This is a rush transcript from "The Fox News Specialists," July 24, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
KATHERINE TIMPF, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kat Timpf along with Eric Bolling and Eboni K. Williams. And this is "The Fox News Specialists." Jared Kushner fighting back against accusations of Russian collusion, the son-in-law and senior adviser to President Trump met for two hours with the senate intel committee today behind closed doors in its ongoing Russia probe. After returning to the White House, Kushner dumped cold water on accusations of collusion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JARED KUSHNER, SENIOR ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Let me be very clear. I did not collude with Russia, nor do I know of anyone else in the campaign who did so. I had no improper contacts. I have not relied on Russian funds for my businesses. And I've been fully transparent in providing all requested information.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: Kushner also went after claims that Trump couldn't have won the election without Russian meddling.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KUSHNER: Donald Trump had a better message and ran a smarter campaign, and that is why he won. Suggesting otherwise ridicules those who voted for him. It is an honor to work with President Trump and his administration as we take on the challenges that he was elected to face.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: Thoughts on that?
ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Russia is still the news of the day even though there was massive breaking news yesterday. And we're kind of guilty of this, too. We put Jared Kushner on the top. Yesterday, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer admitted that the Democrats lost not because of Russia or collusion, because they have no economic message. Now that is a huge bombshell. Of course, none of the major news media -- mainstream media are going to pick it up. We're leading with Jared Kushner. Again, I've been harping on this for a long time. There are absolutely no shreds of evidence of any sort of collusion, yet every single day Russia, Russia, Russia, instead of the things that America really care about. I'm ready to get over it.
EBONI K. WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Yeah. I thought it was great, Kat, that we've heard Jared Kushner really distinguish the Russia issue from Trump winning because even those that have legitimate question around Russia involvement, and certainly we know that investigation is technically still ongoing. That different from the fact that, clearly, President Trump did had a message that resonated. He had voters who supported him as such, perhaps, totally independent of Russia's involvement.
TIMPF: Well, that's how I see it personally. So, yeah, I appreciate that as well. All right. Let's meet today's specialists. He is a former U.S. congressman from Utah, the former chairman of the U.S. house committee from 2015 to 2017, plus he's a Fox News contributor, and he specializes in wildlife photography, Jason Chaffetz is here. And she's a political analyst for Rasmussen Reports, was a speechwriter for former senate majority leader Bill Frist, and tomorrow is her birthday, but she specializes in BBC detective show, Amy Holmes is here.
AMY HOLMES, RASMUSSEN REPORTS POLITICAL ANALYST: Luther, you've got to watch it.
TIMPF: So detective shows. Do you try to get involved in real-life investigations like the Russia thing and apply your BBC knowledge?
HOLMES: Yes. You know, my Sherlock Holmes, I do have that last name. I put on my detective cap. But, you know I have to agree with you, that the news about Chuck Schumer, I thought was really extraordinary that they're finally coming to terms with the results of the November 2016 presidential election. But, congress and your party, you should be getting nervous because it means the Democrats are actually getting a clue. They might get a message, and they might get something that resonates.
JASON CHAFFETS, FORMER UTAH CONGRESSMAN: I'm not too worried about it.
CHAFFETZ: Hasn't happen yet. If Republicans will just put up a victory, some sort of victory on the board, then I think all will be fine because it is a more conservative country, and I do think there's a reason why Donald Trump won and he's demonstrating that right now.
WILLIAMS: To take that sports analogy a little bit further, congressman, right now it looks like a very low-scoring game across the board. And frankly, the sad thing about it is I think the American people deserve more, right, in terms of health care, in terms of economic message, in terms of tax reform that many people are waiting on. And I agree with you, I think it's the GOP. I don't know how much they're going to get done with health care and we'll get to that later on the show. But maybe tax reform or infrastructure or something to give people relief, I think, that would be great for them. As for the Dems, a little bit late to the party.
TIMPF: Yeah, absolutely, I would agree.
CHAFFETZ: That's why I'm disappointed in what the senate is doing. To call up Jared Kushner, to take a whole day, focus on that. It did not rise to the level of calling in Jared Kushner, one of the closest advisors to the president, the son-in-law of the president of the United States -- A, I give Trump a lot of credit for actually going -- showing up, turning over emails. They didn't BleachBit their emails. They turned over their emails. When thy have to talked to them, they showed up. When it was Ben Rhodes and the Obama White House, they claimed executive privilege. Said, hey, you can't talk to him about the Iran deals. So, I hope as the dust settles, a lot of credit goes to.
