home, no doubt the little boy was grad to see him. thank you for joining us. the president at the border, i'm sure your next host will have a lot more. i'm dana perino. here's shep. >> shepard: it's 3:00 on the east coast, 2:00 p.m. mcallen, texas, where the president is visiting the border. and we expect to hear from him live in this hour. after he threatened, again, to declare a national emergency to build a border wall or barrier, and called china more honorable than the top two democrats in the congress. also, the showdown now shutting down most fda food inspections. and an nba player, says he's skipping a game overseas because he's afraid a world leader might have him killed. our reporting, begins now. >> shepard: reporting begins

with president trump speaking right now, in texas, about the border, as talks about a wall seem to stall in d.c. the president visiting a border patrol station in mcallen, texas. it's in the rio grande valley, one of the buyiest parts of the border for crossings. the visit a day after an unsuccessful discussion with democrats aimed at ending the now-20 day partial government shutdown. today, the president threatened to declare a national emergency, if congress will not give him $5.7 billion to begin a wall. >> president trump: i have the absolute right to declare a national emergency. the lawyers have so advised me. i'm not prepared to do that yet, but if i have to i will. it would be nice the if we can make a deal. but dealing with these people is ridiculous. >> shepard: democrats are saying similar things about president trump. after a meeting yesterday in the situation room, the house

speaker nancy pelosi said the president asked her if democrats would fund the wall, if he reopened the government. she told him no. the senate minority leader, chuck schumer, said the president even in slammed the table, and had a temper tantrum, his words. the president says he did not slam the table. but that he should have. he said after speaker pelosi's answer, he politely said bye-bye, and left. democratic leaders say they support border security but do not support a wall which they call expensive and ineffective and which nancy pelosi has said is against our values as a nation. they say lawmakers should handle that separately from the shutdown. >> on multiple occasions he's refused our requests to reopen unrelated parts of the government. and continue negotiations on border security revealing that heed holding the american people hostage as leverage. and he seems to be in his words proud of it.

>> in the shutdown, the government takes pride in it and says months or years. that's not the action of a responsible president. of the united states. >> shepard: right now, hundreds of thousands of americans are working even though they may not get paychecks tomorrow. others are taking forced furloughs. you can see, some are protesting in washington, and elsewhere today. but this showdown affects more than government workers. trash is piling up in national parks. security lines are getting longer at airports. and food safety inspections are, reportedly, falling behind. all because parts of the government remain closed due to the battle over the border wall. we have team fox coverage this afternoon, mike emanuel reporting live from capitol hill. first, john roberts live from the white house. >> shep, good afternoon. you mention the rio grande valley sector, busy for illegal border crossings but not an area of the country where the president is considering building that steel barrier. the rio grande there, is problematic in terms of building

a physical barrier. customs and border patrol acts have to do the best they can using manpower and technology to get a handle on illegal crossings. but the president driving home his message, that a physical barrier is needed to help protect national security. in that room where the president is talking, piles of drugs on tables, a wad of cash, seized weapons as well as the president praising members of the customs and border protection authority for doing the best job that they can. but also promising that he's there to help them do their jobs. listen here. >> president trump: you are highly respected in our country, and beyond our country. we know what you do with ms13, we know what you do with the gangs, we know what you do with crime, and we also see what you do on the border. boy, i tell you what, it's tough stuff. but it could be a lot easier for you, and you could be spread a lot differently if we had the wall. and we'll get it, we'll get it. i think we're winning the battle

in a very big way. >> the brother of singh, the brother of a california police officer killed a day after christmas by a man who entered the u.s. illegally years ago near arizona, also the mother of an offduty officer who was killed in 2013. the president saying he's not ready to pull the trigger on declaring a national emergency, wants to give the possibility of negotiation more time. saying he is willing to play that card if necessary. listen here. >> president trump: i'm not prepared to do that yet but if i have to i will. i have no doubt about it, i will. i have the absolute right to declare a national emergency. i haven't done it yet. i may do it. if this doesn't work out, probably i will do it. i would almost say definitely. >> the president does know, if he plays that card he would likely get an immediate legal challenge which could leave him with no more options, why he wants to wait. he also went back to the well on

mexico paying for the wall in 2016, during the campaign, he got that call and response going literally every campaign rally saying to the crowd who's going to pay for the wall. the crowd would shout back mexico. the president saying i never meant that mexico would give me the money for a wall. >> president trump: if congress approves this incredible trade bill that we made, with mexico, and canada by the way, but with mexico in this case, they're paying for the wall many, many times over. >> but the president saying i never meant that mexico was going to cut me a check. the president knows, though, that the u.s. mca hasn't been approved by congress. he went another direction saying that the amount of money in law enforcement that would be saved would pay for the wall maybe every 3 or 4 months. the president is coming up with a lot of money, shep. here's the bottom line, immediately the u.s. packs tear will be on the hook for the bill.

