the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. five days until christmas so time to buy some presents. good night from washington. "hannity" is next, dan bongino is sitting in for sean for a second time. a good sign, dan! >> dan: a dan bongino's doubleheader. i will be with you tomorrow night tomorrow night. >> tucker: i can't wait! thanks a lot. >> dan: great show as always. welcome to this special edition of the "hannity": law and order in america. i'm dan bongino in tonight agaii for sean.rd as we speak, a plan to fund border security weighs in the balance. president trump remained steadfast in his commitment to build a wall on c our southern border. joining us with the very latest is our own ed henry. >> this day started with markla meadows and the freedom caucus admitting on "fox & friends" that housead republicans fumbled the issue by not getting the money for the wall over the past two years.

he suggested the party let president trump down. he urged the commander in chief to hold firm. tonight he is saying that in the meeting he had with other leaders, the president was serious about not folding without a fight. in part because remember, backab in march, the president vowed he would never sign another one of the stopgap spending measures to kick the can down the road without new money for the wall. like rush limbaugh have spent the last 24 hours telling the president, urging not to cave." terry said he will lose reelection if he does not stand and fight for their signature issue that fueled his victory in 2016. i can tell you as you noted, house republicans changing course to the president's direction.ng they passed a new bill with $5.7 billion plus $8 billion for hurricane and wildfire relief. democrats are warning that the bill cannotrr get through the senate so we are likely headed for a shutdown. but remember, 75% of the government is funded already deep into 2019 including the military, so this would only be a partial shutdown and the president seems to be holding firm.e

>> i give them a little bit of an out, steel slats. we don't use the word "wall" necessarily but it has to be something special to do the job. steel slats. i've made my position very clear, any measure that funds the government must include border security. it has to. not for political purposes, but for our country, for the safety of our community. >> there is notfo one person on the republican side of the aisle that believes if they pass this bill that it will be accepted by the senate. not one of you! >> chuck schumer, another democrat, charged the president is throwing the country to chaos over the wall fight plus a shift in the syria policy to u remove u.s. troops that sparked defense

secretaryab jim mattis' announcement later today that he is resigning at the end of february. schumer noted that mattis was also not thrilled about troops being sent to the border but republican steve scalise said tonight the president waiting this wall battle shows he has made border security up top priority and is putting democrats on the record for what scalise called open borders. dan? >> dan: thanks a lot, ed. as we get closer and closer to government shutdown, president trump is resolute. today he announced border security as a principal worth fighting for. >> our nation has spent trillions ofpe dollars and sacrificed thousands of brave young lives defending the borders of foreign nations. i am asking congress to defend the border of our nation for a tiny fraction of the cost. in life, there are certain principles worth fighting for. more important than politics, party, or personal convenience. the safety and security and sovereignty of the united states is the most important principle of all. if we don't stand strong for our national borders, then we cease to be a nation and we will not be faithful to our loyal

citizens. >> dan: now with president trump determined to fund the board of all, what will happen next in congress? joining usus next from capitol hill are two lawmakers who want border funding. jodi heise and from virginia's fifth district, tom garrett. thank you very much for joining us. i know the house freedom caucus is doing an excellent job fighting for principles out there and i admire your resolute stance. on liberty, freedom, and immigration control and border wall funding. but what's going on with the establishment republicans? they've had the majority for a long time, from your perspective what took so long to get this done? >> i really don't have any idea as to why. many of us have been calling for months and months and months. let's deal with the issue, and we have the majority. the american people sent us here for this. the president is behind it.

