to drug warehouses, floor to ceiling, massive drugs being brought into our country, i have seen tunnels, human trafficking, drug trafficking, yeah, we can protect it with a big door. let not your heart be troubled. it's all the time we have left. we'll always be fair and balanced. jason chaffetz, by the way, tomorrow night, investigating the investigators, following the money, a "hannity" investigation. all right, you are in for laura ingraham tonight. i got to meet your brother. it is meet the brother today at fox. >> jason: i love it when you talk about the border patrol and i.c.e. and we are going to talk about it tonight on this hour as well. good evening from new york. i'm jason chaffetz and for laura ingraham, who is on vacation. we have a fantastic show for you tonight with so much news, i don't know how we will get it all to fit in. president trump is once again attacking the media. this time, over the white house counsel's interview with the mueller probe. as don began turning on the

president? i don't think so. we'll tell you the real story in just a few minutes. while many democrats are calling for i.c.e. to be abolished, president trump was honoring the heroes of i.c.e. and border patrol at the white house today. the latest controversy, though, i.c.e. taking heat for arresting an international murder suspect. unbelievable details coming up. plus, a new wave of violence sweeping chicago over the weekend, and you won't believe how city officials are responding now. but first, our top story, donald trump versus john brennan. last week, the white house announced that trump has stripped obama's at cia director, current left-wing cable news planning, john brennan of his security clearance. how dare he do that. brennan isn't going away quietly, threatening legal action in and doubling down on his most outrageous claims. >> i called his behavior treats rudeness, which is to betray one's trust and to align with

the enemy, and a stand very much by that claim. i've seen the lights clicking read in terms of what mr. trump has done and is doing, bringing the country down the global stage and he's fueling and feeding divisiveness within our country. he continually lies to the american people. the types of things he's doing, i think of my need to speak out. i've been speaking out rather forcefully because i believe is important to do so. i don't believe i'm being political at all. i'm not a republican, i'm not a democrat. >> jason: nothing political, right. president trump's attorney, rudy giuliani, struck back at brennan's apolitical claims earlier tonight. >> john brennan was not a particularly distinguished anything. he was a political operative. he hasn't been an intelligence officer in a long time. he's been a political hit man. his language demonstrates that. the president committed treason? treason? come on. >> jason: welcome a brennan may want to be careful because it's not just trump's allies that are criticizing him now.

>> there are intelligence officials who are uncomfortable with how far brennan has gone. >> i think john is sort of like a freight train and he's going to say what's on his mind. i think, though, that the common denominator among all of us that have been speaking out, though, is genuine concern about the jeopardy or threats to our institutions and values. although we may express that in different ways. i think that is what this really is about. for john and his rhetoric have become, i think about an issue in and of itself. >> jason: yeah, it has become an issue. joining me enough are dan hoffman, fox news contributor, n chief, chris walker, former assistant fbi director, and roger fitz, former aide to secretary of state john kerry, and a democratic strategist. roger, i want to go to your first rate i will give you the first shot at this.

treason? do we really think this is treasonous to do these types of things? >> well, mr. brennan is perfectly capable of speaking for himself. i don't feel like i need to amplify or defend his points. >> jason: wait, can you defend his point are you a supportive of his point? he's making -- you know, the penalty for treasonous death. so you really believe that the president is being treasonous? >> again, mr. brennan can quantify this or classify it however he likes. it's up to him to speak for himself. i think what's really interesting is how many other folks that normally don't speak out publicly at all are willing to join into this conversation. i think people should take notice of that. >> jason: there really is a defense to go with that part. legally, the president can take away security clearance, right?

is there any judge in the world that is going to say, no, the president doesn't have the authority to take away somebody security clearance? >> they act like there is some sort of property right to keep a security clearance, post government work. there is no such thing. what he is doing is irresponsible and selfish because he he is identified wih the intelligence community. i was a member of that. it makes all of us looks like a bunch of partisan hacks when he goes off in every direction spewing all this vitriol, it really reflects poorly on the intelligence community. people sit back and say, well, now we know what he was thinking when he was head of the cia. it doesn't reflect well. >> jason: i think it does undercut the credibility of a agency that prides itself on being a nonpartisan and apolitical. newt gingrich was on "fox and friends" this morning. let's listen to his point of view and dan, i would like you to react to it. >> how would you like to have

director of central intelligence so lacking common sense that he thinks he can write a tweet accusing the president of the united states of the equivalent of treason? high crimes and misdemeanors, and then explained that he's really not political? john brennan is totally political, he was basically a toady for president obama, he participated in line to the american people about what happened in libya and benghazi, and frankly, brennan should never have been director of the ascension central intel. >> jason: dan, what is your reaction? was newt gingrich correct? >> we have troops in syria and afghanistan, we've got -- >> jason: let me make sure dan gets in there. >> a couple of points here. john brennan has made some outrageous claims including that vladimir putin could blackmail president trump, and he called president trump guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors after the helsinki summit. if john brennan really believes these things, i think he would've been better off as a

