a perino, in for shep. you see, he let me in here, next door, big honor i have to say. we're going to continue with the story, the coverage of the testimony from president trump's former lawyer, michael cohen in a public hearing with the house oversight committee. the former fixer who once bragged he'd take a bullet for the president calling him a mobster, a racist, a con man, and a cheat. michael cohen says president trump took part in criminal scheme while he was president, connected to the hush money payment to porn star stormy daniels. and prosecutors are investigating the president for other possible crimes. cohen also claims the president

knew in advance about a wikileaks dump of democratic e-mails and indirectly suggested cohen should lie to congress about plans do build a trump to youer in moscow. details on that and more in a moment. a word we heard a lot today from both cohen and the lawmakers questioning him, lying. michael cohen says that was and still is a requirement for working for president trump. >> everybody's job at the trump organization is to protect mr. trump. every day, most of us knew we were coming in and we were going to lie for him on something. and that became the norm. and that's exactly what is happening right now, in this country, and it's exactly what is happening here in government, sir. >> dana: president trump says michael cohen did bad things unrelated to trump and is lying to reduce his prison time. cohen of course pleaded guilty to lying to congress and other crimes, sentenced to three years behind bars. that starts in a couple of months.

chief intelligence correspondence catherine herridge is live on capitol hill and following the hearing. gave us a great report in the 2:00 hour. we'll give you some time to explain all that you saw, a lot was said. >> we're on a short break right now, but two pieces of testimony i want to draw people's attention to, because the testimony suggests that there may be ongoing legal exposure for president trump. in both instances they arise from the prosecution in the southern district of new york. i want to emphasize that is not a prosecution about russian collusion. the first one is about the issue of whether he understood that he would be pressed on these issues, and whether he really understood whether he would be asked questions about his conversations with the president. michael cohen told the committee today that he could not discuss anything about the raid in the spring of 2017 at his home or at his businesses. again in the southern district

of new york. because he was advised by the u.s. attorney not to do so. here's that exchange. >> i think i worked for ten years and trashing the guy you worked for for ten years, didn't get a job in the white house, and now, now you're behaving just like everyone else who has gotten fired or didn't get the job they wanted, andy mccabe, james comey, same kind of selfish motivation after you don't get the thing you want. >> mr. jordan, all i wanted was what i got. personal attorney to the president. >> so, dana, that was an error on my part, i meant to line up two ideas here. let me do it quickly. one, was on the issue of the hush money payments and checks that michael cohen testified were provided by the president in the spring of 2017, once he was inside the oval office. and the other had to do with his conversations with president trump about a raid on the michael cohen case. those are the two issues, i

apologize for garbling that right there with you. >> dana: that's all right, obviously it's been a crazy day and i called chris wallace bret baier just a moment ago. let me ask you this, as i was watching, he didn't say much about russian collusion, and did we find out more about russian contacts during the election? >> okay, so on the could loogs question, michael cohen -- collusion michael cohen testified he had a number of suspicions but no direct evidence of coordination between the trump campaign and russian officials. let's break it down, one at a time here. let's talk about the moscow real estate project, with trump tower in 2016. you remember, dana, michael cohen lied to the senate intelligence commit buy when those conversations stopped. cohen testified to that committee, in january of 2016 they stopped. but the paper trail indicates that it went on for many longer. -- much longer. that's important, there was a

lot of reporting including buzzfeed that cohen was directed by the tonight lie, he did not say that today. he said he lied and that was his own decision. under his own initiative. but he said he understood that that is what mr. trump wanted. here's michael cohen. >> mr. trump knew of and directed the trump moscow negotiations throughout the campaign and lied about it. he lied about it, because he never expected to win. he also lied about it because he stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars on the moscow real estate project. and so i lied about it, too. >> the other issue has to do with the issue of the wikileaks dump and the hacked dnc and complain ton campaign e-mails.