let's go for it. and for whatever reason, it's been stall after stall after stall. one crbe after another after another, and at s this point, there was a line drawn in the sand, we had enough and we are no longer taking it. it reminds me that down in the alamo, there is a monument there but the monument is not there because they won the fight, it's there because they fought. it was a line that was drowned in the sand with us over the last 24 hours. it's turned out to be an absolutely spectacular 24 hours both for the freedom caucus and for our conference as a whole, for the president, and for our country. >> dan: congressman garrett, the republican committee activists, people knocking on doors, doing the actual work, that are sweating in the summer, trying to get people in congress on the republican side elected, they've been disappointed before, repeatedly. now the tax cut bill was excellent but the obamacare failure and other things, thiss

is a political redline and one of those moments where we absolutely have to stand up for something. are you getting the same thing from your constituents? >> one of the reasons you are lucky you didn't win when you ran for congress is it's disgusting to be in a town where people don't keep promises that they don't intend to keep. some of us have not equivocated. let me be real clear. the cost of human lives, straight-line cost, of not protecting our border would be equivalent to the korean war. thousands of deathsre per year, 4,000 murders per year. if you now say you are in illicit drugs, this is truly about protecting america. i am for a robust and healthy immigration plan. this is ridiculous and flies in the face of a sovereign nation ought to do it. it's tragic that it had to be done this way. >> dan: i agree. congressman, the exit question. the g.o.p. loses, republicans lose, when we don't advance our principles. i said this last night.

ironically, the democrats lose when they advance theirs. barack obama did everything to decimate the democratic party and help barack obama. what do you think will happen on the senate side? i understand, we won't have the votes to undergo overcome a fir but are there enough moderate democrats to get this pushed through? it's a reasonable bill. >> is a reasonable bill and a great question. the truth of the matter -- we've already seen this rumor shut down. we are about to say this rumor senate shut down again because we are sending him a reasonable bill that defends the border, protects american citizens. who would not be in favor of that? $5 billion, when you compare that to 1.3 trillion that we have in our annual budget -- i mean, we are talking, like, a day, day and half of our budget to build this wall for security, and theld truth of the matter i, the senate did not vote on this bill that they sent us. they passed it by voice vote. we don't know where the senate is going to be on this. the reality is now that they are

either going to fund this or they are going to shut down the government. and ie just don't -- that's a tough choice for them to be on right now. >> this is actually less than one day parade is about a half a day. andd i'm tired of fixing the blame, let's start the fix the . if the class want to fail, let them. when we say, it won't get to the senate, i will not expect that. >> dan: i like your style, i like you, too. thank you so much for joining us. i appreciate it. on his radio show earlier today, rush limbaugh reported that the president will veto any bill that does not include funding for our wall on the southern border. watch this. >> so i get this direct message, you tell rush that if there is no money in this, it is getting, vetoed. there is no money for a wall, i am vetoing, plain and simple. this was the message that i just got. and i trust it, and i believe it

to be the case. >> dan: joining us now with the reaction, formal obama economic advisor austan goolsbee. national security analyst morgan ortagus, and florida congressman matt gaetz. okay, austan, i'll go to you first. you know i appreciate a good back and forth with you, you ar- always a gentleman. >> we have a fun time. >> dan: we do. i tell the producers, oh, great, austan is here tonight, it will make for a grade back and forth. austan, simple question. do border walls work as a deterrent a or not? >> no -- i mean, you got 60% of the people that come into the country illegally who fly here, they come to an airport. i don't thinkll that the wall works, no. >> dan: of course, a plane is going to fly over a border wall. i think that is obvious. but these are overseas or a different issue. i'm talking clearly about illegal border crossings on the southern border. just quickly, if you believe is a deterrent or not.

would you -- if you are going to cross the border -- >> at all, i don't think is a deterrent. >> dan: you would rather cross a border where there is a wall rather than where there is no wall? i >> no, what happens with the wall, as you know, they get a ladder that is 1 foot taller -- >> dan: but you would have to get a ladder. butr you would need a ladder, it's a deterrent. >> the question is, why did donald trump change his mind from 48 hours ago? that congress people you had on have been resolute. it is the president who has not been resolute. >> dan: i think the president is standing by now and i care about actions, not necessarily talk. morgan, let me go to you. morgan, again on this question, get to see you. we've seen the statistics and the data on border walls, where they have implemented strong border walls in tucson and el paso, you've seen it illegal immigration dropped dramatically. where are the democrats -- where they lost on this? i don't understand. >> i think the president has been very clear since 2015.

