Supreme Court partially reinstates President Trump's travel ban

Trump's travel ban is a reaction to inaction


This is a rush transcript from "The Five," June 26, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Hello. I'm Greg Gutfeld with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Juan Williams, Jesse Watters, and she bought her beach house from Barbie in Malibu, Dana Perino -- "The Five."

The Supreme Court, those of the people on the left there, just OK'd a version of the travel ban. The gist: If you're from one of six countries with no connection to someone here, you can't come. It's a start, I'm OK with it. What I'm not OK with are the knee-jerks who call any part of this ban bigoted.

If you're shrieking that this is somehow hateful, then it's an emotional and not an intellectual response. Because on paper, it's merely a pause that allows a review of processing visa applicants from lawless lands. Although the ACLU calls it a Muslim ban, which is kind of weird considering that many Muslim majority countries that are not on the list. Why conflate high-risk radicals with all Muslims? That bigotry, ACLU, plain and simple.

What's just as bad: Those who criticize this pause without offering a single alternative but hugs and hashtags. It's my only question: Do you have anything better or do you just like to complain? Those are two questions.

It must be great to be in the media and shoot everything down because no one is driving vans into your well-protected buildings. So maybe we should ask why a travel ban now? It's a reaction to inaction, the result of one party being more obsessed with Celsius than ISIS.

And so this decision is just a start. Just one tool in a set that's needed to fight terror. For we must keep thinking about the next bad thing. Because there's always a next bad thing: a dirty bomb, a power grid attack, bioterror -- stuff that can make 9/11 look small. It's no fun to think about which is maybe why only one side thinks about it.

All right. Kimberly, you are the former prosecutor here. Basically the Supreme Court slapped down the lower court, said you guys suck.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Well, they said, you guys went totally AWOL off the law which is what I think they should have done. Now, of course they have to hear the full, you know, caces when they come in October, but nevertheless, this bodes very well for the president's executive order being able to do this, being within his constitutional authority in this preview which we have said, and I said from the beginning about this as did many of the other legal scholars that in fact the courts had overstepped their bounds, they were considering things that were improper in terms of campaign statements, tweets, et cetera and trying to use that and to weave it into the reasoning to say, this is why it to be struck down because they were trying to get into the mindset of a president.

That's not what their job is to do. They shouldn't be legislating from the bench, they shouldn't be an activist, of course, the fourth or the ninth. And I believe the Supreme Court did their job. By actually being just passionate about it, reviewing it strictly based on legal principles and constitutional authority and came up with this, which I think really you look at it in terms of like forecasting what's going to happen in the fall, they're going to uphold this and it is priority.

GUTFELD: So Juan, I think this reconfirms the president has the ability to control our borders, not some judge in Hawaii.

JUAN WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Well, I mean, so I felt like President Obama when he was trying to change immigration law in the Texas courts.

GUTFELD: I can't, I don't know him.

WILLIAMS: Well, OK. But I'm saying, to me, I think this is a big win for President Trump because clearly, especially on the left, we're taking the light and the fact that the courts were stopping. And now you really can't say that although it's not a complete when as you know, it's partial.


WILLIAMS: These people who are relatives or who admitted to school or hired by American companies can still come in the country, but I think the key thing here, the big surprise to me is that they acted as a group, I think it's called a curium or whatever. So, the court as a whole said, this is right. So what Kimberly said, that's their position. I find it surprising because I think there's a huge constitutional issue about religious rights and about discriminating against any group of people based on religious rights.

But they brought into the idea that this is a national security issue and I think that's what President Trump should have been arguing from the beginning, but now the court is saying, hey, OK, so if it's a national security issue, finish you r review, you wanted 90 days, you got it. And I think they don't anticipate ever having to decide this case in the fall.

GUTFELD: Interesting. Jesse -

GUILFOYLE: The time will be up already.

GUTFELD: We keep saying it's a victory for Trump, but what Trump said is it's a victory for national security which is the way we should look at it, right? Like, it's about our country.

JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: It's about national security. It's not about religious discrimination. And just step back, big picture here, I think they called Bill Clinton the comeback kid. I think they have to give Trump this nickname too because this guy always looks like he's down, whether it was after the conventions, whether it was, you know, after the access Hollywood tape, you know, in the Comey memos come out, you know, the first couple travel bans get knocked down.

ObamaCare repeal vote gets pulled. And then he always come back, he's like Muhammed Ali, he rope-a-dopes these people and then he comes back with a big election win or he comes back with a great state of the union addressed of the successful ObamaCare repeal vote. And now the travel ban vote. So, you know, I think this is probably one of the most significant victories of Trump's young presidency and it's going to carry a lot of momentum into the summer. We all know how it got there.