>> shepard: the president saying today that he's cancelling an upcoming planned trip because of the shutdown. >> he was supposed to go to switzerland to the annual world economic forum, made his first appearance there last year, going back again this year. but after speculation as to whether he would or he wouldn't, the president in a tweet this afternoon confirming that he is going to con sell that trip. he said because the democrats intransigence on border security and safety of our nation i am respectfully cancelling my very important trip for the world economic forum. warmest regards and apologies to the wef. it's likely the treasury secretary, steve ma nuch in, will take a small delegation with him. always a a chance the president could still go. i highly doubt it, because today the military logistics were supposed to go over there and set it up for him, and they cancelled that flight. probably the president won't be going to va. davos. >> shepard: john roberts, from

the north lawn. from congress the house of representatives did pass four bills that we've discussed yesterday, to reopen individual parts of the government. the house sent the bills to the senate which is controlled by republicans. and the leader there, mitch mcconnell, blocked votes on them. republican states pointless to vote on bills that the president has said he will not sign. team fox coverage continues, mike emanuel, our guy on capitol hill. >> blocking those individual spending bills from getting to the senate floor hit a nerve with maryland democrat senator ben carden. >> quite frankly, i don't understand the majority leader's position as to why he would deny a vote on reopening government that passed this body man unanimously in the past. >> after the white house issued a veto threat on those individual spending bills, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said he had no interest in so-called show boats. >> it's been perfectly clear the only way to produce this result

is for the president, the speaker of the house, and the minority leader to agree. bass we need votes from democrats, both in the senate and the house, in order to pass a measure that the president will seen. >> the senate overwhelmingly passed a funding extension before christmas, why the majority leader is saying he's buy-in from the president and the house leadership before he proceeds. >> shepard: the president talking about the possibility, as the president put it, probably if they don't get a deal, of declaring a national emergency. what is the opposition party there saying about that? >> democrats are warning strongly against the president taking that kind of action. >> any president, this one or any president, decides they want to just move unilaterally to spend funds and declare a national emergency for whatever they find of interest, it goes way beyond what i consider the

clear delegation of authority of the constitution. >> republicans say they would prefer a legislative fix but suggests a national emergency might be a last resort. >> i think the president has some legal authority here to do it. now, some of my -- i'm not recommending it. i would want to see him do that as a last resort. some of my colleagues think if he does do that it'll end western civilization. >> that could be where this is heading. after all, we're at day 20 of the partial government shutdown and there do not appear to be any signs of serious movement. shep? >> shepard: mike emanuel, thank you. the president said yesterday that compromise is in his vocabulary, he's willing to compromise. the democrats with chuck schumer at the microphone saying we're willing to talk about anything, and that they'd like to sit down at the table. so, kaitlin owens, she's a news reporter for axios. both sides giving indications that they're willing to talk. is there anything to talk about,

is there any room for movement to reopen the government? >> shep, in theory, yes, there's plenty of room for movement. in the way they're talking, both sides are just talking right past each other. the president wants his $5.7 billion for the border wall. they threw in sweeteners, extra funding for this and that to get the democrats to accept the offer. desire president seem that daca is on the table. >> shepard: i was going to ask, the democrat want a deal for the dreamers and they talked about it for a long time during the campaign. is there some way for a daca deal and maybe more money for some sort of barrier? is there a 'manic juggling that can be done, the democrats can give more money for border security, is there anything there? >> you would think so. but first of all democrats are saying they don't want to negotiate on the wall before the government is reopened. vice president pence came and spoke to reporters on the hillnd he suggested that the president would like to wait until the supreme court rules on daca, the

administration is thinking that daca will be struck down and more immigration down the road. it doesn't sound like the administration is too keen to put a fakca fix on the table -- daca fix on the table. that seems to be closing the room for negotiation between the two parties. >> shepard: the president has said the other option is declaring a national emergency. should he do that, as he said he likely will, in the absence of a deal, what would that mean for the nation? >> right, so i mean that would be one way for the president to get his wall money and go what he wants at the border. i think the concern is, of course legal concerns, a lot of lawyers aren't sure whether or not he has that power. and second of all, just the precedent that it sets. i was talking to a republican earlier and they were saying what happens if a future democratic president decides we have a national gun emergency. you know, if presidents request just decide whatever they want to is a national emergency, you know, when republicans are in

the minority they might not be so happy that that is the case. >> shepard: case lynn owens, reporter for axios, thank you. >> thank you. >> shepard: we'll head to the border in a few minutes where president trump is spending the day, as we reported. we're expecting that he will get a briefing on security in the texas rio grande valley, a hot smot along the border, we'll get what we can of that. first, what the president is saying about that court filing that suggests his former campaign chairman was giving polling data to a russian citizen during the 2016 campaign. that's next on fox news. hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could

feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better protected from mayhem... like me. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ oh, oh, oh, ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2,

or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.