i don't think he's been ambiguous at all, that he wants to build a wall. i think what you have seen happen, though, the first two years of his presidency, barely a failure from the top of republican leadership in the congress to get some of these things included that he told the american people. that has been the pattern of behavior that is so frustrating too many republican voters over the past ten years. it's not just immigration that has not been solved. does anyone remember repeal and replace? what happens is people campaign at wins elections based on premises and then when they aren't delivered, when they are punted, the republican party pays, the president supporters rightly get frustrated. this wholeth discussion is not even about a wall. the wall is a metaphor for, while the republican party, while the president keep their promises? will they take immigration is a national security issue and take it seriously? that is at theis heart of the debate. people want to feel like what they are told, it will be

followed up on, there will be action. >> dan: on that note, congressman gaetz, i've always appreciated your candor. you are one of the most open members of congress. you don't speak and focus group-tested terms, which i always enjoy. your take on this, what is going on with these establishment sellouts? i don't know any other way to say it. did they not get the message? donald trump ran on the wall, he was elected on the wall, this is a powerful issue that people want. are they missing this message? do they ever get on twitter or talk to real people? >> this was a rare good day in the house of representatives because we actually did what we said. we kept the government open. we funded to the presidents border security agenda and we provided important disaster relief or hurricane victims. you know what, dan? this is not about the wall for democrats. it's not even about immigration for democrats. this is about denying president trump a win on a signature and agenda item that he promised theat american peop. ten democrats voted for the department of homeland security

package out of committee.nt you even had chuck schumer talk about the fact that illegal immigration can drain our local governments.bo we all agree that if you allow illegal immigration to go unchecked, you sell out the american worker. so i am glad the republican congress and the president of the united states put americans over illegal immigrants, put the rising wages of american workers come as their principal economic priority. if we continue to do what we say, i think we will see a resurgence in enthusiasm for the agenda of the president that isr working for the american people. >> dan: i agree. austan, what is your primary objection to the wall? the wall specifically, not visa overstates, that's a separate issue that requires a separate fix. is your primary objection the cost of it? i've never seen democrats object to money ever. is that triaging? is our number one? 's big events part. look, i think it cost $25 billion and it doesn't work. it's why the majority of

americans, in the polls, stated they do not want the wall. latest adjusted $25 billion in border security, which we can do on a bipartisan basis, without building a wall that does not work. when you see the president over 48 hours change his mind, change his position, and to say that, oh, it's not going to be a welcome it's going to be an article architecturally pleasing steel slab -- i mean come on, w? >> dan: if it doesn't work, why are you so concerned? if it doesn't work -- >> $5 billion? >> dan: did you lodge these same objections to obama's $9 trillionio in debt? i'm curious. >> okay, as youri know, most of that $9 trillion came left over from wars and unfunded tax plan plans. i was part of advocating how we reduce the deficit, cut it in half by the end of obama's first term. i was concerned. >> dan: i strongly object to --dash my cousin jenny -- i

strenuously object to the border wall. morgan, going back to you, i don't -- the facts and data are here, conclusive. when you talk to experts, border security people at the border, federal law enforcement, they are adamant that they need this. shouldn't we take their word for it, other than the politicians on the hill? >> i would always want to address the professionals on the ground and i think one of the has been just the most disgusting part of this whole debate this year is the amount that the law enforcement e of the border has been attack. we have seen the democrat, mainstream people in the democrat party who are going to run for president, calling for the abolishment of i.c.e. when we really needed him most. listen, the bottom line is the president is the ultimate dealmaker and what he needs to do, now that it has been passed out of the house tonight, we have to take thisnd back to the senate, we have the $5 billion passed in the house. we need to get 60 votes in the senate. the president needs to make a deal. i don't know if this will be daca, what it will be to get those additional votes that he

needs. but this is where we really need to see the dealmaker in chief come into play to get this done. >> dan: by the way, strenuously object is "a few good men." i'm really bad with these pop culture references. austan, you should have objected me. >> "my cousin vinny" is one of my favorite movies. >> dan: congressman gaetz, if this leads to a shutdown, president trump was successful on his last were in the message again, very successful in getting this out in black and white terms. you think you can win this again? >> he needs to assure that whent we begin 2019, the government will be on. if he's going to ruin the vacation of every senator at house member to make sure that we do our level best to fulfill this commitment, we got to rise above politics, dan. this is about the security of our neighborhood. this is about whether or not we will be a nation of laws that respects the rule of law or whether we will be like elements of europe where we become overrun because we don't respect our borders.