These left wing judge shops, they get into a circuit where you would peel it up to the ninth or the fourth. And then they, you know, rule on a tweet instead of the merit. And it's a pause so they can get the extreme vetting procedures in place and, you know, I think that they were viewed in September and I would expect that the court rules that it stands. Because the president in the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president of the United States broad authority and discretion to regulate our immigration.

WILLIAMS: But it also says you can't discriminate against people based on their nationality.

WATTERS: And they're going to have to argue in front of the Supreme Court that it does not. And this is based on travel and chaos and bad people from a bad place.

WILLIAMS: Well, let's me just say before we let Dana and Greg get in there. The reason I think this is problematic from your distinction is that you have President Trump issuing this order back and I believe January then he revises it in March, right? Tries to change it, still can't get past this course. I don't think it's political. You think that the fourth and the ninth were just not playing politics. I think people have legitimate concerns.

WATTERS: Well, I believe it was political because it was all decided based on partisan ideology of the judges.

GUILFOYLE: Improper facts.


WATTERS: Yes, it was. It was all based on it (INAUDIBLE) and I think if you want to inject --


WILLIAMS: In the fourth circuit.

WATTERS: Yes, absolutely. If you look at the breakdown, it was all party ideology. And if you just want to inject ideology, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, if she does the right thing, they have to recuse herself from hearing this because of all the hyperpartisan thing she said about the president over the last year.

GUTFELD: All right. You know, Dana, this can - I mean, we can call this a big victory, but if you only do this, that's not a good thing. That -- y feeling is that this is not enough. It's a false sense of security if you just stop here and say yey, you got to do more.

DANA PERINO, FOXS NEWS THE FIVE CO-HOST: Well, you know, you said that President Trump said this is a victory for the national security. I also think that it's a victory for institutional integrity. So, the Supreme Court makes the decision and everyone goes, oh, OK. Thank you for the clarity, this is what we needed and I would hope that if they had gone against President Trump that he was said, OK, then back to the drawing board. Because there's very little trust in all of our major institutions anymore but the Supreme Court being Supreme Court being one of them. The other thing that has held - the other thing I thought was interesting is that you have a signal from the newest Supreme Court justice, Neil Gorsuch, and which he is saying -- he basically would have thrown the whole thing out and said, the president has the authority to do it and his executive orders are going to stand.

That actually could be a significant precedent not just for President Trump but for future presidents to say that, OK, well then, I believe that I have that significance. The other thing on Ruth Bader Ginsburg on whether she refuses, so as I understood today and had to be reminded, only Supreme Court justices can recuse themselves.



PERINO: The other thing is so -- I would say that the way this look, I wouldn't make a big deal about Ruth Bader Ginsburg because if she goes their way, I'll be like, well, even Ruth Bader Ginsburg did it. Look at that. And if she doesn't, it doesn't matter because the majority of opinion is going to be for the president. And it also going to be mute because at this point the president can declare victory, he can finished his extreme vetting proposal, get that policy spent and the Supreme Court has an artful dodge here led by Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts to say, we're never going to have to deal with this, so let's give the president a win and then I'm going to split this baby and not worry about it in October.

GUILFOYLE: But based on the law.

PERINO: Right.



GUTFELD: Always spills out for that baby. Everybody is trying to split a baby. Lay off the baby. Wouldn't it great through if all sides competed for solutions? This is what drives me crazy about this whole topic, it's that - it's -- you put forth that idea and then the other side says it's terrible. Where is your idea? And you see these debates, you know, you have nobody from the other side and I mean democrats or even progressives and liberals in general, do not have any real ideas in national security except that they don't like your idea.

WILLIAMS: That's not true. What do you mean? We had a two-year review for the refugees. Two years? That's not a little thing?

GUTFELD: Well, it may be. To me it's a little thing.

WILLIAMS: OK. I just - I'm interested to see what he -

GUTFELD: Nothing personal.

WILLIAMS: -- say they're be more strict but I mean, the fact is the United States and our intelligence agencies are not tactless, I mean, we - they want to stop bad guys from coming in.

GUTFELD: I'm just saying, let's don't forget the throbbing convulsion in the media and among liberals. They took to the street over the travel ban. None of them have an alternative is what I'm saying other than yelling and screaming and, you know, soiling themselves. Anyway -

PERINO: Greg, just real quick. To me really what the headline was of today was that - it seems to me that the high court was more troubled by this kind of display of intervention by the lower court then they were by the president aggressively using his constitutional authority here because it was such an overreach and improper in terms the means by which they decided this, so that should be a real lesson for the ninth and to the fourth and to discourage warm shopping, they can taste it all the way they want to the west left coast, but the law is a law and it's going to prevail and the Supreme Court is in good sight. And I'm glad that they're all there, you know. Bader Ginsburg too because she joined in with them today, no need to single her out at all. Let it ride, you took a win, be classy like the in effect.