>> shepard: president trump commenting on a court filing that indicates his former campaign chairman paul manafort lied to prosecutors and doing so about giving polling data to a russian business associate. >> president trump: i didn't know anything about it, nothing about it. >> shepard: the president said he had no idea. the filing suggests he gave polling data to constantine klemnik, he has ties to russian intelligence and vladimir putin. he denies it. the "new york times" reported that manafort told him to pass that data on to a russian 'ol i narc, the times has since corrected the reporting and reports the recipient or the

person to whom he was told to pass it was two people. two ukrainian oligarchs. all of this comes at a critical time in the special counsel's russia investigation and as the deputy attorney general rosenstein indicates at some point he will be stepping down soon. the chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge rments sources do not dispute that he shared polling data with a business associate, but they also emphasis the data was for two ukrainian 'ol i dpashgs who apparently demonstrate manafort had a winning candidate. they say he was well known to the fbi and state department used him in the past as a confidential source. pratly in this letter to acting attorney general matt whitaker the chairman of the house view dishry committee lay dunes a marker and date for public testimony, january 29. the new chairman says whitaker must address a wide range of issues from voting rights and

immigration and gun rights and foreign influence. whether it aer can took over the oversight of the investigation replacing rod rosenstein, in december ethics officials found no conflicts of interest and whitaker was not told to recuse himself. they say the public is entitled why you chose to disregard the advice of etsesics officials with respect to your oversight of the special counsel. similarly, we are entitled to a clear explanation of the current line of responsibility for the supervision of the special counsel's investigation. and house republicans now in the my norlt want the deputy attorney general to testify before he leaves the justice department in coming weeks. in a letter to democrats republican congressman jim jordan and mark meadows want rosenstein on both on allegations first reported by the "new york times." quote, the investigation revealed specific details of high level government officials discussing statements by

rosenstein concerning two options against the president. these included coordinating two cabinet officials to invoke the 25th amendment and recording the president while in his presence. that information according to the letter obtained from a recent transcribed interview under oath with james baker reached out to the justice department on both of the requests, for whitaker and rosenstein, but you can imagine with the partial government shutdown, they're short staffed and we have not heard back from them. >> shepard: catherine. breaking news, this just in, michael cohen the president's former fixer and lawyer for over a decade who was sentenced to three years in prison after implicating trump, president trump in a hush money scandal, michael cohen, we know, has agreed to testify in the house of representatives in the ongoing investigation on the house of representatives part, now led by the democrats. michael cohen will testify

before going to prison. catherine, is this unexpected? >> the democrats once they took control made it clear they were reopening the russia investigation, they made the charge that the republicans closed the investigation without thoroughly looking agent issues related to then-candidate trumps finances. i would say it is not unexpected of the question i have at this point, maybe you have a little more information than i do sitting here, is whether this would be open or closed testimony. in recent weeks -- >> shepard: it will be open testimony. we've just heard. it will be live with cameras testifying before the house oversight committee. >> well, that's a very important development, significant development. it will be in open setting. the republicans in the last session chose to have their with its do these under oath transcribed interviews, they said they were more effective. democrats argued it should have been in public and the argument of the former fbi director, james comey. one of the criticisms of

republicans may level, is whether cohen is credible given that he has admitted to lying to investigators and lying to congress in the past, democrats make the point that he's heading to prison and he's really nothing to lose by stating the truth at this point. >> shepard: today is thursday, january 010. the testimony is to happen exactly four weeks today, four weeks from today, thursday, february 7, and i'm getting this information from a statement that cohen himself has put out. i presume through his attorneys. nevertheless, he's made the statement that he's going to do that. he cooperated back in the day, and catherine, a lot of questions about whether they would use him in any potential legal proceedings. i'm talking about the mueller investigation. this, of course, is completely separate. >> this being -- >> shepard: the house investigation separate. >> yes, absolutely, it is separate. and, again, the way for folks at home to understand this, is that when the democrats took over the

house and they got control and the power that goes with the gavel, they said that they were essentially turning the page and they were going to reopen some issues from the russia investigation. but they were also going to explore new lines of inquiry in the russia investigation specifically these issues of the financing of candidate trump, and his family. so looking at the money trail, if you will, cohen certainly fits into that bucket, shep. >> shepard: under the democratic leadership, the chairman of the house oversight and reform committee, is representative of elijah cummings. cummings has just sent out a statement i'll read for you. last november the american people voted for congress to do two things, address the court issues that affect their daily lives and fulfill the constitutional responsibility to serve as an independent check and balance on the executive branch by restoring accountability and transparency. he goes on, the initial set of hearings will serve both goals,

by launching a broad review of the skyrocketing prices of prescription drugs, hearing directly from president trump long-time personal attorney, and foes canning on sweeping legislative reform to strengthen democracy in house resolution one. chairman cummings made the following statement on the hearing on michael cohen, quote, michael cohen agrees to testify voluntarily. i want to make sure, that we have no intent, no interest in inappropriately interfering with any ongoing criminal investigations. to that end we're in the process of consulting with the special counsel mueller's office. the committee will announce additional details in the coming weeks. cohen says he'll testify on february 7. with history as our guide, this sort of thing could be quite a television event. >> well, listen, it will be the first time we have heard from an extended period from michael cohen, and also having questions from both sides of the aisle.

sort of reading between the lines from what you just attributed to congressman cummings, it does sound like they're just confirming the special counsel is effectively done with cohen, he pushed that kwas into another jurisdiction. that was an indicator for many analysts that cohen was not relevant to the russia piece or the collusion peels of the investigation. but from the congressman's statements wants to make sure there isn't outstanding related to the special counsel and then they will proceed. he's coming voluntarily, it's noteworthy, not under subpoena. those committees had threatened to use subpoenas to bring individuals in to testify. it will be fascinating to hear cohen's side of the story, and also some of the backstory republicans will push him on as to how he reached a point where he plead guilty to lying to congress about a deal that never went through in moscow.