i think the president can win but i do think it's important in 2019 to not have an extended shutdown. i don't know what the republican way out of that would be.'t i think the president can make his point in the concluding days of 2018. >> dan: austan, morgan, congressman gaetz. thank you so much. i appreciated. thanks for your time. up next, we'll break down all the dangers of illegal immigration, including a shocking study about a horrific murder committed at the hands of a criminal illegal immigrant. stay with us. ♪

these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the amazing services of the post office only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again!

♪ there's no place likargh!e ♪ i'm trying... ♪ yippiekiyay. ♪ mom. ♪ >> dan: welcome back to the special edition of "hannity." today president trump spoke about the threats posed by an unprotected border. take a look. speak it without borders, we have the reign of chaos, crime,d

coyotes. i will not surrender this nation to the whims of criminal organizations who pray on the vulnerable, who heard women and children, and to spread human misery and suffering. every day, ten known or tsuspected terrorists try to ge entry into our country. every day, 2,000 illegal aliens try to cross our borders. they try.. we get most of them. it's hard without a wall. every year, 50,000 illegal children are smuggled by coyotes and criminals into our country. >> dan: joining us now with the latest on immigration versus and more as trace gallagher. trace? >> dan, police say on monday morningol alone, he carried out1 crimes, including killing a stranger and shooting at others before he was killed in a high-speed police chase. authorities think he killed another man a day earlier. last week, garcia-ruiz was

arrested in california when i.c.e. learned he was in jail, they placed an immigration detainer on him, asking deputies to notify them before releasing him. but under sb 54, california's sanctuary law, because the suspect was not being held on a felony, law enforcement is prohibited from honoring i.c.e. detainers. i.c.e. says this "is an unfortunate and extremely tragic example of how public safety is impacted with laws or policies limiting local law enforcement agency's ability to cooperate with i.c.e.." here's the astounding part, garcia-ruiz is a known, convicted violent criminal, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, repeatedly being rtported, et cetera. but under sb 54, none of that can be used to notify immigration o agents. here's the tulare county sheriff. watch. >> that tool has been removed from our hands. because of that, our county

wasn't shot up by a violent criminal. it could have easily been prevented had we had the opportunity to reach out to our fellow counterparts. >> in the meantime late last week of the border patrol arrested five illegal immigrants near the arizona border. they came from mexico, honduras, and el salvador, and the border patrol now says one of them is a previously deported ms-13 gang memberep. finally, under a new policy announced today, president trump will no longer allow people seeking asylum at the u.s. border with mexico to be released into the united states. they will not be forced to wait throughout the process process. dan? >> dan: thanks a lot for joining us with reaction a syndicated radio talk show host larry elder antidemocratic strategist and fox news contributor leslie marshall. leslie, i'll start with you, thank you for joining us tonight. in response to this story, do you have any objection to police fully cooperating with i.c.e. in cases of misdemeanors and

detainers with regard to this law?se it's clear he was let go because it was a misdemeanor but he was in the country illegally. what is yourse objection? >> here c in california, where both larry and i reside, this is anan issue where the majority of people that voted for democrats to pass and have protective measures against the hispanic community did not want this element in sb 54. if you look at the original legislation that was passed and how it was written, the changes that were made this past september, i woulde say that we agreed that the police should be able to notify i.c.e. when it is a violent individual. here was the problem, dan, this is where we get into the gray area that is a problem with sb 54, in my opinion. one, he was held on a misdemeanor, not a felony, and two, he does have a violent background. so it is a gray area that can be changed, as we saw changed in september with sb 54. to address this without making the hispanic community fearful