BOLLING: Well, congressman, I want to ask you. You were chair of the house intel committee, why did you step down? Here's an opportunity for a guy -- if you believe what you're saying.
BOLLING: . to push back on some of this nonsense that's been going on in D.C.
CHAFFETZ: Well, I was the chair of the oversight committee. One of my great frustrations, I mean, there're a lot of family reasons why I step down. It wasn't because I was tired of winning, I can tell you that. But I was very frustrated, particularly, with Attorney General Sessions for not turning over documents that we had subpoenaed, that we had issued documents to. I think President Trump is right. I think there is a lot of frustration with Attorney General Sessions. I was frustrated with him -- the Department of Justice.
BOLLING: So was he. He will tell you that.
CHAFFETZ: That's right.
BOLLING: I literally spoke to him on Friday. He was frustrated. Can I just put this out here? I'll do this in a very, very careful way. There are rumors, there are whispers around the halls of congress right now that Sessions may have possibly, possibly had tendered some sort of resignation or discussion surrounding resignation.
TIMPF: Well, I don't think that would surprise anybody at this point. But in terms of Kushner, I'm glad that they talked to him. I'm glad after all these meetings -- I think they should talk to all the people in this meeting. I'm not surprised with the oh-nothing happened, and I didn't recall, and that's what you've got to say, right, Eboni?
WILLIAMS: Yeah, that's exactly.
WILLIAMS: The script that we hand our clients.
TIMPF: Yeah, exactly. BOLLING: For what? For what? He's a family member of a guy who's running for president.
HOLMES: Jared Kushner worked on the campaign. I read his statement to the senat today, and I thought it was excellent. And my reaction was what took you so long? I mean, you laid it out. It's very persuasive that there was no collusion. He took this meeting. He said there was a nothing burger. He actually texted his secretary saying, give me a call to get me out of this. It's really a waste of my time. And I was thinking, after all the drip, drip, why didn't we have this story from the get-go? It wouldn't really help the administration, I think, if Jared Kushner had put out his side of the story a lot earlier.
CHAFFETZ: Because when the senate was in control in Republican hands they didn't do a thing to help us with the Clinton Foundation. They didn't do a thing to help us with the investigation that we were trying to do in terms of the Hillary Clinton investigation. And the Department of Justice wouldn't hand over the documents. I chalk that up to being, oh, it's the Obama administration. I thought when the president came in, we have Attorney General Sessions, and suddenly there'd be this flow of documents.
HOLMES: But congressman, weren't you gratified to finally hear Jared Kushner's side of the story? That in fact, he spoke to lots of foreign officials. That he'd lots.
CHAFFETZ: But it never rose to that point of being a serious enough allegation with any substance whatsoever to justify them bringing him in.
BOLLING: So why do they do it? That he has some sort anti-Trump agenda?
CHAFFETZ: I think the Democrats are loud at beating their drum. And I think they succumbed to that pressure.
CHAFFETZ: I know. That's why I'm frustrated. They have a finite amount of time.
BOLLING: Republicans in the senate bringing these.
CHAFFETZ: I don't know. I don't think anybody knows. I mean, look at what happened today, nothing. Nothing.
WILLIAMS: I will -- when I talk about the low point on the board, this is what I'm talking about. The Democrats are going to be resistant and obstructionist to this president for sure. But the GOP has got to get out of its own way on this.
WILLIAMS: . because I think if you're just a lay person looking, you don't have part of the agenda, it's very confusing.
TIMPF: As Eric alluded to, Attorney General Jeff Sessions probably is not having the best day in the office today after President Trump tweeted this earlier, quote, so why aren't the committees and investigators and, of course, our beleaguered A.G. looking into crooked Hillary -- there it is, crooker Hillary's crimes & Russia relations? The tweet coming after the president very public criticism of Sessions during a New York Times interview last week. Adding some insult to injury, Axios is reporting today that President Trump has been pondering Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, for attorney general.
BOLLING: Can I take two seconds to expand why this matters so much to Donald Trump.