GUTFELD: Do you -- there's a rumor that the Justice Kennedy may be retiring. We heard that today.

PERINO: I don't.

GUTFELD: You don't think so? Nah.

WATTERS: Well, if that happens, there - it's going to be riots in the streets because right now the left, all they have is the court. If they don't have the court, trouble.

GUTFELD: What do you wear when you retire from Supreme Court because you're already wearing a robe.

PERINO: A towel.


PERINO: It'd be - it'd be the perfect job for you.

GUTFELD: Yes. You just start wearing suits at home.


PERINO: Get some new clothes.

WATTERS: I have a lot of black. All I have is black.

GUTFELD: All right. Sorry, they're yelling at me. Up next democrats are upset over Russian meddling but this time they're directing their ire at President Obama. Details ahead.


WATTERS: A bombshell report from The Washington Post on Friday says that President Obama knew about Russian meddling in the presidential election as early as last August. Yet, he did nothing to stop it. The Post even quoted a former Obama official who said the administration "choked." President Trump responded on Twitter writing it, President Obama "didn't choke, he colluded or obstructed and it the dems and crooked Hillary no good. Even democrats were saying, Mr. Obama didn't respond aggressively enough to Russia's cyber campaign.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: The American people needed to know and I didn't think it was enough to tell them after the election. But rather given a seriousness of this, I think the administration need to call out Russia earlier and need to act to deter and punish Russia earlier and I think that was a very serious mistake.

SEN. AL FRANKEN, D-MINN.: I think they - they do think Hillary would win. And I think they didn't want to look like they're putting a thumb on the scale and that's why they didn't do more, I wish they had obviously.


WATTERS: Here's a flashback to what President Obama said back in October when he was lecturing then-candidate Trump to stop complaining about the possibility of the election being rigged and choosing not go public about the Russian meddling.


THEN-PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: There is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even - you could even rig America's elections. In part because they're so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved. There's no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time. And so, I would advise for Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes.


WATTERS: So, Juan, I'll start with you. President Obama pretty clear, there's no rigging, no intentional rigging, no one is trying to do anything, nothing to see here but apparently The Washington Post says he knew there is attempt interfering election all along.


WILLIAMS: No. He didn't know and let's - just to be clear about what he said there. I mean, I think it's very clear that he's saying there had been no rigging in the past and he didn't see evidence that there would be rigging this time. And in fact, we've only recently learned about Russian attempts to -

WATTERS: Define rigging.

WILLIAMS: Rigging mean that you actually control the machines and how the count is done.


WILLIAMS: And I - there is no evidence that that was done in the past and I think that's what he is saying.

WATTERS: OK. So we're going buy word game.

WILLIAMS: No we are not. We are just saying it very clear.


WILLIAMS: And the second thing to say here is, it's not just Al Franken and Adam Schiff and -- there are lots of Democrats going way back who think he should have gone on T.V., he should have made a presidential statement to talk about the effects. According to the Washington Post, the intelligence agencies told him in August, Vladimir Putin was not only trying to interfere in the election but interfere to cause chaos, distrust in the election and to help Donald Trump. Why the president didn't go on T.V. and make this clear and making people, I don't know?

Jen Psaki, his former communications director said -- something was very interesting to me, she said, we didn't take into account the propaganda value. In other words, when you put all these phony stories, when you say things that aren't true, and then all of a sudden everybody is thinking, oh, is this true? And then the fake stories go all the way. Well, people are like, yes, that impacted the election.

WATTERS: What exactly were the fake stories. I think the Russians hacked the DNC and exposed the fact that the DNC was ridding the election against (INAUDIBLE) wasn't that what was being exposed?

WILLIAMS: No. And this is an example of it right here, Jesse.


WILLIAMS: Because you guys will take something that was leaked by the Russians -


WILLIAMS: Yes, you guys and take that and then make it into a big deal and apparently President Obama thought it is ridiculous.

WATTERS: If Wasserman Schultz didn't rig the election against Bernie, why did she resign? Kimberly, what do you -


WILLIAMS: Oh, please.

GUILFOYLE: Listen, yes. A couple things need to be addressed here. So that clipped then was from President Obama in October and by your own statement and admission there, he was aware of at least the sincere best efforts, hopes, and intentions of the Russians to interfere in a major U.S. election for the president of the United States. But, nevertheless, when he took that podium and many other times when he took the podium subsequent top that, he never mentioned anything about it.

If it was such important and significant that we now hear in fact that it was, he should have said and done something about it and I think that's where the democrats are having a hard time with him as well. The argument is, well, listen, this looks like this was a done deal for Hillary Clinton. So why, you know, throw a flag on the play, make a big problem, and then perhaps upset the basket that was tilting in Hillary Clinton's favor. That's what one argument is.