>> shepard: two new things for the viewers. one is details of the michael cohen statement. then there's another from a lawmaker. let me read michael cohen first. his statement, and i quote. in furtherance of my commitment to cooperate and provide the american people with answers again this is michael cohen, i have accepted the invitation by the chairman elijah cummings to appear publicly on february 7 before the committee on oversight and governmental reform. i look forward to having the privilege of being afforded a platform with which to give a full and credible account of the events which have transpired. but now we've learned more, this isn't going to be just a public hearing, there will apparently also be a closed door hearing. and i get that from the democrat of california adam schiff. he is the new chairman of the house intelligence committee, now the democrats have taken over there. and here's the statement of democrat adam schiff. mr. cohen has expressed an interest in telling his personal story in open session and we welcome his testimony before the

committee on oversight and reform. it will be necessary, however, for mr. cohen to answer questions pertaining to the russia investigationnd we hope to schedule a closed session before our committee in the near future. sounds like there will be one thing for the public, and then information on the russia investigation, catherine, separately and in camera. >> it sounds like we have the benefit of seeing the paperwork you have in front of you, but it sounds like you have got two committees really in play on the house side. the oversight committee when which is the public piece in early february, and the new chairman of the house intelligence committee adam schiff saying that they also to -- also plan to ask questions of cohen, but to do so in a closed door classified session. if you will. now that could be would be what they have done typically with wipts in the russia case, they would appear to at least this limited extent, with democrats, and those are usually

transcribed interviews as well. >> shepard: thanks so much, always appreciate it. >> you're welcome. >> shepard: more context for you. the president has made clear according to multiple reporting the trip to the bore dwer and white house statement, listening to his advisors on this matter, not like it was his idea. from the reporting sounded like he wasn't sure how effective this sort of thing was going to be. the president and his team have a message that they want out there. their message is, the border wall is important, i campaigned on it, it's important for national security, the message is come on, let's all get in on this. there's always an effort, no matter who is in the white house or the congress to control the message. when the message strays that's never a good thing. well, now, having a bit of a show hearing on capitol hill on the 7th of february with michael cohen, wonder how that will play at the house. at the white house. i can't imagine they're thrilled, john roberts. >> anybody i talk to associated with this thinks that michael

cohen has nothing that could possibly implicate president trump, anything that the mueller investigation has been looking into, vis-a-vis collusion between the trump campaign and russia. cohen was involved in the campaign early on, and then he had a television interview where he said something that got him sort of booted out of the campaign. then he was just working for the trump organization after that. he might not know much about the inner workings of the campaign during the period in question anyway. but one other statement here, you had the one from michael cohen, adam schiff, also one from elijah cummings in which he says i thank michael cohen for agreeing to bef of the oversight committee voluntarily. want to make sure we have no interest in inappropriately interfering with any ongoing criminal investigations and to that end we are in the process of consulting with special counsel mueller's office. the committee will announce additional information in the coming weeks. so it may be that this february

7 appearance before the oversight committee may or may not happen depending on what the negotiations between elijah cummings' office and the mueller investigation turn up. if mueller were to say, look, having michael cohen testify publicly before congress could jeopardize aspects of the case i'm building on obstruction of justice or something else, they may have to delay that hearing. but we do know from the statement weeks ago, from lanny davis, no longer michael cohen's attorney but working with him on p.r. consulting more than anything, cohen said he was going to tell his story after the mueller investigation had wrapped up. now as you get this confluence of dates, where the mueller investigation is not wrapped up, you don't have the report yet, but then michael cohen, you know, staring at the ground rush of that march 7 date of going to jail. he's trying to get out there and tell his story before he has to go behind bars. this may not happen, we're not sure. but, again, spoke to rudy

guiliani and jay sekulow about michael cohen on many occasions. and they at least to me have not expressed any concern about anything that cohen may tell congress, or may tell mueller for that matter. then, again, you can always have the public face and then the private one that i may not be completely aware of. >> shepard: understood. john, you are the best, thank you. so the best information we have comes from the players at hand, michael cohen says on february 7, i'm testifying before the house oversight committee. oversight and government reform committee. and the chairman of that committee says he's going to be testifying, but doesn't give a specific date. at any rate, bob bianchi is here, very often on the set with us on the news deck. but today on the phone. bob, i just wonder what it would be like this confluence of situations, where we have, he

was his attorney and his fixer for about ten years. and now, is about to be in front of the television cameras, and before congress, that's now aggressively in the house of representatives beginning an investigation against the president. it sounds, well, what are your thoughts on this? >> know, sthep, like many times -- shep, many times we've talked about cohen, i said before, you never want your lawyer, now we have your accountant or campaigning m, as with its against you. campaign manager. michael cohen has a story to tell, he's willing to tell it. michig any time your lawyer is giving invest before congress, the unknown phone call made by donald trump jr., and things of that nature, you will have real questions and real search for the truth. that doesn't necessarily mean there's anything that's negative there with respect to collusion.