professional intelligence officer rather than saying this on msnbc or writing it in the press, he might've gone straight to the special counsel and explained what his concerns were. but the problem is that it's not just our own citizens who are listening john brennan, there are foreign governments and spies feelings stealing secrets on our behalf who are going to believe that john brennan and something that we don't earn their trust in our government is going to be degraded, our national security will be impacted negatively. the second point i would make quickly is that those who signed this letter might question whether they want to be tethered to john brennan, who is really the weak link in this chain here. he's not a credible witness. i think that those who are concerned about a security clearance issue and maybe feel like the cia, who held the brennan's clearance, should have been responsible for revoking it or not, i think their argument is damaged because again, brennan is not a credible witness. >> jason: roger, does dan make a point here?

that is, we undercut the credibility with our foreign adversaries in the sitting president? does not concern you at all? >> it does but there are plenty of things that concern me in that same realm. the president leaking intelligence that we got from israeli sources to the russian ambassador in the oval office. whatever happened to him in two hours and helsinki. this, i think -- >> jason: why does that concern you? why do suddenly democrats good concerned with? the i.d. the president is engaging in diplomacy is something that i've always thought the democrats engaged in and supported and then donald trump resident suddenly he's great if dominic criticized for it quite >> i've been in these rooms. i'm assuming some of the panel has been in the room and you, congressman. there is always no takers, interpreters, some kind of official record, and is no accident that as soon as helsinki was over, we come home from that, and then there's the announcement that there is not going to be readouts from phone calls with foreign leaders.

i agree with the instincts about being concerned about what's going on. i think the brennan-drum thing has taken on its own life and his last 48 hours that i don't think anyone is a necessarily happy with our proud of with. if one has the instincts and the intent of our being concerned about national security, i wouldn't put mr. brennan and his actions the last four or five days of the top of the list. >> jason: i would. i think he uses it as a tool for his own personal political gain and financial gain. that is my own personal opinion. chris, it begs the question, why do people in perpetuity continue to get security clearances after they leave office? it's expensive to do, right? is this really justified in this day and age? >> i don't think so. i think there are far too many people post government service who retain their clearances. they are expensive, got to do re-investigations periodically, and the test is, the criteria is, is it in the best interest of the government for them to keep their clearances?

i would say, the number of people that retain those clearances, the answer is no. it's a commercial gain for them, not so much benefit to the government. >> jason: the cost is exorbitant. my understanding is, i think it was on $15,000 to re-up and do this and you really ought to go back to what senator patrick moynihan from new york said some 27 years ago, he said he heard that a commission that said, when everybody has a security clearance, nobody has a security clearances. when everything is classified, nothing is classified. but i would like to see, it the government in a bipartisan way, have drawn, the speaker, majority leader, appoint a bipartisan panel to review this whole thing, top to bottom, and come up with a real solution. we got to take the politics out of it and figure this out. dan, i got to ask you, we've had some terrific things that brennan has done and taking away security clearances. what do you say to those men and

women that were, say, and benghazi or other places, and they see this brennan out there is feeling what he is spewing today? >> i'll be honest with you, i don't think it impacts our intelligence community at all. we, historically, and i think it carries on today, we are just -- we just don't pay attention to those things. john brennan can say what he wishes. there is no impact on the men and women of the cia who were going about their job, focused on the mission, focused on recruiting, and stealing secrets, even though john brennan didn't like to say we steal secrets, that's what we do, and write all source analysis of the president to make an educated foreign policy decision. i think john brennan is bringing dishonor on himself but i really don't think he is intelligence community. >> jason: good. i hope he's 100% right and the men and women who are serving in the services can't thank them enough for the great work, and i hope these little sideshows that this former director how to put in place are dismissed for the shenanigans that they are.

gentlemen, i thank you for joining us tonight. the media overhyped yet another leak in the mueller probe. we'll have the real story up next. this wi-fi is fast.