WILLIAMS: Well, I think the counterargument from, you know, Obama's perspective and I disagree what it was, Trump is saying the election is going to be rigged, Kimberly, and we don't want to play into that and it could be because he thought -

GUILFOYLE: But he's saying it's for the other side.

WATTERS: Dana, do you buy that argument from I guess, President Obama that, you know, we didn't want to say anything publicly because that could fit into the Trump rigging narrative and it would look like we were putting our thumb on the scales.

PERINO: Well, I guess -- I asked the democrat friends today if they thought that President Obama or someone speaking on his behalf needs to come forward in the next day or so to try to clarify a little bit. And they said, yes, he should but he won't. But they're in lock down mode, partly because they're just not saying anything. There's investigations, there's also a lot to classify thing. Also, you know, President Obama has a book coming out in the fall of November 18.

GUTFELD: Oh, you have to read (INAUDIBLE)

PERINO: Well, I hope not, I mean, but you can imagine that that's going to be a chapter that everyone is going to want to see. But I don't think they can actually wait that long. But I do think, imagine if -- put yourself in their shoes, so the president is saying, it's -- the current president, was saying the election is being rigged against me and in favor against Hillary Clinton. If President Obama had come out and said, actually no, Donald Trump, you're trying to be -- President Putin is trying to put you in a -- what would - what would Trump supporters have done then? We would have gone ballistic.


PERINO: I think that one of the things -

GUILFOYLE: Dana, you didn't see we.

PERINO: We -- I did say we.


PERINO: So I didn't. I think that perhaps he didn't say anything after because President Obama was trying to be presidential and wanted people to accept the election results. He says that in the first press conference when the democrats are all mad, he's like, look, fair and square, the guy won, let's get behind him, let's support the president. So, I think that that is probably going to his mind but I don't want to speak on his behalf and somebody thought he should get out and speak for him.

WATTERS: They should. And behind the scenes allegedly, he made a phone call to (INAUDIBLE) or some in China and say, hey, cut it out.

PERINO: And the secret message?

WATTERS: Could Putin listen?

GUTFELD: I haven't seen it.

GUILFOYLE: What did he tell you?

GUTFELD: Not much. I haven't seen this much Russian meddling since the '80 Olympics. Anyway, here's the reason why Obama didn't say anything. OK? He didn't want to look like a fool for dismissing the Russians when he mocked Romney over it. This is the same thing he did with ISIS and the J.V. thing, he had - he - Obama is really good in the small things. He's appears presidential, sophisticated, eloquent but he's wrong on the big things. He understand our adversaries, he didn't understand Russia at the time and he was embarrassed by it and he should be embarrassed about what he did Mitt Romney -


GUILFOYLE: That's 0 for 2.

GUTFELD: Yes, yes. So he's opened -

GUILFOYLE: 0 for 2.

GUTFELD: And then with ISIS, he did the same thing. He may be a president that -

GUILFOYLE: 0 for 3.

GUTFELD: Yes. He may be a president that is - will be remembered for leading the varmints overtake the yard.

PERINO: And the democrats are the ones that are mostly mad at him now.


PERINO: That's what I was saying that he need -


PERINO: I think that you should try to -

GUTFELD: He could have change the election.

PERINO: That he's not able - he can't maybe - well, you know, he's in Valley right now.

GUILFOYLE: Comey too.

PERINO: So maybe he can't come -


WILLIAMS: Somebody wrote today that, you know, his opponents asked and he anguishes and I thought for my democratic point of view, I agree. Why was he anguishing -- why didn't get out there and say, these guys are putting their fingers on the scale -



WILLIAMS: Yes. I know - I know - you are right, Dana. I agree.


WILLIAMS: But let me just say (INAUDIBLE) Greg.


WILLIAMS: Said guess what, guess who's still won't acknowledge -


WILLIAMS: Guess who's still won't acknowledge that Russia interfered in the campaign -


GUILFOYLE: Everybody would scream like they - like the democrats did about Comey if he made that statement because they all thought Hillary -


GUTFELD: Wait, wait, wait. Can I - can I - can I respond to this? He did.


GUTFELD: He did in a tweet this weekend that you missed, Juan.


GUTFELD: No. Because the media - Juan, the media spin this weekend was very clear, led on every network, Trump admits Russia meddling. That was their lead rather than the Obama knew about meddling and hid it. So it was there.

WILLIAMS: No. He said, Obama choked, right? He said it let Obama choked then he didn't want to put his finger on the scale or whatever.

GUILFOYLE: Obama knew about it, why didn't he do anything about it?