TIMPF: Yes, Eric.
BOLLING: Donald Trump hands the A.G. job to Jeff Sessions -- Senator Jeff Sessions, who as a senator is allowed to meet with Kislyak -- foreign minister Kislyak, and others, and ambassadors. He's allowed to. That's what they do. Anyway, he hands the senator the A.G. job, the A.G. immediately -- or couple of days later, recused himself from the Russian investigation allowing the deputy attorney general to make the decisions on Russia. And this guy, Rosenstein, isn't necessarily a Trump appointee. He came in prior to Trump. Rosenstein, what's the first thing he does, special counsel, Robert Mueller will be the special counsel investigating Russia. I mean, if Sessions had said to Donald Trump before he was appointed, hey, if you do appoint me, I just want you to know, I'm going to recuse myself, there's no way he would be the A.G.
WILLIAMS: Was it foreseeable, though, Eric, if you're Sessions? Do you think it's foreseeable scenario where you would feel the need to recuse at some point? I don't know that was foreseeable for Jeff Sessions.
HOLMES: I don't know, Eboni, because Jeff Sessions did testified that he's had started considering recusal from day one. I think -- I feel like with the tweets and the public statements by the president, that I'm watching like the worst longest breakup ever, and that the boyfriend can't get the hint. Obviously, President Trump is unhappy with Mr. Sessions at best, and that it's probably not serving the American people to have this sour relationship.
BOLLING: . steps aside, Mueller is now general counsel appointed by Rosenstein, and this guy is dragging the whole family through the mud. They got Jared Kushner. They got Don, Jr. This is all because.
TIMPF: Well, no, they're not. It's because of that meeting, Eric. They're not dragging the whole family through the mud at random. Come on.
BOLLING: Other than, hey, let's go witch hunt him and see if we can dig something up, there's literally no reason for the special counsel.
CHAFFETZ: You have duly issued subpoenas from the United States congress that the Department of Justice has not turned over documents, and yet they have time to go push Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr., and all that through the mud. That does not make any sense. There are literally 300 people at the department of state that are wrapped up in question marks about their security clearances. There's an open investigation at the state department about these security clearances. It's never been put to bed. Why are they working on that?
WILLIAMS: I just don't buy it, congressman, specifically, that Jared Kushner being dragged through the mud. He actually hasn't been at all. I think he's been very transparent. I think he's been quite voluntary in his capacity. I found his statement well-prepared but kind of boring. Because I just don't think there is a lot there. I don't think a lot of people, Eric, even those that have a real sentiment that something array is going on, they don't really think that it's Kushner that's the issue. So I don't think.
BOLLING: When you know -- your history and law, that when you target -- these are targets now. These are subjects and these are targets, right?
WILLIAMS: Subject, target, person of interest, those all mean different things.
BOLLING: I know. But they're going further than person of interest.
HOLMES: Eric, do you point, I think the American people -- the issue I'm more concerned about that, that I'd like to see our department of justice being more aggressive about investigating is all the unmasking, that we have the deep state national security people who are illegally leaking information. First you have the unmasking. Then somehow it gets into the New York Times. I think that is a far graver threat to American national security than any of this Russia investigation.
CHAFFETZ: No, I think you're absolutely right. This puts people's lives in danger.
HOLMES: It does.
CHAFFETZ: I mean, when this classified information gets out, there are people working overseas for the United States of America whose lives are in danger. And yet, where is Time Magazine? Who do they put on the cover? Donald Trump, Jr., making him looked like some sort of criminal. That's so fundamentally wrong.
HOLMES: And meanwhile, the New York Times just expose the name of an undercover CIA operative that works on Iran issues. Put his name out there in the newspaper. That's putting a target on his back.
BOLLING: Allow me to ask, Eboni and congressman, why would Jeff Sessions recuse himself? Give me one good reason why he recused himself.
WILLIAMS: I'll let you start.
CHAFFETZ: I think it was an absolute fundamental and total mistake. I mean, unless he knows something about himself that nobody else knows. But he shouldn't have done it.
WILLIAMS: Ding, ding, ding. I believe there must be something that Jeff Sessions knows, that perhaps even President Trump doesn't know, that would go that far because this is a man who spent his whole life, Eric, trying to be the attorney general.