i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome. in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's. ♪ >> jason: you won't believe this, but it seems the media has

overhyped a mueller probe story. "the new york times" put out a piece over the weekend that said white house counsel dawn mcgahn spoke to special counsel robert mueller's team for about 30 hours, revealing new details about the president's attitude toward the russia probe. that prompted some to speculate that mcgahn had "turned on donald trump." but "the washington post" is out with a new report stating that mcgahn does not think he put trump in any legal jeopardy. citing what mcgahn's attorney has revealed to president trump's lawyers. earlier tonight, trompe l'oeil or rudy giuliani made this key point. >> here's the most important thing, i knew not to worry about it because of the president had said anything criminal to the council of the white house, mcgahn wouldn't be there now. mcgahn has a would have to quit. >> jason: good point. joining me now with reaction from washington, d.c., are james, white-collar litigation attorney, and democrat attorney

scott bolden. gentlemen, thank you so much for being here tonight. >> good evening. >> jason: the internal debate, the question is, did they do the right thing? did they cooperate, did they not cooperate? that they open it up, fight back? presidents in recent history have fought to keep executive privilege, they have fought for that. but donald trump is going to waive that, gave them a million plus documents, mcgahn, others that have been there for interviews. so the question is, is the president doing the right thing or not doing the right thing? scott, what say you? >> it depends on what legal team he had at the time. the very beginning, remember john dowd was trying to cooperate and make the investigation go away. we have all been there, we know that strategy is very important, they walked away -- she's walked away from his lawyers, he's got a new team and, they are fighting because they think the mueller investigation is tainted with prejudice. the reality is, though, executive privilege is super important. it frees the general counsel -- i'm sorry, the white house

counsel, it protects the president and to waive it based on cooperation is very dangerous. it's good that the lawyers are talking but the reality is, 30 hours is a really, really long time and i will be honest with you, under oath, telling the truth, mcgahn is a pretty ethical guy, he's fought with trump before, that's a lot of time. >> jason: it is telling, though, that the president is waiving all the privileges, and outputting of the legal defense that he could have done, doesn't he score some points in terms of openness and transparency? >> is completely inconsistent, isn't he? >> jason: sorry, let james jump in. >> thanks, jason. i don't think it is that inconsistent or at least it's an inconsistency he can live with. he can still attack the mueller probe and say they are doing things wrong, saying that they are comprised of partisans, whatever you want to say, but also be able to say at some point, hey, i, as president, was transparent. i allowed my attorney to speak unfettered to them for 30 hours. i turn over millions of

documents. it is unnerving for us lawyers to think of waving an available privilege but i think it might deserve the message pretty well for the president overall, witches, even though he doesn't like this probe, he's willing to be cooperative and give them what they want. >> jason: james, is giuliani right? if mcgahn had evidence of a crime or something going on in the white house, he wouldn't be here, right? >> i think is a pretty good assumption. i think that's probably right. i hesitate only because rudy might change his comments any minute. but overall, i think you've got this one right. >> jason: scott, do you think giuliani made the right assessment and his comments right? >> i don't think he knows what he's talking about in the sense that he doesn't know what mcgahn said for those 30 hours, neither does trump pray they know what his lawyers aside. the fact that he took a lawyer in shows that he was concerned about not only maintaining his integrity, but also the fact that he did have a concern about donald trump setting them up as the fall guy, all iodine and then ask an investigation. but the reality is, we really

just don't know. but we will find out, and i got to tell you, i think mcgahn is more important than cohen in regards to what he knew about the white house, the president, comey, and the issues of obstruction or conspiracy going on at the white house and during the campaign. >> jason: james, wasn't it director comey who says he wasn't really going to chase after false statements? look, i was very involved in the hillary clinton email investigation. there were a lot a lot of false statements that were made, but the fbi numbers pursue that. 's is a double standard yet again? >> it certainly is unsettling, a little weird to see that. inspector general report specifically talked about a witness in the hillary clinton probe lying repeatedly, lying to the point where the agents were, getting themselves, wow, we could do a 1,001 fall statement prosecution against this guy. but meanwhile, comey swore a document that we are not going to trouble ourselves with these false statement cases in the hillary email probe. but interim, they have been handing them out like candy.

obviously, michael flynn, the notion of a perjury trap, the notion of a fall statement prosecution is alive and well in this case, although it didn't seem to be in the other ones. >> jason: scott, that is a problem. hillary clinton was under oath when she testified before the benghazi committee. jim jordan come after us ask fr some very direct questions and i'm telling you, she absolutely, totally lie. i signed a letter as the chairman of the oversight committee asking the fbi, along with bob goodlatte, chairman of the judiciary committee to investigate that in the fbi and department of justice never even bothered to respond! >> every doj as their own individual agency. i mean, i thought my call it -- >> jason: why? why? you hit on just the right point. that is what is wrong with just as in this country right now. justice -- no, it needs to have a blindfold. if it's a clinton, they let them go. >> told the republicans to fix

it because they want the event produce documents -- >> jason: what you mean? donald trump has produced more than a million document to set of holding off on saying, i can pull executive privilege, when fast and furious happened and we had dead americans, guess what? they gave 2,000 weapons out there, eric holder and the department of justice -- >> producing any documents or very little in regard to the house and senate investigation. i got to find something to regroup you on -- would you rather have comey, who wouldn't prosecute false statements and large the fbi? because that is what you are facing. now you've got mueller, and mueller is doing his job. you can't have it both ways. by the way, this is a republican investigation. isn't it? >> jason: yes, but scott, you hit out on, got to wrap up, and got to let you gentlemen go. each department of justice as his own agency based on -- that is was fundamentally wrong. justice should be blindfolded! >> they hop discussion, though.

