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 in 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.

did don mcgahn turn 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 cia director, turned left-wing cable news pundit, john brennan, of his security clearance. how dare he do that. brennan isn't going away quietly, threatening legal action and doubling down on his most outrageous claims. >> i called his behavior treats -- treasonous, which is to

betray one's trust and to align with the enemy and i stand very much by that claim. i've seen the lights blinking red in terms of what mr. trump has done and is doing, bringing the country down on 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, i need to speak out. i've been speaking out rather forcefully because i believe it's 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: well, 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. but john and his rhetoric have become, i think, an issue in and of itself. >> jason: yeah, it has become an issue. joining me now are dan hoffman, fox news contributor, former cia station chief, chris swecker, former assistant fbi director, and roger fisk, former aide to secretary of state john kerry, and a democratic strategist. roger, i want to go to your first. 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 point. >> 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 for post government work. there is no such thing. what he is doing is irresponsible and selfish because he is identified with 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 an 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 to president obama. he participated in lying to the american people about what happened in libya and in benghazi. and frankly, brennan should never have been director of the central intelligence. >> jason: dan, what is your reaction? was newt gingrich correct? >> i think so. 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 stealing secrets on our behalf who are going to believe that john brennan knows something that maybe we don't and their trust in our government is going to be degraded. our national security, as a result, 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 and the sitting president? does that 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 in helsinki. this, i think -- >> jason: why does that concern you? why do suddenly democrats get concerned with that? the idea the president is engaging in diplomacy is something that i've always thought the democrats engaged in and supported and then donald trump does it and suddenly he's criticized for it. >> i've been in these rooms. i'm assuming some of the panel have as well and probably you as well, congressman. there is always note-takers, interpreters, some kind of official record, and it's 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-trump thing has taken on its own life and in the last 48 hours that i don't think that anyone is necessarily happy with or proud of. 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 spearheaded 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 trump, 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 in taking away security clearances. what do you say to those men and women that were, say, in benghazi or other places, and

they see this brennan out there spewing what he's 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 for 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's impacting intelligence community. >> jason: good. i hope he's 100% right and the men and women who are serving in our intelligence services, can't thank them enough for the great work. and i hope these little side shows that the former director

had 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. 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: 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 don 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, trump lawyer 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 as a matter of legal ethics and possibly even law, 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 discussion 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 -- he'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 not putting up the legal defense that he could have done. doesn't he score some points in terms of openness and transparency. >> it's 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 turned over millions of documents. it is unnerving for us lawyers to think of waiving an available privilege but i think it might deserve the message pretty well for the president overall, which is, 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 that he made tonight? >> 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. they know what his lawyers said. but the fact that he even 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 him up as the fall guy,

a la dean in the nixon 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 never pursued that. is this 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, commenting to themselves, wow, we could do a 1001 false statement prosecution against this guy. nd 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 in trump, they have been handing them out like candy. obviously, michael flynn, the

notion of a perjury trap, the notion of a false 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, asked her some very direct questions and i'm telling you, she absolutely, totally lied. 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 and the fbi and the department of justice never even bothed to respond. >> every doj is their own individual agency. >> why? why? you know what, you hit on just the right point. that is what is wrong with justice in this country right now. justice -- no, it needs to have a blindfold. if it's a clinton, they let them go. >> tell the republicans to fix it because they won't even produce documents --

>> jason: what do you mean? donald trump has produced more than a million documents instead of holding off and 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. what did 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 agree with you on -- would you rather have comey, who wouldn't prosecute false statements and lie to 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. republicans can't. by the way, this is a republican investigation. isn't it? >> jason: yes, but scott, you hit on it, got to wrap up, and got to let you gentlemen go. you hit on it. each department of justice is its own agency based on -- that is was fundamentally wrong. justice should be blindfolded! >> they have discretion, 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 i.c.e. movement and hitting back hard. a full report next. ent and hitt with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe eczema, or atopic dermatitis, you never know how your skin will look. and it can feel like no matter 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: 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 mind it when it happens to them, they don't mind it when they have to watch it on television, have waged an 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 aristimundo. 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. the question is, it's a simple one. the president -- >> i got a simple answer but you gotta let me answer the question. if you interrupt me, i can't speak. let me finish. 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 way it's supposed to by enacting this senseless and anti-immigrant zero-tolerance policy. >> jason: wait, wait, wait. 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 ivy's brother. i worked side by side with nick ivy'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 seized dope. you know, you know personally how difficult that job 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. "i.c.e. the team detained man who was driving his pregnant wife to a hospital in "the 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 a referral we got from interpol 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 deport anybody, no matter what, and the next day, all of a sudden they awe 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 kristin gillibrand, senator warren, some real stalwarts in the democratic party who are asserting this is the proper thing to do. 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 children, 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 to 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 thank the good men and women of the border 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. how city officials are responding. when my hot water heater failed, she was pregnant, in-laws were coming, a little bit of water, 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.