WILLIAMS: In that - in that way, he acknowledged finally that there was some meddling.


WILLIAMS: But he never --

WATTERS: That's what he just had.

WILLIAMS: No, no. What I'm saying -

PERINO: President Trump also said that in January when he was asked about it. So don't we just stick to January?


WILLIAMS: I want Trump to come out and say yes, guess what, Russia help me get elected.


GUILFOYLE: Why would he make that statement and try to delegitimize his own presidency without any specific -

WILLIAMS: Oh, the fact - the fact -

GUILFOYLE: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Admitting that there was meddling or interference is not saying that there was an outcome specific achieved. Why would he do that and try to undermine his own presidency?

WILLIAMS: Seventeen intelligence agencies said -

GUILFOYLE: We won a lot of things.

WILLIAMS: -- they wanted Trump to win basically.

WATTERS: All right. Thank you, Juan. Anyway, coming up, big news about the GOP plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare. That's straight ahead.


PERINO: All right. The Trump administration is in the midst of a full- court press to get the senate to repeal and replace ObamaCare, but democrats are universal in their opposition to senate's bill and so are some republicans.


SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS.: These cuts are blood money. People will die.

SEN. RON JOHNSON, R-WIS.: What I find so disappointing is these bills aren't going to fix the problem. They're not addressing the root cause. They're doing the same old Washington thing, throwing more money at the problem and of course we have all been blamed with rhetoric.


PERINO: Today, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office shook things out when it released its analysis of the current senate bill which found come it will cut premiums by about 30 percent for single individuals by 2020 compared to ObamaCare. But also would cause 22 million more people to be without health insurance by 2026. Reacting to the CBO scores senator, Susan Collins of Maine became the sixth republicans who announced her opposition to the bill. Over the weekend, President Trump said he's confident he will eventually get the votes he needs.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I don't think they are that far off. I don't think they are that far off, you know, the famous last words, right. But I think we're going to get there. I can't promise, I think we're going to get there.

Health care is a very, very tough thing to get, but I think we're going to get it. We don't have too much of a choice because the alternative is the dead carcass of ObamaCare.


PERINO: That's some good language, Greg.

GUTFELD: Yes. Who are these 22 million people? By the way, we will now be compared to Stalin killing 22 million people so I'm getting --

PERINO: You know who this 22 million are?


PERINO: They are people that are either going to choose not to do it because they're no longer mandated.

GUTFELD: Exactly. The people losing coverage are those who had coverage by force and the people that are going to walk away are people that might be young, might be healthy. They are people that finally can do what they want to do. You don't have to leave! You don't have to leave! We are arguing -- no one is dying because of this. They are finally having a choice that they deserve.

And once you have choice, guess what? To borrow a phrase from Juan, you have competition. You have different products. You might get catastrophic health insurance at some point and then you deal with the smaller things, but the point is the people leaving the exchanges are leaving because they can leave. And if you don't want to leave, you don't have to leave. That's the point of this. And by the way, the 22 million, totaling exaggerated. We know he CBO exaggerates. The problem may be closer to five than 22.

PERINO: And also they are doing a Medicaid expand -- the Medicaid thing is a little bit tricky to explain but they are telling states that didn't choose the ObamaCare way, that there is a way for you to opt in if you want to expand it. And Kimberly, I think that Mitch McConnell who is so steady and he has figured out a way to get a wiggle room that they will actually pass this, maybe not by 4th of July but by August 1st.

GUILFOYLE: I think you're absolutely right and that's what I'm hearing too. And plus, they try to legitimately work and listen to people's request, some of their concerns, to try to get them, you know, cooperation on this whole thing. What's going to make you happy? What would you like? What is really troubling you here? OK, we address this, we address that, we expand Medicaid. OK, is that going to work for you?

Bottom line is, why wouldn't we want choice? These are the same people that are always marching for a choice and now that they have a choice, oh, you're bad, you gave us a choice. It really makes no sense and it's so hypocritical and it's completely inconsistent with what their supposed viewpoints are of wanting choice and wanting independence and not being forced, mandated, penalized, or punished into purchasing something. So they have the power of choice with their dollars to do something else with this.

PERINO: Juan, are the Democrats counting on these five to six Republicans not changing their minds so that they don't see a bill that passes the Senate in (INAUDIBLE)?

WILLIAMS: I don't know specifically these five. I think a lot of kind of posturing you've seen from people who are even more concerned. They want this bill to be tougher.

GUTFELD: Right. Good point.

WILLIAMS: And so what you're really talking about are people who are more in the middle, people like selling more capital in West Virginia, you know, Ron Johnson in Wisconsin was saying, hey, you know, people would be hurt. They are not usually considered far right.


GUTFELD: Does that mean the Democrats should like the bill

WATTERS: -- more money on it.