to cooperate with police, if we look at 2017, rape and domestic violence reporting was down. many in law enforcement feel strongly that the hispanic community is fearful that they would be deported if they cooperate. we need to have that fine line addressed with sb 54. you don't need to get rid of it, you need to make the change, so law enforcement can have theseng violent offenders picked up by olc.e. and deported way >> dan: leslie, one quick thing before i get to larry. when you see the hispanic community, we are not talking about the hispanic community. we are talking about people here illegally. they are in the country in violation of the laws. why do they get a special pass? >> dan, they are people in california that are undocumented, they came heredo illegally, before you and i and even larry were born. these people -- >> dan: but they are here illegally. speak with been here for generations! >> dan: they are here illegally. >> are you going to cough up the money to deport 11 million

people? >> dan: they are here illegally. larry, i'll go to your -- >> if somebody came to the united states illegally, dan, you don't want them to cooperate with law enforcement because you want -- >> dan: wheat you are changing the argument. larry, i'm suggesting that although these crimes are limited, they are not -- not all people who come here legally or illegally are criminals. 100% to come here should not be here at all.l. larry, come here. >> the majority are not violent criminals. >> dan: i just said that. >> no one is caught talking about mass deportations. the presidenton campaigned on getting rid of bad hombres. he was a nonviolent offender. not only does a sanctuary law require the person to open house on a felony, it requires an arrest warrant to be signed by a judge. it's also very time-consuming. this sheriff said, had this bila not been passed, he would have turned this person over to i.c.e. and the crime spree would have never happened.

i don't know how this border security think him a left-right thing, a trump versus pelosi-schumer thing played out to be a national security thingp we have a vested interest in making sure that people don't come to the country illegally, they arele not drains on the society, they don't compete against jobs for unskilled workers and put down the rates on their wages. the left-right thing is beyond me. why we can't spend $25 billion for a wall when they spend $20 trillion since 1955 to fight the war on poverty, we are spending all this money, and what do they say? if we err on the side of the geworst will happen, we'll havea cleaner planet. why don't we pay all my gear on the side of paying $25 million for the law? it will deter a few people illegally. what is wrong with that? why can't we agree on that? >> dan: i agree, larry. what i don't get, leslie, having a difficult time, while you don't only get a pass once if you break the law and come here illegally and violate our immigration laws. while you get a pass twice now

that you've been convicted of just a misdemeanor or being held on a misdemeanor, while you get a pass. i stipulate your point. the overwhelming majority of people who come here and breakve the law the first time do not go on to be, thankfully, criminals. but that is not the point, leslie. 100% should not be here. they already broke the law. why are they getting a pass again? >> again, dan, you are saying 100% should notai be here. okay, let me just agree with you on that. so what do you do? that is where we are today. that is where the problem lies. i agree with larry, it should not be a left or problem which is why you guys should be applauding barack obama. right now, dan -- >> dan: what do we n do? go ahead, larry. >> wait a minute! building the wall, if we do tha that -- >> dan: if we talk over each other, no one can hear anyone. >> comprehensive immigration reform. >> one more time, no one is

talking about deporting 11 million people. by the n way, a yale study puts the number at almost 20 million people. no one is talking about that. we are talking about getting rid of what donald trump calls bad h hombres. clearly, this guy was one. we had to be talking about doing something about all of this and it ought not to be an ideological deal. >> dan: leslie, you asked me what do we do. as ironic about what we do? we get rid of the sb 54 law, that's really ridiculous, when you commit a misdemeanor, you get a pass. will you agree and say, we both agree, it's a bad law? if you are arrested for a misdemeanor and here illegally, you ought to be reported to i.c.e.e. and set up for deportation? can we agree? i'll take a "yes." >> no! by the way, it was dan who asked me about all of the undocumented people in the state. larry, you weren't listening to the host. i said, that is an element that needs to be changed and that a left and right in a state of

california agree on and by the way, going to you again, larry, with your wall, the wall doesn't address that we need conference of immigration reform. dan, if decades ago, left and right, our congressional members slapped the hands of the corporations dangling the carrot of jobs and opportunity, we wouldn't have had people coming to this country for the opportunity and believing the streets were paved with gold. >> dan: leslie, my wife is a legal immigrant. i get what you are saying. i don't understand why you ask for solutions and i say, getting rid of this law would be one of them and you said, that is not a solution. >> that doesn't address the majority of the people! >> dan, we need to get rid of the welcome mat we have in california. we need to get rid of the welcome mat -- >> immigration has been declining every year for a decade. >> dan: i love it. thank you very much. larry, leslie, you both did great. appreciated. coming up, a new report

surrounding hillary clinton's bought and paid for dirty dossier. you don't want to miss it. this special edition of "hannity" continues. ♪