>> jason: that discretion has been tainted with politics. gentlemen, i have to go. i really do appreciate it. president trump is hitting back at the abolish b12 movement and hitting back hard. a full report next. it really- it rocked our world. i had no idea the amount of damage that water could do. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they were on it. it was unbelievable. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. we're the baker's and we're usaa members for life. usaa. get your insurance quote today. until i held her. managing my type 2 diabetes wasn't my top priority. i found my tresiba® reason. now i'm doing more to lower my a1c. i take tresiba® once a day. tresiba® controls blood sugar for 24 hours for powerful a1c reduction. (woman) we'd been counting down to his retirement.

it was our tresiba® reason. he needs insulin to control his high blood sugar and, at his age, he's at greater risk for low blood sugar. tresiba® releases slow and steady and works all day and night like the body's insulin. (vo) tresiba® is a long-acting insulin 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. (man) i found my tresiba® reason.

find yours. (vo) ask your health care provider about tresiba®. covered by most commercial health insurance and medicare part d plans.

♪ >> jason: president trump escalating his war of words with the left over its calls to abolish i.c.e. the president blasting the abolish i.c.e. radicals during an event honoring i.c.e. and border patrol agents at the white house today. >> incredibly, a coalition of open borders extremists, and to me that means crime, people that don't mind crime, they minded rent happens to them, they don't mind it when they have to watch it on television, have wage and unprecedented assault on american law enforcement, our greatest people, threatening i.c.e. and border patrol for performing their duties admirably. and for defending our country

from horrible people and horrible, horrible events and crimes. >> jason: joining me now for debate is national border patrol council president brandon judd and democratic strategist jose. jose, i appreciate you and brandon being with us. i got to ask you, to the president do the right thing today honoring those federal employees, the i.c.e. and border patrol agents? >> jason, there are currently over 500 children who are separated from their parents because of the policies of this administration -- let me finish -- >> jason: no, jose, i want you to answer the question that i asked, not what you want to go off and talk about. it's a simple one. the president -- >> i got a simple answer but you gotta let me answer the question. if you enter it may come i can't speak. let me finish. to be when you are not answering the question. i will interrupt you. did the president do the right thing? >> he did not do the right thing, jason.

>> jason: by honoring i.c.e. and border patrol agents? >> absolutely he did not do the right thing. we should be looking for things to reunite these children. we know that i.c.e. agents right now are not using its resources the weights imposed by enacting this senseless and anti-immigrant zero-tolerance policy. >> jason: wait, wait, wait for a timeout. jose, this is an important point. don't say that we are anti-immigrant. we are anti-illegal immigrant. don't leave the word illegal out of the statement. >> undocumented jason. it's undocumented. >> jason: it's against the law. is it legal or illegal to be here undocumented? >> they are undocumented. i'm going to make it real simple -- >> jason: jose, simple question, is it legal or illegal? >> let me say it again. they are undocumented. >> jason: it legal or illegal? >> not a serious crime. we got to make a choice. look, can i -- let me flip the question -- >> jason: no, no, no.

jose, you are not here to flip my question, i'm here to ask you questions but now i will let brandon give his perspective because there's another side to the story, and i want to get the border patrol's perspective on this. did the president do the right thing by honoring i.c.e. and border patrol agents? >> he absolutely did. i knew brian terry personally. it hit me when he died. i knew nick ivs brother, i worked side-by-side with nick's brother, when he died. when the president has honoring those heroes that put their lives on the line to protect our citizens, of course that's the right thing to do. jason, you are the only sitting congressman that i know of that actually patrolled the border. you know personally how difficult the job it is, how difficult is it? >> jason: i have been there multiple times to the border and i did, i went out, we chased and caught this dope and it was bad. it was really bad.