WILLIAMS: Yes, we should know --

GUTFELD: If conservatives don't like it and that means the Democrats should like the bill.

WILLIAMS: No, that's not true. But this brings me to the bigger point --

GUILFOYLE: Nothing is odd that should be.

WILLIAMS: -- which is you have the American Medical Association, the doctors, you have the hospitals, you have the Catholic Health Association, you have AARP, cancer security action (ph) --

WATTERS: They endorsed ObamaCare and ObamaCare was destroyed.

WILLIAMS: They're all saying this a bad one and that's what really concerns me.

WATTERS: And they said ObamaCare was a good bill.

WILLIAMS: Hang on.

WATTERS: And look what happened to it.

WILLIAMS: What happened to it is --


WILLIAMS: The Republican sabotaged it.

WATTERS: Oh, come on, Juan.

WILLIAMS: But I just want to -- but let me just finish this point. What you have here is a situation where Republicans are putting politics above what's best for the country. Nobody think this is a good bill. Look at the polls, even Republican voters think this is bad deal.

GUTFELD: That poll is what the media tells them.

WILLIAMS: Oh boy, come on, people can't thing for themselves?


PERINO: But the other point is there are -- this is third-party support to like third-party ads that will be run against people who don't want to run for but won't vote for it, Republicans.


PERINO: So there is actually -- so you have all of the list of it, the AMA and all those folks. But on the other side, Jesse, you do have pressure coming from people that support President Obama that is saying Republicans, you better be with us. And so they're threatening to punish them if they don't vote.

WATTERS: It's going to be a really tight vote and it's going to come down to the last second, but I think while the Democrats have been crying about Russia for the last couple of weeks, Mitch McConnell has slowly and methodically and quietly pieced together an ObamaCare repeal bill in the Senate that has a very, very good chance of passing with 50 votes because you need Pence as a tiebreaker so you can afford to lose one or two, it's going to lower premiums 30 percent.


WATTERS: Based off of what the CBO said.

WILLIAMS: That's not true. No!

WATTERS: Lower than ObamaCare. It reduces the deficit --

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. Everybody said --


WATTERS: -- up a $1 trillion, Juan, and it reduces taxes and it keeps pre- existing --

WILLIAMS: I gave you that one, Jesse.

WATTERS: -- conditions and nondiscrimination --

WILLIAMS: The rich will get a big ticket out of this.

WATTERS: And you can stay on your parent's health care plan. And it saves Medicaid from bankruptcy.


WATTERS: They put a cap on it.

WILLIAMS: So they will throw the old people out of the nursing homes.

WATTERS: Are you saying that again?


WILLIAMS: No, I don't want to say that because I don't want to aggravate Greg, but this is truth.



GUILFOYLE: It's awful.

GUTFELD: You know what CBO is? It's what happens when I check my armpits in hot weather.

WILLIAMS: Even though it's a Bush appointed --

GUILFOYLE: Juan, raise your (INAUDIBLE).

PERINO: All right, President Trump is pushing back against a resist movement. We'll tell you what the commander-in-chief is saying about his opponent after this very quick break.


GUILFOYLE: Democrats are determined to resist President Trump and the GOP at every turn.


SENATE MINORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y.,: The Democrats, we are doing everything we can to fight this bill.

HOUSE MINORITY LEADER NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: We're in a fight for our lives and the lives of many people in our country because we must defeat what is going on in the Senate.

WARREN: They better be ready for a fight because now that this shameful bill is out in the open, that's exactly what they're going to get.


GUILFOYLE: It's not a good strategy according to the president, it's clearly not working.


TRUMP: I've never heard of anything like this resist. Their theme should be, "Let's get together. Envelop. Let's get together." But the thing is resist. It's obstruction. It's a terrible theme in terms of getting elected and more importantly I think it's a terrible thing for the people of this country, resist, obstruction, that's not what they want.


GUILFOYLE: Hollywood, of course doing what it can to help fuel the resistance movement. Actor and director Rob Reiner best known as Meathead from "All In The Family" is encouraging his fellow resisters on twitter to fight an all out war to save democracy. Dana, what do you make of this?

PERINO: Well, I think that President Trump has said some really good messaging there. He said why wouldn't you want these good things that are to come? I can understand the health bill that's going to be may be a little bit more of a difficulty because that's been partisan for so long.

But once they get health care passed and I do think it will get passed, they got tax reform and there's going to do a lot of Democrats who live in states that have big elections coming up in 2018, but also have companies who are telling them like we absolutely need this in order to be competitive. And I think that they should want to work with him on that, and I also believe that President Trump is willing to do comprehensive immigration reform. He's going to be able to show that he has done border enforcement, one, because the wall, well, may go andget the wall, but let's just say that he's been able to see number of people crossing over has decreased.