cohen testified he was in then-donald trump's business office and he took a call, a conference call, put it on speaker, with roger stone. and cohen testified today that roger stone relayed he had just talked to the head of we cannie likes, julian assange, and more e-mails would be coming. here that's piece of sound. mr. trump put mr. stone on the speaker phone. mr. stone told mr. trump that he had just gotten off the phone with julian assange. and that mr. assange told mr. stone that within a couple of days there would be a massive dump of e-mails that would damage hillary clinton's campaign. mr. trump responded by stating to the effect, wouldn't that be great. >> so, there are a couple of things, really, to give you more context on that. first and foremost, in the summer of 2016, the u.s. intelligence community had made no public assessment as to who

was responsible for the hacked e-mails. that, in fact, came one month before the election in october of 2016. so we've seen democrats today, try to tie up russian collusion in the conversation with wikileaks when in fact the intelligence did not support that conclusion at that time. the other piece of testimony that i think is important is debbie wasserman schultz, who had her e-mails hacked by the russians, tried to press michael cohen on the relationship with roger stone whether he was part of the campaign, whether he had a formal role with the trump organization. cohen testified in effect, that roger stone was a free agent, he was acting on his own, he was bringing this information to candidate trump. it was not part of a larger conspiracy to work with wikileaks. >> dana: and that, thank you, catherine, you're going to come back and cover the rest of it, you will be updating us the rest of the day. right now, let's bring in andy mccarthy, former assistant u.s. attorney and fox news

contributor. i want to talk about a couple of things, andy, including the southern district of new york. can i ask about what catherine was talking about in regards to roger stone and wikileaks and this phone call that supposedly michael cohen says he overheard between president trump and roger stone. roger stone then apparently sent out one line that says michael cohen is lying. what do you make of all of that? >> well, two things, dana. i think you have to bear in mind with everything that cohen has to say we're not hearing anything today that he hasn't already told the two sets of prosecutors, both from the southern district of new york and mueller's prosecutors. i would note in the roger stone indictment, there's a whole story about, well, the leaks, dnc e-mail dump and the podesta dump. the story that cohen is telling, to my mind, does not square up with what mueller has in his indictment.

according to mueller's indictment days after the dnc leak happened, you had conversation between cohen -- not cohen, stone and jerry corsi, when he said we have to figure out a way to get to assange, i understand there may be another disclosure of e-mails and it relates to the clinton foundation. now, if stone had a way to contact assange directly by phone and was aware, what it was that they had and were going to put out, there would be no reason to work with him days after dnc hack to say how are we going to get in touch with assange and we have to figure out what he has and if it's the clinton foundation. it seems to me that whatever, cohen's story today is obviously

sensational and explosive and grabbing people's attention. but understand, he told this story to the southern district of new york and mueller, not only did they not inpart it in the stone indictment, what is in the stone indictment is inconsistent with his story. >> dana: take a listen, we have a sound bite, number 65, if you byes could pull that up, i want andy to listen to this and respond. it business the southern district of new york. >> is there any other wrongdoing or illegal act that you are aware of regarding donald trump that we haven't yet discussed today. >> yes. and, again, those are part of the investigation that's currently being looked at by the southern district of new york. >> dana: your thoughts on that, you worked at the southern district of new york. >> we like to call it the sovereign district of new york. >> dana: i know you do. >> one of the things that is interesting, no one has asked cohen whether he has a cooperation agreement now with

the southern district of new york. if you look at the sentencing memorandum that the sdny filed, they were emphatic cohen was not a cooperator as that term is understood in federal practice. did not have a cooperation agreement, they were not recommending cooperator type leniency in his case. flash forward to today, what we're learning is he is evidently working with him, he says on other investigations. he refused to outline what other criminal behavior he says he thinks he knows president trump was involved in because he said that that could implicate the investigations in the southern district of new york that he says he's assisting with. i think it would be interesting to know, is he actually now onboard as a cooperator. as catherine mentioned a couple of minutes ago, one of the things that he was pressed on today was about his

conversations with president trump after the raid on his residence and the hotel room and his business office. it sounds like they may be looking into a potential obstruction investigation but it would be good to know is he actually formally signed up cooperator working with the southern district. >> dana: is there anyway for us to know that? is that under seal? supposed to be a secret? >> if i was in the committee i'd ask them. >> dana: maybe they will. >> do you have a cooperation agreement, are you signed up. >> dana: um-hum, okay, good information andy mccarthy. let's bring the panel back, they have been part of the coverage all day, chris wallace, anchor of fox news sunday, martha maccallum, anchor of "the story." chris, this is a little bit different had to do, number 67 for those in the control room, with jackie spire, the congresswoman from california. this exchange with michael cohen. watch this. >> how many times did mr. trump