they would have ended up on the streets and hurt our kids. i want to get your take on another story that certainly appears to make i.c.e. out as real villains. here's "the new york times" headline. >> jason: i.c.e. the team detained man who was driving his pregnant wife to a hospital in e sacramento bee." they were on their way to a hospital to have a baby when i.c.e. took dad away." sounds pretty disturbing, until we heard from i.c.e. who revealed this from a suspect. >> this is far from an innocent victim. this person was wanted by foreign authorities for murder. this was info for a wanted person. we did surveillance to find out where they lived in that when that individual left their home, we made a vehicle stop. none of the i.c.e. officials did anything wrong. it just happened they were on their way to the hospital from that location. >> jason: we are hearing from a source of the request from the mexican government for i.c.e.'s help first came nearly a month ago. jose, i will let you take the first shot at this. did i.c.e. do the right thing in

that case? >> if you are undocumented person and you committed some serious crimes, you should be deported. democrats have said that from the beginning. it's a little strange to me, jason, there was a press release that came out by i.c.e. saying that they will support anybody, no matter what, and the next day, all of a all of a sudden,n we just found out that the guy that we arrested has a warrant out to get him in mexico. do i believe the whole story coming out by the agency? not totally. but i will say it again. if you are undocumented person who is committed crimes, rapes, murders, you should be deported. we've been clear from the beginning. >> jason: do you believe i.c.e. should be abolished? if christian jaelyn brown, senator warren, some real stalwarts in the democratic party who are asserting this is the proper thing to do. you advocate getting rid of i.c.e.? >> whether you call it abolishment or calling at rebranding, i don't really care. >> jason: rebranding? >> i think i.c.e. should be doing better things with their time, they should be going after

transnational crime organizations, going against money laundering cases, they should not be going after little cases trying to separate them from their parents. >> jason: jose, thanks. that's why we need a wall, brandon. make sure they don't get here in the first place. can figure out who the bad guys are and go to guys are and a lot of bad guys coming in. brandon, your quick perspective and then i got a wrap it up. >> first off, when people cross the border illegally, i don't know what crimes they have committed in their country. i can only find out the crimes they've committed in the united states and that should scare anybody because we don't know who's coming over. if they are doing it legally, we are going to know who they are and we have the right to know who they are. >> jason: this country legally and lawfully brings in more than 1 million people and there are people -- that's who i think we have -- >> the majority of those people are good people. >> jason: i have a higher moral obligation to the people who aren't willing to break the law, who are getting into line, that is who we should be prioritizing. jose, i appreciate you coming

out because i know you believe wholeheartedly in your position and i appreciate you sharing with us. brandon, cannot think the good men and women of the board and patrol and i.c.e. agents as well. thank you, gentlemen, for being there. chicago appears to be at a breaking point with a new wave of violence again rocking the windy city over the weekend. wait until you hear how city officials are responding. stay tuned. cular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.

thethe more you know theme, commute is worth it. for all the work you pour into this place, you sure get a lot more out of it. you and that john deere tractor... so versatile, you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive. but just like a john deere, it's worth it. nothing runs like a deere. now you can own a 1e sub-compact tractor for just 99 dollars a month. learn more at your john deere dealer.

>> jason: six killed, more than 50 shot. it was yet another horrifying weekend -- that was just a week -- of carnage in chicago. it's a public safety emergency. but whatever hearing from the authorities in the wake of the new wave of violence? more empty rhetoric. >> let's not forget, the police aren't the one out there doing it. we can only do so much. now can we do better? of course we can. but it's just not about that. crime is a very complex issue. you look at resources, educational opportunities, health care, mental health treatment, all of those things play a part in it. >> jason: joining me now to discuss this true american tragedy are fox news political analyst gianno caldwell and criminal defense attorney anthony paul. now anthony is joining me here in studio. i want to be direct and what i'm asking you. democrats have been in charge of chicago for a long time.

i can't remember republicans enacting their policies in ther there. so you've got rahm emanuel, you have president obama, the situation is getting bad and worse, what are we supposed to do? >> i think it's going to take a couple of things. i think one thing that we need to focus on is that this is a gang war, as someone who has represented gangs in los angeles, whether -- all gangs, latino, african-american, white, asian, got to remember that these gang members are looking for some type of support. and financially, democrats -- you are correct. they have been getting a lot of money poured into cities for problems and it obviously hasn't been invested well. there are some things that can be done if they are investor into the right areas. >> jason: you are not suggesting that you need more money. that is usually with the democrats say. we need more money. >> i think we need role models and i think we need role models, education, and jobs. as simple as that may sound, i think that will solve the problem.

>> jason: we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the history of our nation. black unemployment rate is at its all-time record low. >> let's look at the black unemployment rate for those gang members, teens in the inner-city, pretty sure it's not as low. i can respect and understand the fact that the an employment rate for african-americans is lower but not for these guys. these guys need something. i can tell you from my experience personally, they are looking for that opportunity for a role model, someone to -- >> jason: i believe in mentors and give it to good job. gianno, both of you gentlemen have ties to chicago. what do you think we need to do in chicago? >> i was born and raised in chicago, specifically on the south side, and for me, this isn't just a discussion as we are talking about now, we are in a literal state of emergency. the state of chicago is under siege. i've been shouting it from the rooftops on this platform, fox news channel, blessed to have the opportunity to invite, not just invite president trump to chicago, but we have to work on solutions. those solutions come with a