BOLLING: Just because you recuse yourself, doesn't mean you're off the microscope, right?
WILLIAMS: True story, right. You're not off the radar. But, certainly, you can step away from it.
BOLLING: You can cut a deal, though, right?
WILLIAMS: I hear where you're going.
WILLIAMS: You might not be wrong.
BOLLING: If I recuse, I've got immunity.
WILLIAMS: There's a protection. You buy yourself protection.
HOLMES: Remember, Loretta Lynch said she stepped aside, but she did not, actually, formally, recuse herself from the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
TIMPF: Right, exactly. Thank you.
HOLMES: You're welcome.
TIMPF: All right. When we come back, President Trump admonishing Republicans this afternoon over health care, will he help get their act together ahead of this week senate vote?
BOLLING: President Trump refusing to give up on getting a health care bill through congress, the president delivering a sharp message to senate Republicans this afternoon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: So far, senate Republicans has not done their job in ending the Obamacare nightmare. Any senator who votes against starting debate is telling America that you are fine with the Obamacare nightmare, which is what it is. Every member of the senate, I say this, the American people have waited long enough. There's been enough talk and no action. Now is the time for action. We are here to solve problems for the people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: Amid the intense pressure from the White House, senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, announced a short time ago that the senate will consider health care legislation tomorrow. Now we'll bring it around, Congressman Chaffetz, I'm not even sure at this point which legislation they're going to vote on, do you?
WILLIAMS: Not just you, Eric.
CHAFFETZ: Well, the United States senate is supposed to be the most deliberative body on the face of the planet. The first question that comes to the senate is should they debate it. It's a yes or no question. It's not about a specific bill. But once that passes and there's not a single Republican that should vote against it, I don't care where you're on health care, the American people deserve a vote, and a yes vote, so that they can actually have that debate. What amendments get brought up, Mitch McConnell has not shown his hand on that. I don't think he wants to give anybody an excuse for getting off -- for voting no. I think that's why he's holding that close to his vest. I think it's a game that he's playing. But the first vote is just whether or not to proceed and have the debate. And President Trump is absolutely right.
BOLLING: I'll bring it around -- to be clear, Mitch McConnell does not want to proceed to a vote, even to debate it, if he doesn't have a final yes on something, right?
CHAFFETZ: I think they have to put up a vote. Even if it fails, the American people don't understand in the heartland is when they don't even vote on things. So the only vote, the only question tomorrow is should we debated this and should we have this discussion, it's as simple as that.
BOLLING: All right, Eboni.
WILLIAMS: OK. So the president doesn't like redlines when it comes to national security. But I think, Eric, what we heard from President Trump this afternoon, a very clear bright line in the sand around how he's going to view and paint aggressively any Republican senator that doesn't vote for this tiny, little, incremental thing that the congressman is describing, because it's really, to me, as tiny as you can be in terms of effectiveness. Is it going to be open for discussion? I think it's a little bit of a vanity vote. I think it's a bit political. But when it comes to the president making a very clear line around any vote in opposition to this is a vote, basically, for Obamacare, that's what he's saying.
BOLLING: OK. Kat, I'm going to take it one step further -- let's talk a little bit about the political risk of getting closure, going to a vote, which means you debate. But then, if you vote on something, does a lost put up too many negatives, too many losses, put a big L in your policy scoreboard, so to speak?
TIMPF: Yeah. Well, I think that they've been taking L after L after L on this one. It's hard to even keep track of all the L's that's been pretty, pretty bad. And yeah -- and to your point, I agree they should debate it, but when we have people that have problems with it and they've problems with two opposite reasons, either the freedom and liberty people that this is too much, and then the moderates who say this isn't enough. How do you ever really reconcile that?
CHAFFETZ: You vote. You have the debate and you vote.
WILLIAMS: So you can then say what, congressman? See, we got it to debate? I mean, what's the big prize there?
CHAFFETZ: Look, the senators meet about three times a week, and they have lunch, and they have a discussion. That isn't good enough. It's a whole different game.
TIMPF: I agree with that.
CHAFFETZ: You have to put your name and put it up on the board and say I'm the one that kept Obamacare in place.
BOLLING: Here's the other option, they can go ahead debate, and then they can vote on the clean repeal, which we have -- Paul Ryan, if I'm not mistaken, Paul Ryan was in favor of a clean repeal bill.