>> dan: welcome back to the special edition of "hannity": law and order in america. tonight we are learning more about the infamous trump dossier. as a new court filing says, an associate of the late john mccain showed the unverified document with the news out lead buzzfeed in 2016. also developing, nbc news is reporting that mueller could wrap up the probe as soon as mid-february. cement his report to acting attorney general matt whitaker, who's been cleared by the doj to oversee the special counsel. now president trump's pick for the ag job, william barr, sent a

memo to the department earlier this year, expressing deep concerns to deputy attorney general rod rosenstein about mueller's inquiry into alleged obstruction of justice by the president. despite this development, our own catherine herridge reports that rosenstein is still not expected to appear before house lawmakers this session. joining is never a reaction, author of the terrific book, "te russian hoax," fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett, along with attorney david davie and republican congressman bob goodlatte. gregg, i will go to first on this memo. you've read it, i read it, it is a manifesto on how ridiculous it is to charge the president or even think about charging the president for obstruction of justice on what is essentially a personnel decision in the firing of jim comey. i find it incredible that democrats aren't celebrating this memo. your opinion? >> this is the document, a meticulously, well reasoned analysis of the law of

obstruction of justice. it is not, as chuck schumer said on the floor of the senate, a reason for disqualification of barr to the contrary, it is actually a very good reason to confirm somebody like william barr. he lays out how the firing of james comey's not obstruction of justice. the law is very specific on obstruction. i devote an entire chapter in my book to it. has to be a corrupt purpose that involves a lie, threat, bribe, concealing of evidence, destruction of documents or falsifying information. the firing of james comey is none of those things, even comey grudgingly admitted in his testimony, the president was entitled to fire him for a reason or no reason at all. so again, the media and democrats say, oh, barr must recuse himself or he is disqualified, frankly, they don't know what they are talking about. they have never read their recusal regulations in the code of federal regulations. >> dan: david, i'll go to you next. your legal opinion on the

ridiculous obstruction charges -- you know how i stand given how i set this up -- but this seems utterly ridiculous. james comey was on capitol hill and asked specifically if he was obstructing the investigation into mike flynn and he said no. the president also, when he asked jim comey about the mike flynn case, said, this can go away. he said "hope," he did not obstruct it. how do we know that? because general flynn took a plea. are there any links to the obstruction thing? is william barr correct in his memo? >> william barr is correct. it's outrageous. william barr's memo ultimately is about article two power of the president. the irony is, the previous administration exercised probably the most robust power for the president that we have seen in decades. the idea that this should be disqualifying is absolutely wrong. we don't want an attorney general from mars who hasn't given serious thought to serious issues like this. let me say this: it's time for

mr. barr or mr. whitaker to act appropriately under the regulations. regulation -- special counsel regulation 600.7 gives him the authority and obligation to demand an explanation for every inappropriate investigative or prosecutorial step for special counsel has taken. it's time for them to get on board. the regulations contemplate a person who gives it serious thought to reining in an outrageous special counsel. mr. whitaker, mr. barr need to do it mr. rosenstein has refused to do. >> dan: congressman goodlatte, with regards to rod rosenstein, he seems to be living in a government in and of himself. i don't know if he has extraconstitutional power a member of the justice league, whatever it may be. rod rosenstein seems to be telling you all to -- he doesn't want to go on capitol hill, doesn't want to talk. is anything going to be done? common sense people say, if i did this in my job, i would be fired. >> i hope he has a short shelf life because i would think that

the new attorney general would insist on having a new deputy attorney general. we have a lot to speak to mr. rosenstein regarding this meeting that took place before the special counsel took place. we wanted to talk about his involvement late in the fisa warrant process with regard to carter page and other matters. we had it set up in early october, it did not suit everyone on capitol hill, and the timing in terms of the amount of time available to ask. dozens of pages of questions we had for him, it did not work, it fell apart. we tried to ask him back. it is something for lindsay terman, the new chairman of the senate judiciary committee, to take up, and certainly should be something that the inspector general of the justice department takes up with him because he is right now looking into the whole issue surrounding the carter page fisa warrant application. that actually should be expanded to cover a number of other things regarding the so-called