number of things. i can agree with mr. tall in terms of jobs, that is absolutely necessary, there is a great pastor, dr. bill winston, a great program where he has guided about 360 360 jobs, connecting the two manufacturers, incorporated guys with backgrounds and records. so i can understand that is one element of it. but this law enforcement issue is very big. let's think about the numbers here. we saw that about seven people were killed, the new updated number is seven people killed from this past friday to today. we have over 600 new police officers that had the streets of chicago and the numbers are still as chaotic as they were in the beginning of the month! just imagine if we invited the national guard into chicago. it wouldn't be 600 people there from the national guard. that tells me that we have absolutely no choice. we have to put politics aside and president trump must come

in. laura ingraham has been talking about this for a long time. we have to do a lot more for chicago. this isn't a casual discussion for anyone. there's lives on the line, my brother almost lost his life last year due to the violence in chicago. a 3-year-old was shot this weekend. a three year old. >> jason: we are talking about a city here. these numbers are astronomical and i see feeling policies. if you want different results, you have to do different things and probably instill different people. i don't know how you can reelect a guy like rahm emanuel. >> rahm emanuel must go. he's been nothing but a failure. i'm sure mr. tall, even as a democrat, can agree that rahm emanuel is a failure that must leave. no question about it. >> jason: what gianno is advocating is to not only bring donald trump in for a visit and a rally or what not -- >> not a visit. we need solutions. we need god to bring something to bear. >> jason: the question is, would you support bringing in donald trump and would you

support, for instance, calling out the national guard or taking something, a more drastic step? if it's truly a gang war, as you say, your rookie cop on the beat isn't necessarily going to be able to take down the ms-13. ms-13 the donald trump is been talking about for a long time. >> here's what i said to laura ingraham last week and i was late again. i'm all for more police. even perhaps the national guard national guard. >> jason: we just had an argument and discussion with a guy who wants to abolish i.c.e.! >> what i am saying, when people are dying at the rate they are in chicago -- >> jason: that is part of the problem. >> one of the things i'm concerned with, i'm concerned with an environment where you have a minority percent of people committing a high rate of crime and affecting everyone, a large police force coming in and national guard coming in, and blank italy fourth amendment rights can be excused, things like that happen, guy walking the streets gets

ticketed, gets locked in jail, he comes back out, in the gang, and the crime gets worse. i wanted to be more strategic, i understand mr. gianno's point but i >> it's gianno strategy is important and i can agree with you on that, we have to have a strategy, it's not a law enforcement argument, i just mentioned were dr. bill winston has been doing, he's a church pastor in chicago. what he's been doing. these are all great elements but we have to have a very comprehensive plan and for me, it is not simply inviting president trump to come to chicago -- >> but would you when you say tt you want president trump to do? you know that there's laws -- >> jason: gentlemen, this is a discussion that is a worthy -- i mean, this is a place in crisis, the drug war that is going on, gang war there is going on, i think anthony makes some good, valid points. i think is actually a reasonable mind on this and is willing to invite the president to come in, if only the mayor and the city

leaders would also take a humble pie a little bit. speak of the state represent, a democrat, has invited him in, he's been on this is show. >> jason: gentlemen, thank you again for the discussion. why is paul manafort's defense team very happy after a third day of jury deliberation? the new details right after thi this. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.

this wi-fi is fast. i know! i know! i know! i know! when did brian move back in? brian's back? he doesn't get my room. he's only going to be here for like a week. like a month, tops. oh boy. wi-fi fast enough for the whole family is simple, easy, awesome.

in many cultures, young men would stay with their families until their 40's.

♪ >> jason: baba mueller might be getting nervous. jurors and paul manafort tax and being fried trial finished their third day of deliberation without reaching a verdict. for more, let's bring in fox news' chief national correspondent, ed henry. >> one paul manafort entered the courtroom late today, shook his lawyer's hand with a smile. perhaps they signed the former trump campaign chair, as you suggest, believing the longer this goes, the more likely there is an acquittal, which would be a major blow for special counsel mueller, since this is really his first test in court in these charges already have nothing to do with russia collusion. despite the optimism in the brennan camp, there are no guarantees for him tonight as he awaits his weight on these charges that could bring up to 305 years in federal prison. there are some legal analysts

who are noting that manafort should not get carried away, indicate with a -- in a case with 14 counts, it may be the jurors weighing these important pieces of evidence. today, sandwiches were brought in for the jury, showing they were digging and for that third full day of deliberations without a verdict. manafort's legal team is of course watching all this very closely. a jury of six men, six women, any sign at all what might they do today they felt good, though, manafort camp about the liberation's going into the fourth day tomorrow. >> the jury announced they will continue to deliberate starting tomorrow morning. mr. manafort is very happy to hear that. >> a source close to the manafort legal team noted that the nearly 400 exhibits in this case were not sequentially numbered by special counsel mueller's team. that gives load on the jurors work more. i can tell you, our team inside say that most of the jurors seem