ask you to threaten an individual or entity on this behalf? >> quite a few times. >> 50 times? >> more. >> 100 times? >> more. >> 200 times. >> more. >> 500 times. >> probably. >> dana: chris, i want to get your thoughts on that. i think the democrats are trying to solidify the picture in their mind of the president. >> yeah, that was one of my favorite pieces. just as theater. from having dealt with michael cohen myself, over the years, he was the hammer. he was, you know, to the degree, and it's interesting. occasionally you'll see flashes, particularly when he's dealing with republicans of the old michael cohen, the one that, you know, he says he's on the path to redemption from, where he's cheeky and combative and arrogant. that's the michael cohen, the

only michael cohen that lot of us saw. this morning i called him, said that he could be a thug and i thought he was one of the meanest, most humiliating people i've dealt with in a half century of politics. i don't doubt that he threatened a lot of peep. . when i say threatened, i'm sure it was lawsuits, you won't get to talk to the. the candidate, or that kind of thing. not threaten physically. >> dana: i got one of those voice mails in june of 2015 that was so bad, that my assistant at the time refused to let me listen to it and just deleted it. >> i don't have assistants who are so helpful in terms of screening things. quickly, in october of 2015, this is after we had the first debate, in which i asked donald trump about all of the bankruptcies that he had been, his companies had been part of, he was not happy with me. now i'm trying in october of 2015 to get an interview. i called michael cohen up, he could not have been more insulting.

i said some time between now and 2016. he said let me tell you, i could book this guy from now until 2017 and he will never talk to you. i figured, well, cohen isn't going to work so i called core yes lewandowski and had an interview with candidate trump the next week. he could be insulting. >> dana: this tweet from ben shapiro, he wrote this, cohen's testimony falls into three buckets for trump. one, illegality. embarrassing for trump, super hi layerity. not much in bucket one, a fair amount in bucket three, a p.r. thing. >> ben as he often is, is right on with the assessment. you look at the illegal issue, michael cohen saying all of these things that don't lien up. the president was working -- line up. the president was working on this hotel project to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars and be the biggest hotel

property in europe. he said that was always the main goal. he didn't think he was going to win the election, that's why we had to be on the same page. then in the next breath saying he would do anything to win. so none of these things really sort of line up in terms of what michael cohen was going after. in terms of the hi layerity, you have to go back to the -- hilarity, you watch some of what happened here, and the idea this is a question and answer session is preposterous. you see a lot of grandstanding, moments where michael cohen says can i please answer your question. he's told by the member of congress, i'm sorry, no, this is my time to grandstand. raises questions about, really, just what value exists in the back and forth. in terms of the embarrassing part, some of the elements of this one, i read through the statement this morning, reminded me of back during the campaign, mitt romney went through the trump steaks and the trump water and the lists of errors and conman activity and character

issues that he saw in donald trump. michael cohen, we have been on the other ends of the wrath of it at one time or another, used to defend him so vociferously. he laid out a conman race thasht he would never have recognized a couple of years ago. >> dana: talking about the testimony today, but testimony yesterday in closed session and tomorrow in closed session, behind closed doors. well, hey, surprisingly nothing has leaked out of that testimony so far. any thoughts on that? >> well, yes. i mean it's very interesting, yesterday was the senate intelligence committee, tomorrow is the house intelligence dmipt i. particularly on the house side, they have decided various chairman, to divide up the lanes. the whole russia lane, yes we got a little bit into russia here, all of the issues about russia and collusion are really under the purview of the house intelligence committee. you have to assume, he says he doesn't have any proof of any

collusion, he has, quote, suspicions. but you have to assume anything and any great detail, he's saying in private, behind closed doors, under oath, to the house intelligence committee, not to the senate intelligence committee. one other point, and we've been talking, martha was, about congress. today i've been thinking a lot about the mid-term election in november. and barack obama's famous statement about elections have consequences. this hearing wouldn't be held, michael cohen wouldn't be testifies, the questions would be different, the whole way that the democrats have railroaded things through, just by tabling objections from the republicans. this is because the democrats, now, have the gavel. they are the chair. in the majority of this committee. and you know this is what we knew was going to happen if the democrats were to take the house back in november. that is that they were going to be in control, able to call up witnesses, subpoena people, and subpoena material, and make life very difficult for donald trump.