we don't know. are we talking about all of these other transactions that occurred, railroading payoff, hush money. no matter what side of the aisle you're on with regard to support or nonsupport of the president, you would be out of your mind not to know that no person, whether you've done absolutely nothing wrong or whether you've done a lot of things wrong, wants their lawyer, that you are fixer, their person who has intimate many of all of your dirty laundry testifying under oath. >> shepard: keeping in mind michael cohen pleaded guilty about five months ago, now, to criminal charges related to hush money payments to women who allege affairs with trump. here was the argument from those -- from the nontrump side. that was that that was a campaign violation. that the money was paid specifically to these two women to keep them quiet as it relates to the campaign itself so that potential voters would not have

the information about the affairs, therefore you pay them in one case $130,000, you pay them not to say anything. and in another case you buy up their story and don't tell it. the argument is that's a campaign finance violation, and could be fairly serious for the president. there are other ways to look at this but you guess, bob bianchi, the democratic controlled house, in charge of investigation, oversight and reform, the democrat controlled house might spend time on that matter. sure, let's not forget, there's also an audio recording of this payment, one of these payments being discussed. and there's talk about cash. as a prosecutor when you hear cash you hear coveringup. that's what you think. not necessarily, but that's what you think. and then when you look at the manner in which this payment was structured as i recall, a corporation being set up, cohen taking out loans, and the money then being repaid and listed in the ledger as legal fee when is

they weren't legal fees. these are all things where we talk about consciousness of guilt that something inappropriate was done, something was hidden. i'm not saying trump or some one else, this is the reason campaign finance laws are in effect so that people know where the money is coming from, what the money is being used for, so that you can't cover things up. and my point with this as far as the prosecutor is concerned, i don't care if you're a democrat or republican, you let it fly here, what do you do when it happens when the opposing party you don't agree with, it occurs in two years from now, three years from now. why these laws are placed in effect. because it affected the court of public opinion. it affected peep poom's opinion of who to vote or not vote for. people's opinion. this is the reason why money was paid out in a circuitous way to hide it from the public, true. >> shepard: bob bianchi, our

legal eagle, thank you. most memorable recent time there was an investigation, when the party in channel was one side and the one being investigated was on the other, could be the benghazi hearings. you all remember they were all over the cable news chance and all over the papers at the time, when the house oversight and reform committee was investigating that. and it was very aggressive, and very public. and you wonder, if now, that the tables are turned, let's go to chad pilgrim, senior producer for us on capitol hill. this would be a democrat controlled committee investigating the republican president's side of the matter. you wonder what all of this might look like. >> you heard so much from democrats of all of these different investigations that they're going to have. this is going to be the first big marker by democrats. the first public hearing on the 7th of february with michael cohen. i'm going to read you part of the statement here from elijah cummings, chair of the oversight

committee. i want to thank michael cohen for agreeing to testify. i want to make sure that we have no interest in inappropriately interfering with any ongoing criminal investigations. to that end we are in the process of consulting with the special counsel's office. . committee will announce additional information in the coming weeks. we have a statement from michael cohen, cohen says in furdz rans of my commitment to kooment and provide the american people with answers i have accepted the invitation, look forward to having the platform for which to give a full and credible account for the e rents vechts that trance -- events that transpired. we knew this was going to happen at some point, probably the biggest hearing on capitol hill since jeff sessions, the former attorney general, came and spoke on the senate side of the capitol back in june of 2017. this is a real marker here. something that is going to drive republicans in the house, now the minority, crazy. michael cohen is going to tell his side of the story before they ever got rod rosenstein, deputy attorney general.

before christmas there was a push by republicans in the majority to get rosenstein behind closed doors. they had james comey a couple of times. cohen will be here in early peb february, the first big hearing for the democratic howls of representatives. >> shepard: remember back when devin nunes and others headed up this same committee, under different control than the republicans. there was a lot of testimony that they blocked, that they wouldn't, would not make available. are we expecting, now, that there would be a lot more testimony and if so from whom regarding these matters. >> well, to clarify, devin noon necessary chaired the intelligence committee, this is a different committee for devin nunes. that's a fair point. i think the frkt that cohen will be in public, what the intelligence committee did was in private. i can't imagine there wouldn't be some element of cohen's testimony that might have to be redacted or have to go into a

private session. cummings statement here, they have more information coming. and what i read between the lines there, they might have to have an open session with cohen and a closed session with cohen. that happens regularly in these type of high profile investigations. >> shepard: is there the degree of pressure on democrats to make this a full, exhaustive, e long galted -- elongated, drawn-out process? is the pressure that democrats suggest or a lot of that just talk? >> democrats campaigned on this, they said if we get the majority we're going to look at all of these different things. nadler, the new chair of the judiciary committee, talk about subpoenas and oversight with the justice department. and everything else. so you're going to start to see a lot more of this. i don't know if pressure is the right term. but it is an idea that they said they were going to do this. everybody knew it was coming. they said in the minority, we have all of these problems that republicans weren't aggressive in the oversight of the trump administration and this is