flat and drained. this has been a grueling trial. >> jason: is a grueling trial and that they have the threats coming after them but they have to have extra security and precautions. stick with the judge draws without. there were some of that wanted to get the names of the jurors, and that is why the judge said no way. >> jason: thanks. let's bring on two legal to discuss the manafort trial. former doj official robert driscoll and former prosecutor john malcolm. john, i want to start with you. this has been going on -- what are we to make based on the fact it's going into yet another day of jury deliberation? >> i wouldn't be turning cartwheels quite yet if i were the manafort team. however, it is true that the fact that the jury ask for a redefinition of what it means to convict someone beyond a reasonable doubt, and the longer things go on, they're more likely it is that somebody is holding up the jury and i don't think there would be an acquittal but you might get a mistrial. i wouldn't quite get there yet. they have been indicated yet that they are having trouble

reaching a verdict. maybe after tomorrow it might be a little bit more likely that we are headed toward a mistrial. but this is a long try with a lot of documents and 27 witnesses. the fact that they are deliberating for a third day doesn't totally shock me but it certainly shows the longer it goes on, they're more likely the mass tried a case. >> jason: robert, what is your read on this? is that, do not not number sequentially all the documents and evidence? is that abnormal? >> no, you number a lot of those things. trial and you end up not using exhibits or you put them in in a different order depending on whether witnesses go. i think if i were the defense, only for the following reasons, the jury has gotten past the fact that they do not have the defendant testified, and did not put any defense case at all. i think your fear as always, the defense counsel that they will read into, oh, my guy didn't testify, he must be guilty.

the data entry reject pollute, conclusion out-of-the-box. the risk is, if you are the defense team, you have to run the table and all 18 of these counts unless manafort is looking at decent jail time. if they hang on two counts on convict on 16, that doesn't really do you much good. you need to kind of roma table, which is still a high bar. >> jason: there are many out there that feel like this is a bit of a witch hunt. this has absolutely nothing to do with donald trump! it has absolutely nothing to do with russia and the election. i mean, is this a bit of a witch hunt? array extending too far? are we giving a tool to prosecutors? 305 years -- i want you to listen to a senator rand paul had to say about this earlier today. >> i think we've gone crazy on criminalizing everything under the sun and what happens is, it adds up to, like, people will never have physically hurt somebody and yet you add up all

these things, if you are guilty, you would get six life terms. i think we've gone too far and we need to reassess what we do. >> jason: i mean, john, this is a case where they look to this previously, decide not to prosecute, prosecute, all of a sudden, you are associated with donald trump, and they are prosecuted to the maximum. does that fit the definition of a witch hunt? >> i don't know if it's a witch hunt. i think it's very fair to say that the prosecutors wouldn't have focused on paul manafort to this extent if he had not been involved in the trump campaign. i don't think there is any question that they are trying to squeeze them to get in to cooperate with the ongoing investigation. i think if he runs a table in this case, he still got darker more of them in less than a month. you're talking fairly serious charges but they are unrelated to anything he was doing as a campaign manager for the three months. >> jason: i believe we are talking about three months of association with donald trump, it strikes me the association

with the irs, because of your political thinking, we will use the power of government to go after you. i have ten seconds. >> certainly come it's a fair argument to make in the political realm for sure that this case would not have been brought if he wasn't the trump campaign manager because of how long ago the stuff was. i think narrowly, the air or serious charges that in some cases can be proven but whether or not they will be brought is not a question. >> jason: gentlemen, i appreciate it. we look forward to seeing with the conclusion is. 12 men and women get to make the decision and hopefully soon. a shocking development in the me too movement that hasle hollywood stoned tonight. details in a moment em ter what you do, ter what you do, you're itching all the time. but even though you see and feel your eczema on the surface of your skin, an overly sensitive immune system deep within your skin might actually be causing your eczema. so help heal your skin from within.

with dupixent. dupixent is not a steroid, and it continuously treats your eczema even when you can't see it. at 16 weeks, more than 1 in 3 patients saw clear or almost clear skin, and patients saw a significant reduction in itch. do not use if you are allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems, including eye pain or changes in vision. if you have asthma, and are taking asthma medicines do not change or stop your asthma medicine without talking to your doctor. help heal your skin from within. ask your eczema specialist about dupixent.