and here we are, just in february, the end of february, of 2019. you can be sure nor a year, year and half you will see more of this from the judiciary committee, intel committee, from house oversight and other committees. elections do have consequences. and the democrats, at least in the house, are in charge. >> dana: and in fact, martha, it is the first time they have been back in the majority since benghazi hearings. which the democrats considered to be an abomination. >> absolutely. one of the things that really drove this whole picture of how much has changed home, was right out of the gate, dana, where we saw a repeat what we saw happen in the kavanaugh hearings when chuck grassley went to open the senate judiciary hearing and immediately, we started hearing yelling from kamala harris, corey booker, shut it down. what was the reason? they said they hadn't received the information from the kavanaugh team in enough time, that it had come in too late to

fully process it. they wanted to delay. you saw that exact same tactic play out today. mark meadows jumped right in and said there's no way that we can continue this hearing today. we didn't get the information soon enough. i wonder how that plays in america. i think that people watch that kind of tit for tat and it's dism dismaying, about the process, when you see that sort of tit for tat gamesmanship that we saw play out at the top of the hearing. it's always that. from now on it always will be. >> dana: hard to think back to a hearing where you got a substantive answer that moved the ball forward. it is oversight and that's what the congress is to do, as our founding fathers set up our system. chris, could you listen to this sound bite from chris christie, former governor of new jersey, then of course friend of donald trump, just finished writing a book and published it, called "let me finish." he said this to say about the republicans on the committee. >> there hasn't been one

republican who has tried to defend the president. on the substance. and i think that's something that should be concerning to the white house. why are no republicans standing up and defending the president on the substance. and that's either a failure of those republicans, on the hill, or failure of the white house to have a unified strategy with them. they knew what was coming with michael cohen. >>. >> dana: i think the republicans would say we're doing our best to do what we can. what do you think of christy's point? >> well, it is an interesting point. i have thought that, yes, a few of the republicans sat there and were able to cut off, point out the flaws, either in current statements, or the long parent history of michael cohen. they haven't refuted his basic allegations against the president. and you say they're doing the best they can. it may that be they don't have any evidence to refuse. to some degree they can't sit there and refute the checks to

the degree that cohen has said things, and it's just basically his word, they don't, all they have is the president having denied that. that's he said-he said. but no, you're exactly right, they haven't done anything to really say, basic allegations about the president, they've done a lot to shake his credibility. in terms of the allegations they haven't defended it. is there anything out there that the white house could have given them to defend against the aelss that michael cohen is making. >> dana: and there might not be, and you don't want to be in the position to say something that is incorrect lilter on. i'll -- incorrectly. i'll give you the last word. >> one of the new members of congress, i don't remember the gentleman's name, but he basically said were you ever asked directly by the president to write this check to stormy daniels. he said no. i mean, his whole argument, it was understood, everything was implicit, we knew what mr. trump wanted us to do. i thought it was an interesting point to lay down.

he said he could not ever, he had no evidence that backed up what the president said please write this check for this purpose. although he has testified that it was absolutely done for the purpose of the election in that crunch moment in october. there's not any evidence to support it. in terms of the russia allegations, he said himself that he didn't see any direct evidence of collusion although he was suspicious of it. i'm not sure there was, that the job was carved out for republicans specifically in that way, in a way that wasn't let out by michael cohen when it came to the issue of the illegal. >> dana: tonight you have former congressman trey gowdy, now fox news contributor, former cham of house oversight. chris wallace and martha maccallum, thank you. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> dana: mike emanuel has been reporting live on capitol hill and he's got a report for us now. >> dana, good afternoon. a lot of reaction pouring in from people who are not part of this committee, watching the

hearing like the rest of us. new york democratic senator kirsten jill i land, candidate for. united states, writing on twitter, a campaign for president of the united states should never be in the business of scheming with foreign adversaries to tamter with our elections, i thought that went without saying. virginia democrat tim cain, vice-presidential nominee for the democrats, said the hush money matters. >> i think they definitely matter. because they weren't just apparently, if i understand what the testimony is, not just things that the president did before he was president, but that he is making payments while he is president. and lying about them, or trying to disclose them. that makes it much more serious. >> congressman david sisolini drawing this conclusion, this is already the most damning testimony against a sitting president jins john w. dpeen exposed richard nixon's corruption. needless to say democrats are

having a field day. >> dana: what are the republicans saying? >> as you've noted, with your analyst, some are concerned about the timing. you have president trump overseas trying to address a major problem. >> i think it's poor form to have it while the president is literally talking with kim jong-un about giving up nuclear weapons program. if we had done this, people in the media business would be outraged for good reason. >> senate intelligence chairman richard burr of north carolina says about cohen's oceans regarding roger stone's call with president trump that cohen did not provide any proof, any notes, times, dates, calendars or phone logs. burr wants to see evidence. cohen appeared to have senate intelligence yesterday and chairman burr did not want to get into any possible discrepancies regarding what was said behind closed doors yesterday and what has been said in front of the cameras today. >> dana: mike, thank you for the reporting, we'll check back.

we'll take a quick break, be right back.