democrats saying we're in charge and we're going to have that aggressive oversight, we think the if i disturbry responsibility of the congress, they were -- the fush responsibility of the congress. >> shepard: we have three new statements, in the last 20 or 30 minutes, one from michael cohen himself, and two others from democrats on the hill, catherine herridge has been looking at those closely and has observations. catherine? >> my observations are, shep, and it's just a sense that we have from democrats leading into the new session, they don't want to overplay their hand on the russia piece. they want to sort of lay out what they've been able to find and mind the new avenues they say republicans have not mined. but they seem to have, and chad may be able to weigh in as well, that sense of overplaying their hand on the impeachment issue. and how that worked out, republicans last time around, when there's a democratic president. they want to get to the facts

that they see, they want to mine new veins or new lines of inquiry but not overplay their hand in the process. one of the issues that sort of came back to bite the republicans in the last session, when they had high profile with its what comes to mind to me was the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, some of the hearings had really uncomfortable moments, i'll put it that way, the gravity of the questioning and the liens of inquiry were overtaken by some of the questioning of the lawmakers. that would be something that they would all wish to avoid, sort of the very first, very public, high profile testimony on the russia investigation and indicator of how they're going to proceed with it in the future. >> shepard: i want to talk to chad about that, chad there had been -- there have been voices that have talked about impeachment, some of them in ways that have very much upset democratic leaders. but most who have spoken on the hill, nancy pelosi to be

specific, said what we need to do is get to the facts. they seem to be avoiding the impeachment word, leaning forward investigation instead. >> nancy pelosi has a tough hand to play, and something that's been discussed, you know, at length on capitol hill how do they do appropriate oversight of the trump administration, part of the constitutional responsibility of the house and the senate regardless of party, who's in charge in the white house as well. pelosi knows they have to do this right. they have to do this by the book. the terms she used in november were appropriate. appropriate investigation of the trump administration. and when she took the gavel as speak i for the first time in 2007 there was a there was a lot of pressure to impeach george w. bush over how they handled iraq, over investigations with halliburton be and she put out the fires. she has been measured, she's not as definitive, not saying we're not going with impeachment but it is a problem, tase away from the other issues that they want to address. it's a little bit of, you know,

one foot in, one foot off, it's a balancing act, teept teeter-totter, pelosi is aware. she has proven before that she's able to balance it and put on the the fires in her own caucus. can she do it again, that's the $64,000 question. >> shepard: chad, thank you. now we know the investigation is beginning in earnest on behalf of the democrats who lead the committee in the house of representatives. what the mechanics be like? day-to-day how's it going to work? chief congressional correspondent emmanuel is here. >> a tremendous amount of hype going in, you will have the pictures of the women, stormy daniels, and talk about payments, hush money to the women. you will have talk about this trump tower proposal from moscow. the question is whether michael cohen delivers. there's going to be tremendous type going in. there will be all of the sensational talk going in.

but how does he appear with the bright lights on capitol hill in his face. and with republicans, perhaps, asking tough questions on the other side, questioning his credibility. i've been through the hearings over the years, in the benghazi select committee hearing when hillary clinton came up to capitol hill, on the stand for 10, 11 hours. then it was up to the american people to decide whether they believe secretary clinton or whether they thought republicans brought out serious news there. and then ultimately, the court of public opinion decides whether this was a made for tv event, "days of our lives" on cable news across the country, or legitimate news and whether there's serious breakthrough there is. there will be pressure on the democrats to deliver. there will be anxiety among the house leadership, nancy pelosi, new speaker of the house, whether it is hyped too much and whether it lives up to that. or whether it does deliver serious news and raise serious

information. as you mentioned, and we've been talking about, there's also the concern about potentially classified information. adam schiff saying we will need to have a private session with the house intelligence committee to discuss delicate matters that shouldn't be out before the tv cameras, but it will be quite a moment should it happen. >> shepard: mike, thank you, stand by. it's expected to happen exactly four weeks from today, thursday, february 7. we got our i flishl notification of this -- initial notification from michael cohen himself. and our senior correspondent rick leventhal had communicationing with him. >> i called him and he took my call. i asked how are you doing, he said good, how are you. he sounded relaxed. i said everybody is talking about you. he said how about that. i said what have you got? he said i've got nothing for you. i said come on, buddy. he said, well, i just have a statement. >> shepard: okay. >> and he said just a statement. i don't know if you've read the statement from michael cohen. >> shepard: read it again.

>> in furtherance of my commitment to provide answers i have accepted the invitation by elijah cummings to appear publicly on february before the committee on oversight and government reform. i look forward to having the privilege of being afforded a platform with which to give a full and credible account of the events which have transpired. >> shepard: he said he wanted to do that when lanny davis was his lawyer. that full and credible, feels like that miement have been the language they used then. >> he testified before congress before. and lied to them. and was convicted of that. now, apparently he is ready to tell the truth to congress. and says he will before he goes off to prison. this is his statement. again, he sounded pretty relaxed on the phone and apparently looking forward to talking to congress. >> shepard: thank you, rick. what about the other side, president trump's attorney and sometimes spokesperson, p.r. type, wearing a lot of hats, rudy guiliani. and john roberts at the white house, just talked to rudy giuliani.