Case law will probably pass. Sanctuary cities will probably pass. It's got a win in the Supreme Court. So he will be able to tell his people on the right, look at all these things I've done to enforce border security. Now, why don't we go about doing the bill to do immigration reform?

I think Juan is agreeing with me, which is very interesting. So I think that the Democrats should throw out the playbook. The resisting is not going to work. It would lead them to more failure and they should start with a ban on Hollywood's help.

GUILFOYLE: Absolutely. So that's like the curse. The kiss of death but will Hollywood stay away or we're going to lose, we're going to fail.

PERINO: We're like 0 for 8.

GUILFOYLE: Juan, we saw some nonverbal communication (INAUDIBLE) on your part conferring with Dana Perino.

WILLIAMS: Yes, I think it would be great. Look, I'm all about solutions that make America better. That was my objection, you know, to what is going on right now. I just don't see the people are putting America and Americans first on this health care bill and Republicans just going to claim a win even though it's a bad bill.

GUILFOYLE: I don't think so.

WILLIAMS: But when it comes to this resistance business, the hypocrisy drives me nuts. Mitch McConnell has, you know, put a justice on the Supreme Court by resisting and obstructing President Obama who had a legitimate right to appoint his Supreme Court justice and (INAUDIBLE) says, oh great, Mitch McConnell is a genius. He really did a great job. Now that Democrats say, hey, we're going to resist and obstruct, they say you are bad guys.

PERINO: Slightly different in an election year.

GUILFOYLE: Apples and oranges.

WATTERS: So, there's the party of (INAUDIBLE) and I think the American people voted for the party of (INAUDIBLE) to say let's slam the brakes on President Obama's far left, out of control, radical agenda.

WILLIAMS: Excuse me, you think that Obama's --

WATTERS: Well, I'm saying in the House and the Senate --


WATTERS: -- elections when the Democrats lost both of those chambers to say this radical ge (ph) is going too fast, let's slow this down. And I think that's different because, you know, you had a tea party movement, which was primarily made up of, you know, middle-class workers that were concerned about policies and they went out and they peacefully assembled and they worked the phones and they, you know, achieved success at the ballot box.

Now, the resistance, they're burning things, hanging nasty signs, they are out of the mainstream. The people are just going to regret that which is also one last thing.

GUILFOYLE: Anti (INAUDIBLE), stabbing horses.

WATTERS: Donald Trump won independents. He won blue-collar voters. He won these states in the Rust Belt. There's a lot of reason for Democrats and the House and Senate to, you know, compromise on some of these things where there is common ground because I think their constituents like that.

GUILFOYLE: The Democrats don't realize the bride left the church, you know, they were like, what happened? What happened? The working men and women are like we're with this guy, Donald Trump.

GUTFELD: If you took all that sound on tape that we played at the beginning and you took out Trump or Republican Party and you replaced with ISI, it would make perfect sense. However, none of those people have ever said that about the number one threat to our existence.

And what exactly is an all out war from Rob Reiner? Is he going to load up his Prius with water balloons and write a really scathing piece on the "Huffington Post" and then order a pie and get all the crust in his beard? Here's the problem with the left that the right has never had. You can't force people to care about something. You can only persuade it.

The problem with the heart of the left is that you must bend to my belief or you are damned because you are evil not wrong so you have to agree with me or you are damned. Whereas you have this -- I'll call him a Trump character. President Trump is a character who came on the scene with one goal in mind, to persuade. He shows up to persuade.

He has rallies. He gets people involved. He's a salesman. He persuades. The left says you are going to die. Everybody is going -- these people are all murders. They're trying to force you to believe something that is deeply flawed because they cannot persuade.

GUILFOYLE: We'll end it right there. Ahead, Bernie Sanders is lawyering up and we're going to tell you why he's implicated in a federal investigation. We'll be right back. Kindly stay with us.


WILLIAMS: Welcome back, the White House has just put out a statement indicating that the United States has identified preparations taking place in Syria for another chemical weapons attack, similar to the attack that took place April 4th, 2017. The Trump white house also says that the U.S. now aware of this, will have a heavy price put on President Assad and his military if another chemical attack is to occur. Jesse.

WATTERS: Well, he's drawing a red line and we know he enforces redlines because we saw with those tomahawk missiles did the last time they perpetrated this kind of heinous abuse of their own civilians. Also, great intelligence by the intelligence agencies to be able to catch this and then be able to put a warning out so that he doesn't do this. This is a humanitarian statement and warning coming from the White House.

Also from the same day, the travel ban was partially upheld too, one of those countries at note, Syria. So, I think it underscores the complexity of the region, you know, we're there to fight ISIS but you got this thug in power that's trying to gas his own people and you know, he's Russia's little pet and very complex. I think we're the right thing by issuing this warning.