♪ raquen... rakutahn... rakooten... ♪ rakuten oh! is this my money? whoaaah! haha! rakuten ♪ ahhh!

rakuten! not having a good breakfast can make you feel like your day never started. get going with carnation breakfast essentials®. it has protein, plus 21 vitamins and minerals including calcium and vitamin d, to help your family be their best. carnation breakfast essentials®. why didn't you book your y on a travel site?on at hilton.com, i get the price match guarantee. and i can choose from their 14 different hotel brands, so i get the right hotel for every member of my family. like a doubletree for my cousins who love their warm chocolate chip cookies. a homewood suites for my uncle who likes a long stay. a hampton for my sister and her kids. that's a lot of syrup and the waldorf astoria beverly hills for me. but i thought your family vacation was in miami? it is. i hear they're having a great time. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee.

if you find a lower rate, we match it and give you 25% off that stay. i'm a fighter. always have been. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.

>> dana: looking at a live look at the hearing room on capitol hill, house oversight committee hearing room. just a couple of hours ago from 10:00a.m. until about 2:30 it was filled with members of congress, and then members of the media, this has been a big mediafest. highly partisan hearing and we're expecting the members to resume the testimony of michael cohen, the. 's former lawyer, in just a little bit. president's former lawyer. we'll keep you updated. special report anchor bret baier is all the way, half way around the world, hanoi, vietnam, it's very early, very late at night, i don't think you got any sleep. >> bret: not much, we have president show coming up at 6:00 eastern time, 6:00a.m. here. we just got the first reaction

from the white house and statement from the spokesperson, saying michael cohen is a felon, disbarred lawyer, and convicted perjurer who lied to the president and special counsel in a deliberate and premeditated fashion according to the special counsel's office. he offers evidence but his only support is his own testimony which has proven to be worthless. cohened wide array of crimes were marked by a pattern of deception, that par me it aed his life. his instinct to blame others is strong. prosecutors said he wanted to enhance his level of influence and profit personally. this is the same michael cohen who admitted he lied to congress previously, why did they bother to swear him in this time. as predicted, the reaction to all of this would be to question cohen's voracity, credibility, and that's what you see from republicans on the panel as well. i do agree with the previous

guests, that the hush money payments, the checks, the specifics about inflating wealth when it comes to filing with different banks, these are all things that prosecutors, and if you have a bunch of white collar prosecutors going after you, it's not -- they're going to find something. these are all things, possible avenues, that the southern district of new york or the special counsel could be going down. >> dana: listen to a piece of sound we haven't played yet, this is michael cohen talking about those payments and about the first lady, melania trump, how he felt about lying to her. >> he asked me to pay off an adult film star with whom he had an affair, and to lie about it to his wife which i did. and lying to the first lady is one of my biggest regrets because she is kind, good person. and i respect her greatly. and she did not deserve that.

>> dana: any thought on that angle, brett, bringing up the first lady, saying he regrets it. might be the only thing people can agree on, she is a kind, lovely lady. but he thought it was important to bring that up in his testimony. >> and he brought it up again later on when he was questioned by the congressman from florida, martha mentioned him, about whether he had any evidence that these payments were actually not a retainer but a payoff of hush money. he went back to that statement and talked about a conversation he had on a speaker phone in the car with president trump and the first lady about this incident. i do think that it is his word against the president's when it comes, unless there is some hard evidence. he has these checks that are obviously signed. but you would have to see other people in the room and there were. you heard rona dpraf, personal assistant, who was always there

in trump tower mentioned. i bet the committee is going tune that road, the special counsel clearly has. and others, david pecker and others who may have been in some of those meetings. >> dana: what do you think about the democrats, as martha said, their first at-bat when it comes to big oversight hearing as they've taken over as majority in congress. >> well, as i said earlier, i do think on the international stage, with something this big, and this negotiation happening in hanoi, it is a brit of bad form -- a bit of bad form to schedule it now. they delayed this thing three times, i think, with michael cohen. there's nothing to prevent them from delaying to it tuesday of next week when the president is back on u.s. soil. it does take a lot of the attention away from what's happening here, which could directly affect nuclear weapons and geopolitical strategy going forward. >> dana: what do you expect next, i know you're up there early, early in the morning,