russia investigation. >> dan: gregg, what i find ironic about rosenstein, there are more -- is there more a conflicted character in this play? he signs the fisa, after it has been widely debunked. not only that, he's the prosecuting attorney on the uranium one case, obviously a political hot potato. how has he seemed to avoid all this? use the central figure in this entire scandal. >> the code of federal regulations that governs rod rosenstein and other involved in this, very specific. it says if you have a personal or political involvement in a case or with somebody else involved in a case, you must disqualify yourself. it is not a maybe or, gee, i might, it is mandatory. he's ignored the code of responsibility with impunity. this is a guy who has been interviewed by robert mueller,

the special counsel, as a key witness in my keys, and yet rosenstein presides over the case? this is the ultimate conflict of interest and instead of accusing william barr or matt whitaker of a conflict of interest, let's all take a look at rod rosenstein. he should have been kicked off of this case from the beginning. >> dan: it's amazing. everyone wants recuse also accept rosenstein. for a gentleman, thanks a lot for joining me. i appreciate it. after the break, one democratic congressman had a christmas themed melted down on capitol hill. we'll show you the tape. you don't want to miss it. stay with us. ♪

♪ >> dan: welcome back to a special edition of "hannity":

law and order in america. the trump administration is hard at work trying to secure they,y, border.. dhs secretary nielsen announced the deal with mexico to overhaul the asylum process and combat catch and release. secretary nielsen was on capitol hill today to discuss the agreement where she was confronted by democratic congressman luis gutierrez. he won't believe what he had to say. >> there is one thing that this administrationas has done better than any other administration in american history and that is alive. it is repugnant to me and astonishing to me that during christmas -- they call it the holiday season to be inclusive -- but during christmas, because the majority always wants to just call it christmas, during christmas, a time in which we celebrate the birth of jesus, a mattis who had jesus who had to flee for his life with my and joseph, thank god there was not a wall that stopped them

from seeking refuge in egypt! thank god that wall wasn't there and thank god there wasn't an administration like this or he would haveat perished! >> dan: [laughs] well, how do you respond that? your direct discusses, campus reform editor in chief lawrence jones.ce the author of the best-sellingth book, "jesus is risen," attorney david limbaugh, who has done some legal work for me, and former legal attorney emily compagno.em lawrence, you notice how we had to get the pc talking points. "a christmas -- is the holiday season, for all thent pc folks." isn't this just another disingenuous argument by a liberal democrat? they cite religion when it'snt convenient, but when it comes to social issues, they will attack you. > they never love jesus until it's time to make a political? argument. the interesting thing, none of these people are advocating for life from conception. all these abortions that take place, thousands and thousands of dollars from planned parenthood to make sure

there's laws to protect -- it's decimated my community played by the way, the story of jesus, he died for our sins. he was born for oure sins. to go on the cross -- >> dan: he missed a few details. >> obviously he doesn't. the bible, only using it for his political agenda. >> dan: david, no better person to have on giving your book. i find incrediblyca disingenuous about this, not just the convenient use of religion, also the compassion angle he thinks he's trying to take, while he ignores the fact that the united states has been the most generous country on earth when it comes to legal immigrants. we just ask that you come here legally. it's entirelyth disingenuous. >> this is such demagoguery, dan. did you see the stunning disrespect he showed for secretary nielsen? >> dan: he walked out. >> liberals are supposed supposed to respect women. he called her. a liar and remorseless. he walked out right after she started talking.