WILLIAMS: Well so, Dana, what Jesse just said about Russia is very much important here. What's Russia's worth?

PERINO: Well I think that this is a public -- basically goading Russia and saying, you're on notice. We are telling the world that we know about this, so you can't do that funny business you did a while ago where you said, oh, we had no idea, which was totally fake. So now the president is saying, we know, so now you know, even if you would pretend that you didn't, and if it happens, you are responsible.

I mean, this is getting a little bit dicey because you have the Congress say, what are we doing here? Is this a proxy war that we're fighting? But the other -- let's not forget, Assad also killed innocent people and children in a lot of different ways and so despite is worth having and I think that we're on the right side of it but we have to make a commitment to find it all the way through.

GUILFOYLE: She's absolutely right, but we're on the right side of it. We got on the right side very late in the game unfortunately. I just say that because now we're put in his position that is very difficult but also its, you know, really going to strain and further our relations with Russia and de-confliction and that is a big problem.

So now, I think it's very important what Dana said, is that the president is putting them on note -- Russia on notice, the world on notice, Syria on notice because one of the other things that Putin said was this was a total hoax, this was not something that Assad did, he did not in fact gas his own people, right.

PERINO: They had blamed on the rebels.

GUILFOYLE: Absolutely. So that's why it's important we're calling it out ahead of time to take away that line of defense and reasoning that tries to absolve Russia from any kind of being complicit with Assad.

WILLIAMS: So Greg, the thing that strikes me from the White House statement is they say very clearly, a heavy price will be paid by Assad if there's another chemical attack. What does that heavy price mean to you?

GUTFELD: I would say it would be -- the great thing about what he did at the beginning with the first retaliation was that it was small so you have plenty of room to choose different options. You can do something twice as damaging or you can go, yes, you can do something more. But what this is about is basically sending a message that we are here to eliminate ISIS, don't mess that up.

I know what you guys want to do, you want to chop up all this stuff and you want to get it -- just wait a minute. Let us eliminate this and with then we'll figure this stuff out. But right now, just hold your horses and stop being such jerks or we'll kill you.

WILLIAMS: Or we'll kill you, you hear that? You hear that Assad? "One More Thing" up next.


GUTFELD: Time for "One More Thing" let's go here. "Greg's Slow News Day."

GUILFOYLE: No more time left.

GUTFELD: All right, let's go to Tennessee -- Tennessee Wildlife Resources, Arlington County. What you're seeing here is a slow-motion fight between deer.

WILLIAMS: Looks like they're boxing.

GUTFELD: Yes, they're boxing. This went on for hours.

PERINO: They look like kangaroos.

GUTFELD: Those are actual deer. Turns out they were exes. They had met at a bar and one is deeply ashamed of the last relationship.



GUTFELD: Well, and that's been your slow news day. Juan?

GUILFOYLE: Is that Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake in a dance off?

WILLIAMS: OK. So, June wedding bells ringing all over America and this weekend I attended a beautiful wedding in Monterey, California. (INAUDIBLE) were wed. The bride is a daughter of my college roommate, Fritz Beck (ph). Wish the young couple to have best night. Get this, 41 years ago, that's Fritz (ph) and his wife Diana with Madeline. Fritz married his lovely bride, Diane, and guess now -- I want you to guess who was the best man at their wedding?



WILLIAMS: Yes, that's right!



WILLIAMS: There is the picture. There it is.

WATTERS: Look at that hair! You had great hair, Juan.

WILLIMANS: I had hair (INAUDIBLE). Unbelievable.

WATTERS: Looking good.


PERINO: All right, you can find out more about this on one my facebook page. Just quickly, a "Washington Post" column today by Jackson Diehl about the coming humanitarian crisis, it will be worse than 1945. This is one that we know about. The United States has pledged it -- money to deal with the famine in four major countries. Other countries like Saudi Arabia have not fulfilled their commitment and President Trump is in a perfect position to try to pressure them to do so.


GUILFOYLE: A very emotional moment, a grieving father united with his child's heart. Bill Connor lost his 20 year old daughter Abby in an accident in January and Abby was a registered organ donor. Her generosity saved the lives of four men. One of them, Loumonth Jack, Jr., who was in desperate need of a new heart -- and this past Father's Day, her dad Bill, cycled 1,400 miles from Wisconsin to Louisiana to raise awareness about organ donation and to meet with the man who now has Abby's life saving organ. It was a powerful reunion as you can see right here. One organ donor can save as many as eight lives.

GUTFELD: Great story. All right, set your DVRs. Never miss an episode of "The Five." You'll be sorry. "Hannity" is up next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.