we'll hear from john roberts in a bit. when the sun comes up what do you expect? >> bret: begins this first official day of negotiating. you had a dinner last night, this time, and interaction a little bit of interaction that we caught on camera but not much. now, you are going to see the full initiating of this negotiation. and, really, what we're going to hear or try to get behind the scenes is what the definition of success is here for this summit, what does denuclearization look like to president trump and kim jong-un. what does it mean if they didn't get a deal. those are big questions as we get ready for the big day of negotiations. >> dana: tell me about the difference of the atmosphere, you were there in singapore for the first summit and this one. >> it's a little different, singapore had this kind of, the first time atmosphere, singapore had two months to get ready for

the summit. vietnam only had ten days. we have been around, we'll show people around vietnam tonight on the show on special report, the big sites. security is very tight here. but there are people in the streets, really coming out for all of the motorcades that go by, kim jong-un, his hotel was closed down, and the street blocked off. there are all kinds of people and cameras trying to get a glimpse of the elusive leader. and there's excitement on the street. but they're not watching the michael cohen hearing i can tell you that. >> dana: there's sfround lindsay graham, he had a phone call with president trump last night, talking about the two store stories happening at once. >> i think he was upset that he's going to have dueling shows here, that it did bother him that's going to be a split screen between michael cohen and him meeting with kim jong-un. i said that's the world in which

you live. >> dana: what do you think, brett? db yes, i think there is -- >> bret: yes, definitely, hurt feelings about the amount of attention to this does or does not get. i'm sure the hearing will get a big splash tonight and tomorrow in the papers. and tonight in the coverage. but this will get a lot of attention, too. >> dana: indeed. >> bret: if they get across the finish line, that will be something. >> dana: they could make significant news, beclaring the end of hostilities. history doesn't care about cable news cycles. but we do and we appreciate you being here with us, bret baier, thank you. >> bret: you bet. >> dana: martha maccallum, aferk kor the "the story," we brought up the fact that the hush payments were made and michael cohen feels it's important to

bring up melania trump and express how hurt -- he knew it hurt her to lie that it made him embarrassed to lie. >> i found that very interesting. this is a question of federal campaign finance violations. in order to prove that, you have to prove that the reason that the payment was made was in order to help the election. now, one of the arguments that the president's team has made is that he didn't want his wife to know, he wanted to protect his family. michael cohen, i think, helped the president a little bit here on this front by saying that he lied to melania for the president because it was clear to him the president didn't -- wanted to protect her from this story, which is think is interesting. on the flip side of that, the other side, that could be helpful to the president with regard to that, if michael cohen had said we paid off women all the time. this was not for the campaign, wasn't for the presidential action, it's something we did all the time. but he said no, it was just these two.

diametrically opposed legal helpful and unhelpful on that point made by michael cohen. >> dana: stick around, we'll bring in chad pergram, from capitol hill, chad catch us up, are they coming back soon? >> they're about to go to the final vote on the house floor right now, which would pass a bill to expand universal background checks on firearms. and we were told by the committee chairman, elijah cummings, democrat why maryland, they would restart the hearing 30 minutes from the start of this vote. i'm looking offscreen, and we're thinking that this vote is going to start any nanosecond. you'll probably hear bells go off behind me when it starts, that's when you can start to run your clock when the hearing with michael cohen will resume. this piece of legislation is an interesting piece of legislation. hasn't been a major bill on firearms moved through the house and the senate in 25 years. you have to go back to the brady bill in the early 1990s. also the assault weapons ban, part of the crime bill in 1994.

and this is supposed to be a bill that will get bipartisan support. look at moderate republicans, people like pete king, from new york, and also fred upton from michigan, brian mass, republican from florida, for them to be for this piece of legislation. the house of representatives should be passing this bill in the next five minutes. and some time around 4:08, 4:09 eastern time is when they would reconvene the hearing with michael cohen across the street in the rayburn house office building across from the u.s. capitol. >> dana: give me a sense how you think the speaker, nancy pelosi, thinks this hearing is going. she's been concerned about going down the road of impeachment, it's a distraction, takes away from the agenda and might help the president if they were to do that. obviously you don't know if she's been watching. any sense of how she feels they're handling this at the house oversight committee? >> i talked to nancy pelosi about a half hour ago as she was going into the house chamber for the voter is reece, she said she had not, quote, watched one word