he talked about her being a liar because she supposedly said that we don't separate children. well, we don't. that is not the policy. the policies is to enforce the law and he knows this, this is pure liberal demagoguery and propaganda and their purpose is to demonize republicans as racist and heartless and it's shameless what they are doing. >> dan: emily, i don't know if you saw that but it was unbelievably disrespectful. the congressman, while dhs secretary nielsen was talking, gets up and leaves. david, you pointed out, really grotesque to watch. emily, from your perspective, being an attorney, this policy, the so-called separation of children policy, because is not a policy, it's actually a 2015 policy. it is 92 donald trump. we cannot hold these people in detention for more than 20 days. i don't understand what they arr suggesting. what are they suggesting? we detain them for more than 20

days? have you heard serious proposals took about this from the democrats? >> that is why i have such an issue. the tip of the iceberg. my issue with representative gutierrez, who has been wasting then tax dollars for the 25 yeat he served in congress. during that time, clearly, he does not know the law, but he's taken no steps to articulate or to afford specificity for the citizens are those seeking asylum. he's grand standing in front of secretary nielsen, said those who are fearing forin their livs not be leslie or from sickness, which obviously have no part in a discussion on the actual loss. i want to point out for viewers that this, in those 25 years, sponsored really four bills that were announce it, two of which had to do with naming a post office and one had to do with minting a coin. he was officially reproved by the house committee on ethics for mismanaging funds and arrested outside of congress this year. that is the tip of the heap. i do want to point out that it's a good thing that he's retiring and i wish them well but hopefully moving forward, we

have actual legislators there that are earning their taxpayer dollars that we are paying for their salary so that moving forward, our immigration and border security stance will be clear. >> dan: take up residence deal. a lot of these people, they complete the president being anti-immigrant but the president offered them a deal on daca. give them border security.ts they are not interested in it the democrats want open borders. i'm a reasonable person, i am a libertarian, i believe an immigration reform but we got to secure the border. we can't make the mistake that ronald reagan made and put the cart before the horse. he did -- we've done this before. we've given amnesty and then they say they will give us border security and then didn't happen and it's been a grave mistake. >> dan: david, will the democrats oppose anything on immigration? i wonder, where is the compassion for the american taxpayer? we have people in this country who work very hard and a class of legal immigrants who work hard toom come here. where's the respect for people

who waited in line? my wife being one of them, who came to the country legally. >> they do not. they are for open borders. they do not want to enforce the border. they oppose the wall. they always pretend that they promise they will give us border security if we give them amnesty and daca and they always preach their promise. republicans have got to realize, you can't compromise with people like this except on certain issues like the criminal reform bill. but on immigration, no. they want to get as many democratic voters across the border entering the entire united states into california where we don't have assimilation, don't have people that come in adopting -- embracing our civic way of life and constitution. that will spell the death of those countries' founding. >> dan: lawrence, david, emily. thank you. more of this special edition of "hannity" after the break. nancy pelosi singing and dancing. you don't want to miss this one.

straight ahead. ♪ nancy pelosi, singi

i want some more what's he doin? but, he can't

look at him! it's just not done! please sir. i want some more more? more? more? more? please sir he has asked for... thank you what? well he did say please sir yes he did and, thank you yeah. and thank you he's a wonderful boy (laugh) a delightful boy (all boys): thank you, thank you, thank you.

♪ ♪ . >> dan: alright. welcome back to the special edition of hannity, law and order in america. nancy pelosi seems to be excited about her upcoming leadership position. last night she was caught on camera singing and dancing at a dc bar. check this out. [ music playing ] . >> dan: she's got some moves. [ laughter ] >> dan: all right. that's all the time we have left this evening. if you're looking for the perfect last minute gift check out my book spy gate the at measurements sab about taj of dan old j trump.

>> laura: dan bongino if you think that's rhythm, i have to check out your dance moves, my friend. i couldn't find her in that shadow thing. >> dan: laura you see my dance moves you can't unsee it, you have to bleach your eyes. >> laura: you're the male version of elaine on seinfeld 89 it's worse. she looks like john travolta compared to me. >> laura: we're invite sebastian gorka you next year. merry christmas. >> dan: merry christmas. >> laura: i'm laura ingraham, this is the "ingraham angle" from washington tonight. when the this seat doesn't work for the american people, the american people go to work for themselves. tonight we're going to speak with a man behind a go fund me effort to finance the border wall. only three days this has been up he's already raised $9 million. story of the can do american spirit is in action. were anti-trump forces inside