my pick for the most outrageous comment of the week. my father passed this truck down to me, that's the same thing i want to do with you. it's an emotional thing to watch your child grow up and especially get behind the wheel. i want to keep you know, stacking up the memories and the miles and the years. he's gonna get mine but i'm gonna get a new one! oh yeah! he's gonna get mine but i'm gonna get a new one! when it's time for your old chevy truck to become their new chevy truck, there's truck month. get 10 or 14 percent below msrp on 2018 silverado pickups when you finance with gm financial. plus, during truck month make no monthly payments for 90 days. find new roads at your local chevy dealer.

and i'm the founder of ugmonk. before shipstation it was crazy. it's great when you see a hundred orders come in, a hundred orders come in, but then you realize i've got a hundred orders i have to ship out. shipstation streamlined that wh the order data, the weights of , everything is seamlessly put into shipstation, so when we print the shipping ll everything's pretty much done. it's so much easier so now, we're ready, bring on t. shipstation. the number one ch of online sellers. go to shipstation.com/tv and get two months free. >> so many outrageous comments

this week. i almost cannot choose! take a look at this clip from michael moore's new film. >> how the -- did this happen? >> the american dream. is dead. stop resisting. >> the presidents powers here are beyond corruption. >> ladies and gentlemen, the last president of the united states.♪ ♪ [music] >> wow! here with reaction to that, former arkansas governor, mike huckabee. all right governor, when i saw that, it caught me and it took my breath away. and you? >> you know, the only thing about that entire little clip that was worth watching was the jimi hendrix national anthem. everything else was typical, michael moore nonsense.

the guy has become a joke! he is so melodramatic, so full of himself and he cannot see the fact that our economy is doing fantastically well. we've earned the respect of nations, if not the respect, their fear. america is back on track thanks to the president. michael moore is missing it, he is missing a great show out there because he is trying to put his little show together. and it has less credibility and is less entertaining than an old three stooges clip. >> i guess you didn't like it! to me, it was a very sad commentary. i mean it is upsetting to me, it really was. let's move on. rosie o'donnell, she is always good for an outrageous segment. she claims now that the trumpet rallies are filled with paid supporters. take a listen. >> first of all people are paid, chris, you know that peer people were paid since he went down on the escalator.

he pays people to show up at those rallies. >> i don't know that that's -- >> what do you think, governor? >> first of i did not know she was back from canada. remember she was going to move there if donald trump got elected. so i guess she is back! because i assume she kept her promise. here is the deal. if the people in the trumpet rallies are being paid, to be there -- i've been to a lot of the rallies and i'm telling they are better actors than she ever was in her entire movie career. she really ought to stand up and applaud them. that is nonsense, she knows it but -- she has a bad, almost terminal case of trump derangement syndrome. >> be careful when you say that! people freak out and throw you off of television shows and out of buildings. i know! anyway, all right governor let's move on. omarosa. she has a new book out and earlier today, the president

called omarosa in a tweet he says, i think he calls her a low life. we have this take a listen. [inaudible] >> lowlife, she is a lowlife. >> what do you think? >> well, i guess their relationship shall we say, is on the chilly side of the street right now? the fact is, she has zero credibility on this. had she resigned and had a press conference in which she said, i just cannot stand it anymore. you know, this is not a white house i can work and it would be different. she got fired. >> right. >> before she got fired she thought the president was fantastic. after she got fired and then got a book contract, not until but after she got a book contract she decided he wasn't

so cool after all. what have we heard similar things from other people about the white house like reince priebus, sean spicer? others have left and you do not hear that from them because they're not out there to sell a book. they're not out there trying to do something to harm the president. she betrayed his trust, she was either lying before, she was lying now or she is lying both times. but she has zero credibility. i cannot imagine why anybody would buy this book. it makes no sense and when the title is called unhinged, i have to think it is an autobiography. [laughter] >> governor, mike huckabee, always good to have you on! thanks so much! >> thank you, judg oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight.

in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation.

some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.

judge jeanine: finally tonight president trump has a copy, do you have yours back my new book "liars, leakers and liberals" is the number one new york times bestseller and you can get your copy on amazon, barnes & noble and it answers your questions and i've been talking about is in the book. keep up with me the other week, facebook, twitter, instagram to find out how to score yourself a signed copy of my book and you never have to miss justice. if you can watch, that your dvr. thank you for watching. i'm jeanine pirro advocating for truth, justice and the american

way. greg gutfeld is coming up. i will see you next saturday night. thank you for watching. >> always good to see you. that's what you get for wearing my suit. i have a new do. it's hump day. what do you say? let's get after it. it's my birthday, not bad for anyone. get after it. greg: what the hell is it? [laughter] yes, yes, yes. all right. so, how was your week? anything good happened? anything at all? talk about -- >> slow news