of the hearing. she was participating in a series of forums at howard university, just north of the u.s. tap toll. and she -- capitol. she was asked directly about this, had she been briefed. she said no, i'm more concerned the policies of donald trump. i asked stenny hoyer if could have impact on impeachment, he said we have to wait and see what comes of the robert mueller report. democrats are hedging their bets. nancy pelosi isroiding two horses, pressure about the impeachment, the liberals want to go to to the mat. others say we want to keep our powder dry. remember that nancy pelosi dealt with pressure before, when she became the speaker in 2007 there was a lot of pressure after they won the house of representatives in the 2006 mid-term elections to go to the mat and try to impeach george w. bush. that did not happen. she immediately ruled that impeachment was off the table. she has not done that in this

instance. and a lot of us thought that maybe as the speaker went into the house chamber, she had a good reason why she wasn't paying attention to the hearing today. she has to be careful. has been mindful about how the democratic house and the committees are going to handle oversight. she has always said we'll do it with integrity, by the book, and if they go with something like impeachment nancy pelosi makes sure that's a good vote for her members to take. and the majority of her caucus wants to take. democrats won the house not because they elected liberals, they elected moderates in swing districts. people in virginia, california, maine. and that could be a tough vote, donald trump remains popular in those districts. >> dana: in the suburbs. chad, thank you. we're going to keep an eye on the hearing room. the house oversight committee, expect the members to come back a little bit after 4:00. we'll take a quick break and be right back. this is huntsville, alabama. aka, rocket city, usa. this is a very difficult job. failure is not an option.

more than half of employees across the country bring financial stress to work. if you're stressed out financially at home, you're going to be too worried to be able to do a good job. i want to be able to offer all of the benefits that keep them satisfied. it is the people that is really the only asset that you have. put your employees on a path to financial wellness with prudential. bring your challenges.

all of you. how you live, what you love. that's what inspired us to create america's most advanced internet. internet that puts you in charge. that protects what's important. it handles everything, and reaches everywhere. this is beyond wifi, this is xfi. simple. easy. awesome. xfinity, the future of awesome.

>> dana: welcome back to fox news. we are waiting for the hearing to get started. that's the house oversight committee room, one of the largest committees on capitol hill, partisan hearing earlier today from about 10:00 to 2:30, took a break for votes and lunch and calls of nature and things like. that we've been able to talk to

our best analysts. let's bring it back to the show, fox news sunday anchor chris wallace. i asked chad what he thought nancy pelosi was thinking n a way this hearing is letting out, basically, the democrats are just chomping at the bit. they want this hearing, they want to go after president trump. she's more cautious. what do you think that she would think how this is going and where it's leading. >> it was interesting, i take her at her word she said she hadn't watched a minute of the hearing, i believe. that i cannot believe that this hearing, remember this is the first big hearing by the democrats in the new house majority, i can't believe that this hearing would be happening with michael cohen if nancy pelosi didn't want it. you're exactly right. there is a tremendous amount of pressure in the democratic caucus, although, you know, they're not all alexandria ocasio-cortez. but i can't believe there's not

tremendous pressure to have oversight. that's one of the things democrats have been frustrated about, first two years of the trump presidency, the republicans were in charge in the house and they were able to block a lot of oversight of this president. so this is an opportunity, the first opportunity, for the democrats to hear lot of bad things about president trump. which i'm sure they believe. and to give vent to this. there's a big difference between that and having this hearing and letting some of the pressure off the pressure cooker. impeachment. my guess is, these are certainly interesting avenues to pursue and i thought it was interesting some members of the committee said who else should we talk to. they talked about the chief financial officer and one of the other lawyers and members of the family. it's certainly possible you'll see them called up before the house oversight committee. but i have to think there's two things they'll watch for. one is the mueller report and what mueller has found or not found. and also, i think we saw a

bigger spotlight on it today, and i think this may end up playing a bigger role in the potential, and i repeat potential impeachment of donald trump. that is the southern district of new york. they're investigating a lot of things not necessarily that happened since president trump took office, but that happened when he was in business, the hush money payments, we hear they're investigating potential other illegalities by the president. i think that that's going to be very important, too. both the mueller report and what we end up hearing over time from the southern district in new york is going to play a much bigger role than anything michael cohen says in potential impeachment. >> dana: it is interesting, democrats as chad pergram pointed out, one of the ways they won the majority they won in moderate directs and suburban districts. they have to show by the time the legislate election comes around they should be allowed to continue to be the majority, they have to have a record to point to. if this is any indication, if we do a lot of legal stories and