>> i did just got off the phone with him, just spent about 3 or 4 minutes to get information that we could pass along. he said he can't imagine why congress would want to hear from michael cohen at this point. or at all, ball games he is a, quote, discredit theed liar. rudy guiliani said the democrats want to start an investigation without any evidence that anybody did anything wrong. because the mueller report is not even in so he's not sure what they're going to investigate. he said to me, quote, cohen doesn't know a damn thing about collusion. he did expect that the democrats when they took control of congress would do this, though he thought they'd wait for the mueller report to come out to see if anybody did anything wrong. and i also asked him if he thought maybe this was the first stepping stone down the road to impeachment. giuliani said there's nothing to base impeachment on, no evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor in anything that's come out of the mueller investigation. so, you know, clearly the

president's outside legal team is spinning this politically in a way they want to play with the president's supporters and with the rest of the country. at this point, they're saying, cohen's got nothing, he has been discredited as a liar on many occasions, he's willing to say anything according to rudy guiliani to keep his hide out of jail. not sure testifying before congress would go any distance toward doing that. about the line for the president's outside attorneys, this guy has been lying through his teeth, to anybody who's willing to listen. and why would congress want to listen to anything he has to say. particularly since robert mueller has not reported yet. but this idea that the democrats seem to want to create a parallel track of investigation, separate and apart from the mueller investigation, without any evidence that anybody has done anything wrong. that's what the president's outside attorneys are staying. >> shepard: john roberts, thank you. breakings into, now, on fox news

channel, this is the live look at that we promised, expecting, we promised we'd give it to you, this is the president in mcallen, texas. mcallen right there in the rio grande. the rio grande separates that part of texas from mexico. and the president, we're expecting to give remarks in just a moment. we're going to bring in our fox television station is a cross the nation. across the station. from fox news world headquarters in new york, this is shepard smith, president trump's visit to the nation's southern border, getting a briefing much sorts on border security over the last hour or so. these are live pictures coming in to us from mcallen, texas. right on the rio grande. mexico is across the river. this is not an area that anyone has suggested there would be a border wall at all. the president not talking about it for this area. but he certainly wants a border wall, or barrier, over an

extended period. for der. he hasn't been specific about exactly where and where not. but he has been specific about wanting 5.7 billion to begin the construction of the wall. no construction has begun on such a wall. the wall maybe isn't the parlance they'd rather we use. i think they'd rather we say barrier, the president has pointed out this steel barrier, he's suggesting is something of a compromise here from the president with the democrats. as the partial government shutdown drags, it begins the third week tomorrow. and, really, by the weekend would be the longest government shutdown in american history if it does continue. on the heels of this, the president gave an address to the nation on tuesday night, you remember. and then the announcement was made that he would be on the border today. and he's there. the president said candidly, i don't know if this is going to do any good but my advisors say let's give a speech from the oval office and go to the border to make the point the president

believes for national security he wants a border wall. a border barrier. some sort of physical impediment to people crossing. now he's talking, cameras are close enough, let's listen. >> president trump: appreciate it, appreciate it. thank you very much, everybody. >> good work. >> we can continue to see an influx of people, you described humanitarian crisis, we had 140 yesterday. >> president trump: yesterday alone? >> 450 out of that, 133 from countries other than the central american countries and mexico. india, apprehended pakistanis, folks from romania. >> president trump: how many pakistanis? >> two. >> not just central america and mexico, people all over the world exploit the vulnerabilities in our border. >> president trump: you can tell

them -- >> how many different countries? >> so far this sector has be a rehenlded folks from different countries, yesterday 133 peep from countries other than central america and mexico, including individuals from india, pakistan, china, romania, ecuador, nicaragua. we talk about the family units and unaccompanied children, 60%, 70%. we've seen a change over the last couple of weeks where that number is less than 50% of the apprehensions in south texas. south texas continues to lead the country in apprehensions as well as marijuana seizures in between the ports of entry, cvp and dhp are committed to the border and humanitarian vision. mr. president, senators, couldn't do it without your support, appreciate you coming down here, means oh lot to the men and women of dhs, border patrol, local law enforcement. >> president trump: thank you. thank you very much.