♪ >> jason: the me too movement is being rocked tonight. according to "the new york times," one of its leaders, actress and filmmaker asia argento made her own deal with a young actor who accused her of sexual assault. "the times" report that argento reached a $385,000 settlement who accused her of sexually assaulting him back in 2013. he was just 17 years old. argento was 37 at the time. argento was one of the first people to accused disgrace producer harvey weinstein of sexual assault. joining me in every action our publisher cathy areu and a conservative columnist on the author of the book "how do i tax the."

i appreciate you being here. this is an important subject, touchy subject, and it is something that needs full disclosure under discussion. i want to go to kathy, sitting with me in the studio. what is your read on this? i mean, you have a victim here but now this movement gets set back and it appears to be so political. >> i don't think it setback at all. it's a movement. it shows that it really, really is a movement. it's a movement that causes these tough conversation. women are not just the only ones that are abused, are sexually abused, men are sexually abused as well. >> jason: i don't see the women's groups coming out -- i mean, i see such a selective number of people in certain instances coming out when it's politically, you know, convenient for them and their movement but i don't see them doing it across the board. >> sadly, she's a survivor but she's also one of the pigs that she talked about her. she's had more pigs will be revealed through this movement. she actually is one of those

pigs that was revealed through movement. it doesn't mean it didn't happen to her. she did it to someone else. >> what is your take on all this? harvey weinstein may be this, of the earth and it appears that he is but what is your take and read on this situation? >> this certainly does not let harvey weinstein off the hook, let's just get that out of the way. but this woman, asia argento, is nothing more than another hollywood hypocrite. she jumped on this. 22 bandwagon animators off a phase of the movement and was simultaneously paying off a minor who she allegedly sexually assaulted. this is a reminder for major flaw in the me too movement. me too has the same problem at all (movements have, which is that it develops the sort of mob like mentality that tries to typecast every single victim into a box that left-wing feminists think is appropriate. in real life, victims, and all ages, all sizes, all political affiliations, all gender, but

these left-wingers don't want to acknowledge that. where were the feminists when conservative victims, like juanita broaddrick and paula jones, came forward? they were nowhere to be found because unfortunately a lot of these feminist movements are more about peddling left-wing politics than about really furthering women's rights. this woman really does a disservice to the movement. >> jason: cathy, can you see where conservatives see the double standard -- it only seems, when if it's a political narrative, i think she makes a really good point and as a conservative, it seems like it is still one-sided. >> i think it's a movement, to movement, it's evolving. >> jason: is a political movement? >> i don't think a leader state as a political movement. they've come out and said, a victim victim is a victim. >> jason: some of the leaders are a little bit discredited. >> she was very vocal but not the founder. she was a victim. we can't take that away from her.

so she was an abuser as well. >> jason: you agree with the other parts, men, women, it doesn't matter? >> what happens mostly to women but it does happen to men. it would be wonderful for the movement to have more men come out so that this movement continues to evolve, and more people will come out on the victim here has not come out. her victim has not come out. men will speak up may be. >> jason: here is a guy that is under age allegedly involved in engage, and evidently hadn't said a word. i'm not using his name, y'all haven't been using his name, he was a minor at the time. i worry that it morphing into this political thing. >> i think it is obviously a political thing. i will say, the me too movement has done a lot of good. it's exposed a lot of really horrible men. that's wonderful. by this is an opportunity for us movement and think about how we can best serve victims. >> jason: thank you.

>> the best thing we can do for victims is rejected mob mentality. >> jason: i hope we give this topic more attention. i think you both. finally, tonight, i want to take a moment to honor the life of my fellow utah and matthew merges by the 42-year-old drapery fire battalion chief went to california to help find the mendocino complex fire that has been devastating the state. he was tragically killed in the line of action by a fallen tree. his heroism and life was celebrated back in utah today when thousands of family members, friends, colleagues, and citizens assembled to give him their final farewell. he leaves behind his wife and 7-year-old son. a donation site to his family has been set up by the utah firefighters emerald society at utah fes.org. we encourage you to check it out, that is all the time we have left tonight. i'm jason chaffetz and for laura and it's an honor to be able to host this program. i'll be back here tomorrow

night, as laura continues her vacation. i'm turning it over to my favorite person at fox, shannon bream! she starts now. shannon? >> shannon: jason, we'll see you tomorrow night. thank you so much. we begin with the fox news alert. breaking tonight, the president's attorney sounding off in robert mueller, also, standing by, white house counsel donald mcgahn after this week's report saying that mcgahn has cooperated extensively with a special counsel investigation. and scorned former cia director john brennan mulls a lawsuit over his security clearance getting revoked on the president says, bring it on. also tonight come president trump honors immigration enforcement officials of the white house, calling out democratic leadership as open border extremists. senator david purdue was asked at that event and he joins us to talk about the abolishment i.c.e. movement and whether the senate really well work all the way through the august recess. we all speak exclusively to a former miss america as pageant