always going after the president, and covering that, it's not going to leave a lot of room for them to show that they can govern. >> i think you have very mindful of that, that's why i don't think this will be the only thing see, as a member of congress said democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. you will see legislation passed on things that affect people's lives, healthcare, education, jobs, the economy. but they're also going to want to look at this. i've talked to a number of the chairs of the various committees, including jerry nadler, chair of the house judiciary committee that would handle any impeachment. they're keenly aware of the mistake republicans made in 1998 when they pursued impeachment against bill clinton and there wasn't bipartisan support. and the distinct impression i have, the only way that they will actually proceed, and i think this is true for nancy pelosi as well, they will actually proceed to impeachment,

i think they worry about a backlash, is if there are facts. again, this is all supposition. if there are facts that are so black and white there can be some bipartisan buy life in, it isn't solely seen as a democratic coup against a duly elected president. they will be very careful. there may be pressure from some of the fire brands in the party but they are aware as you say, a lot of moderates, a lot of democrats elected in purple directs or red districts, and they would be in real jeopardy if you pursue what is seen as a purely partisan exercise to unseat the president. >> dana: take a listen to the sound from jim jordan, ranking chair, strongly coming after michael cohen earlier. >> this might be the first time some one convicted of lying to congress has appeared again so quickly in front of congress. certainly, it's the first time a convicted perjurer has been brought back to be a star with it in a hearing.

and there's a reason this is a first, because no other committee would do it. >> dana: what about that in terms of republicans, how effective to say this is a total waste of time. >> i don't know. and i suspect it's not true. i was thinking as he said that, and somebody pointed out flv been organized crime hearings with people like joe velacci, convicted murderer, they come back and testify, in federal crime investigation, about organized crime i wonder if some of the watergate defendants, who were convicted of crimes came back later and testified. look, they have made the case and it's a perfectly legitimate case this guy has a long history as a liar. that certainly raises legitimate questions about his credibility. but the idea that it's outrageous to have somebody, you know, i was talking about this earlier today, with andrew mccarthy, the former federal prosecutor. and a lot of cases that you

covered, somebody just absolutely reprehensible, who worked for the organized crime group, worked for a politician, and now comes back and they're reprehensible, all kinds of ways the defense tries to question their credibility. the prosecutor says we didn't bring them into this case it was the principle who brought them into the case. the argument against what jim jordan is saying is, hey, he was the lawyer, personal lawyer and fixer for donald trump for a decade. so don't blame us entirely, as democrats, for the fact that he's here testifying. >> dana: i think he blames himself a lot, too, indeed. we saw that. you will see that more. chris wallace, thank you. we're waiting for the michael cohen hearing to continue. first at live update from vietnam where president trump is holding his second summit with kim jong-un, that's next. 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. >> while we wait for michael cohen theory pick -- hearing to

pick back up. president trump is praising relationship with kim jong-un. chief white house correspondent john roberts is reporting live for us in hanoi, vietnam. >> reporter: good morning to you. we're getting close to day break here. what will be happening is confidence-building measures between united states an and noh korea. the president tweeting saying the s. is off to a good start. very good dialogue, resuming tomorrow with the one on one meeting they had last night and again at dinner, the president predicting that the summit will be a success. >> lot of things will be resolved. i hope. it will lead to wonderful situation. our relationship is a very special relationship.

>> reporter: north korea wants normalization in relations with the united states. experts say there's still a tremendous amount of distress to the united states in north korea. any steps towards denuclearization likely won't happen all at once. it will be a step by step. the president again, telling kim jong-un the promise of economic rebirth for north korea if he gets rid of his weapons of mass destruction and isolation and brings north korea into the economy. it's unclear what will come out of summit. they have a signing ceremony that is scheduled for this afternoon. some of the things they talked about are opening liaison offices in the united states and in pyongyang so that north korean and u.s. officials can have a more open dialogue, maybe closing of the nuclear facility to allow u.s. inspectors to get in there and agreement to end

the korean war. this is a top-down affair. >> lots of news to cover. we appreciate you being there for us. "your world with neil cavuto" next. >> neil: you are looking at two sides of the same very weird day. you're looking at the house oversight committee. they're about to resume the michael cohen hearing. on the right of the screen is president of the united states meeting with the north korean leaders. it is 4:00 a.m. vietnam time in hanoi. the president will get ready for a busy day. on the same day his presidency and actions are called into action on a fiery pol