so they apprehended people from the middle east and they do it all the time. everybody says where are they from. we're not talking about only mexico. all over the world they come in because it's a weak spot. they -- weak spot. the laws have to be strong, and we need security, we need the kind of backup that you want. they have asked, by the way, we have lists of things, what they need more than anything is the barrier, the wall. call it whatever you want. whether it's steel or concrete, you don't care. we need a barrier. >> right. >> president trump: they have done a fantastic job. never so many apprehensions, ever, in our history. but, you know, it could be a lot easier, ee easier for you and spread your people out to a lot of different areas. which would also be very helpful. >> we have 155 miles of fencing in the sector. we started the job in 2006, we need to finish that job. we've got the personnel, we need the tech nothing, we need the resources, we need the infrastructure to get -- in

order to yol control this border and manage it. part of our area is covered on the east side, that accounts for about 6% of our traffic. we have no fencing, over 90% of our traffic occurs in those areas. >> president trump: okay, folks, you don't have to say any more, that's it, that's it. we never spoke before this. i never told you to say that. >> no, sir. >> president trump: i should have but he said it perfectly. this is common sense. they need a barrier, they need a wall, if you don't have it, it's going to be nothing but hard work and grueling problems. and by the way, and death. and death, a lot of death. i want to thank you, you do a fantastic job. >> appreciate that, mr. president. >> president trump: thank you very much. [questions shouted] >> how much closer are at this point to declaring national emergency? >> president trump: well, we can declare a national mng, we shouldn't have to, national emergency. this is just common sense.

you know, you were at the last meeting where we saw people who, like, as you know reggie singh's brother, reggie, i got to know him a little bit today. this shouldn't be 457ing in our country, this shouldn't be happening. what you see on the border, that's not as much of a problem as they come through the border and go out throughout the nation. you have crime in iowa, you have crime in new hampshire, you have crime in new york, you have crime in places, you know, you don't associate with the border but it comes through the border. tremendous amount. as hard as we work and well as we're doing, nationwide on crime, a lot of it is caused by people that come in through the southern border. you know, if we had the barrier it wouldn't happen. it wouldn't happen. they could have fewer people, they could put people other places, instead of having everyone concentrated, right here, and it's all common sense. nancy and chuck know that. look, they're not winning this

argument, they're losing the argument badly, they know it. and it's not about the argument, it's not about politics, it's doing the right thing. i could do a lot easier things, i could just forget this like everyone else. should have been done 30 years ago. and 230 years ago. and 10 years ago, and 5 years ago. i could have done like everyone else, sort of say, hey, forget it. a lot of the crime in our country is caused by what's coming through here. these people do the most incredible job. and they're not given, they're not given a full hand. because they need the barriers. if they don't have the barriers, you just said it, better than anybody could say it, where we have a good, strong barrier you don't have problems. now, the problem is they go to the barrier, that's it, they go around the barrier now. when you fill up the gap it's going to be a much different day. >> are you closer to declaring an emergency? >> president trump: we are, i would like to look at broader.

we can do this, it's common sense. we will save the cost of the wall every year but much more than that. much more than that. but i would like to do a much broader form of immigration, and we could do immigration reform, it'll take longer, it's been complex, it's been going on for 30, 35 years, talking about immigration reform. but we have to, before we do that, we have to create a barrier. that we can do very quickly. something can be done, we can do it, phil, help the dreamers. we want to help the dreamers. identify was ready to help the dreamers then we got a decision that the folks representing the dreamers very strongly, which is us also, if you want to know the truth, but they said, well, we don't have to do it any more. it's before the supreme court. we'll see what happens. and if the supreme court rules against the president obama decision, which he knew would not hold up, if -- we will have a deal with the dreamers.

we can do it early. this has to be done soon so we get our folks paid in our country. [inaudible] >> when you say mexico is going to pay for the wall you never expected they would write you a check. but during your -- >> president trump: of course i don't expect -- when i say mexico is going to pay for the wall, you think they're going to write a check for $20 million or $5 billion or two cents? no, they're paying for the wall in a great trade deal. you had the worst frayed deal in nafta. we lost thousands of businesses. millions of jobs. millions of jobs. go up to new england, ohio, pennsylvania, you look at those factories that were wiped out. and now, we have a great trade deal. and it will take in, and we will, look, billions and billions of dollars a year will be made now as opposed to nafta which was a disaster. you know that, everybody knows that.

[inaudible question ]. >> president trump: more impressive are the a little themselves. look at them, these people are incredible. [ applause ] we have, you hear about them, when you meet them it's different. you meet these people. they're a great group of people. they happen to be very good looking, i have to say that. they're good looking people. they're smart, they're tough, they have got the whole package. i want to tell you, they are impressive. and i met a lot of them, i've met -- we just left a big room loaded up with border patrol and i.c.e. and law enforcement. there's something different when i meet them here as opposed to seeing you at the white house or seeing you in an office. they do an incredible job. [inaudible] on the border, have you met with any of them? >> president trump: we have, we have. >> you have? >> president trump: we have. not anyone that i met with, but most people want it, i think.

and i guess there could be some pockets where they disagree but not very much. [inaudible] >> president trump: about what? i'm going to see how he do with going through congress. don't forget, national emergency is going through congress, that already went through congress, it's what it's there for. if you read it, it is so clear, it is so perfect, i'd rather not do it, not for any particular reason other than this should be easy to get approved through congress. the same people that are holding it up, have approved it, many times before. ted and john, these people approved it. just a few years ago. and now all of a sudden they're not. the reason is because of me, i hate to say. because they know they're going to lose in 2020, they'll do anything they can to not lose. they want to win. but they're not -- it's not going to happen. >> are you going to make any time during your visit today to

see the detention facility