>> jason: six killed, more than 50 shot.

it was yet another horrifying weekend -- that was just a weekend -- 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 ones 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 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. democrats have generally 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 investing 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 giving them a 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 city of haug -- 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. paul in terms of jobs. that is absolutely necessary. there is a great pastor, dr. bill winston in chicago, he has a great program where he is guiding folks. about 360 jobs, connecting them to manufacturers, these are people 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 failing 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 think everyone can agree with that. i'm sure mr. paul, 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 got to bring something to bear. absolutely. >> 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 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'll say it 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. it's not all of it but it's 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 blanketly fourth amendment rights sometimes can be excused. and a guy walking the street

gets ticketed, gets locked in jail and he comes back out and he's in a gang and the crime gets worse. i want it to be more strategic, i understand mr. giovanni's point but i -- but this needs to be -- >> 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 when you say that, what you want president trump to do? you know that there's laws -- >> jason: gentlemen, this is a discussion that is so worthy. i mean, this is a place in crisis, the drug war that is going on, the gang war that is going on. 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. >> the state representative, a democrat, has invited him in, he's been on this show. >> we need some bipartisan solutions. >> 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 this. hird day of jury deliberation? the ne

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 >> jason: bob mueller might be getting a bit 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. he's sitting right next to me. >> good to see you, jason. when 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 manafort 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,

because in a case of 18 counts of tax and bank fraud it may be perfectly normal for the jury to carefully way all these complex pieces of evidence. today, sandwiches were brought in for the jury, showing they were digging in 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 deliberations going into the fourth day tomorrow. >> the jury announced they will continue to deliberate starting tomorrow morning. at where the -- at 9:30. mr. manafort is very happy to hear that. he thinks it was a very good day. >> 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 can slow down the jurors work more. i can tell you, our team inside the courthouse says that most of the jurors today seemed flat and

drained. this has been a grueling trial. >> jason: it's a grueling trial and that they have the threats coming after them but they have to have extra security and precautions. >> the judge has dealt with that. there was a news organization that wanted the name 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 asked for a redefinition of what it means to convict someone beyond a reasonable doubt. and the longer things go on, the more likely 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 true, the longer it goes on, the more likely it seems they might mistry a case. >> jason: robert, what is your read on this? is it common to not not number sequentially all the documents and evidence? is that abnormal? >> no, that's not abnormal because you number a lot of the things pretrial and you end up not using exhibits or you end up putting them in a different order depending on when the witnesses go. i think i would happy 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 as the defense counsel that they are going to read into, oh, my guy didn't testify, we think

he's guilty. the jury didn't reach that 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 run the 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? are we extending too far? are we giving a tool to prosecutors? 305 years -- i want you to listen to 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 him to get him to cooperate with their ongoing investigation. by the way, even if he runs the table in this case, he still has two more trials in front of him, one 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, 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, there are serious charges that in some cases can be proven but whether or not they will be brought is a question. >> jason: gentlemen, i appreciate it. we look forward to seeing what the conclusion is. 12 men and women get to make the decision and hopefully soon. a shocking development in the me too movement that has hollywood stunned tonight. details in a moment. sleep disturbances keep 1 in 3 adults up at night. only remfresh uses ion-powered melatonin to deliver up to 7 hours of sleep support. number 1 sleep doctor recommended remfresh -- your nightly sleep companion. available in the natural sleep section at walmart. enterprise car sales and you'll take any trade-in?rom that's right! great! here you go... well, it does need to be a vehicle.

but - i need this out of my house. (vo) with fair, transparent value for every trade-in... enterprise makes it easy.

♪ >> 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 with the underaged actor who accused her of sexually assaulting him back in 2013 when he was just 17 years old. argento was 37 at the time. argento was one of the first people to accuse disgrace producer harvey weinstein of sexual assault. joining me now, "catalina magazine" publisher cathy areu and christen tate, a conservative columnist and the

author of the book "how do i tax thee?" 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 cathy, 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's set back 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 said 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 the me too bandwagon and she made herself a face of the movement and was simultaneously paying off a minor who she allegedly sexually assaulted. this is a reminder of a major flaw in the me too movement. me too has the same problem at all left wing 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? there 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 and 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's 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. but this is an opportunity for us to really examine this movement and think about how we can best serve victims. >> jason: thank you. >> the best thing we can do for victims is reject the mob

mentality. >> jason: i hope we give this topic more attention. i thank you both. finally, tonight, i want to take a moment to honor the life of my fellow utahan matthew burchett. the 42-year-old draper fire battalion chief went to california to help fight 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 utahfes.org. we encourage you to check it out, that is all the time we have left tonight. i'm jason chaffetz in 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 now. shannon? >> shannon: jason, we'll see you tomorrow n ou tomorrow n shannon: we will see you tomorrow night. we begin with a fox news alert. the president's attorneys sounding off on robert mueller and standing by. john mcgann has cooperated extensively with the special counsel investigation and former cia director john brennan with a lawsuit over his security clearance getting revoked and the president says bring it on. donald trump honors immigration officials at the white house, got democratic leadership as open border extremists. david purdue joins us live to talk about the abolish ice movement and whether the senate really will. we will speak exclusively