HOLMES: Never going to happen, Eric Bolling. They are not going to vote on clean repeal. You've talked about those moderates and other Republicans who says, look, if they couldn't get their act together in seven years, do we think if we give them one more after we repeal Obamacare?
BOLLING: They voted on -- 18 months ago, the house.
WILLIAMS: When it meant nothing, Eric.
BOLLING: But the house and senate passed it. Barack Obama vetoed it. When they have the same house and senate right now, why wouldn't they vote for it?
HOLMES: Because, Eric, it's the same thing, which is now it's the real deal. Now they'll actually have to live with the consequences. In Rasmussen Reports, we're finding that, actually, the popularity of Obamacare is going up. That 49 percent of likely voters, actually, have a favorable view of Obamacare. I mean, the high watermark for repeal was in November, was only 40 percent. Here's the big number you should think about, 32 states that accepted Medicaid expansion and a number of them were Republican states, like including Nevada for example. Those senators in those red states that accepted Medicaid expansion are very nervous that repeal and reform will hurt their constituents.
BOLLING: I'll give you another one, 38 percent of the country will have one counties, will have one or no insurers in 2018. Do you think you're still going to get a 42 percent approval rating?
HOLMES: No, 49 percent that we have right now is like -- I agree with you, but if Republicans then pass something that sends premiums even higher that have even worse outcomes than we're seeing right now, then they owe that mess.
WILLIAMS: What Amy is describing, by the way, is no complement to Obamacare. It's simply showing how afraid people are of going from bad to worse, congressman.
CHAFFETZ: Look, when you're playing with live ammunition, as they're doing now, it's time for them to put their name next to that box and vote. And the simple question is do you want to continue with Obamacare or do you want to make it somewhat better? Make them vote.
HOLMES: I would like to see them do this in a more incremental way.
BOLLING: That's the repeal. That's what I'm saying.
HOLMES: Repeal is when 180 and then we start over, Eric. We know that. If they couldn't get it together for seven years, do you expect they will and just one more?
BOLLING: No, no rush on reform. You replace it down the road. You repeal now.
WILLIAMS: I don't think that's going to play well.
TIMPF: I agree that everyone should repeal it, but I feel like when we have all these different objections on the opposite ends of the spectrum, what do you do about that?
WILLIAMS: It becomes very scary when you don't know what it's being replaced with.
BOLLING: All right. Coming up, at least 10 people are now dead after a horrifying immigrant smuggling attempt in Texas, but the state lieutenant governor is saying sanctuary city policies are to blame. That's next.
WILLIAMS: Ten people are now dead following an immigrant smuggling operation gone horribly wrong. Dozens of undocumented immigrants were found crammed into a scorching 18-wheeler park at the San Antonio Walmart on Saturday night. They were found suffering from extreme dehydration, heat stroke, with nearly 20 in dire medical conditions. The driver's name, James Bradley, Jr., is now charged with illegally transporting undocumented immigrants resulting in death. Bradley claims he was unaware of human cargo. Texas' lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick, is putting the blame on sanctuary cities. Posting on his Facebook page, quote, sanctuary cities entice people to believe that they can come to America and Texas and live outside the law. Sanctuary cities also enable human smugglers and cartels. Eric, I'll start with you on this when you have been a vocal proponent of one of what I think is a two-pronged solution. Obviously, we all can agree around securing the border, but improving legal immigration so that things like this don't happen and people don't die.
BOLLING: And this isn't a very conservative opinion -- conservative circles that hit me back hard. I think -- we did 980,000 legal immigrants last year, and I believe about the same the year before, double it or triple it. I don't know it's going to solve this problem. I think -- when I heard the lieutenant governor of Texas say it was because of sanctuary cities, I was scratching my head and wondering if that was just -- you know, let's apply conservative opinion to a tragedy. And the more I think about it, well, yeah, because they were probably headed to a place where if caught they weren't going to get in any sort of trouble or deported. I think closing the loophole on sanctuary cities, building the wall, and maybe increasing legal immigration, is really the solution of vastly reducing this type of tragedy.
WILLIAMS: Certainly. And Amy, you know, for those in this country who say that sanctuary cities offer a safe haven, and not too closely correlate this tragedy to the sanctuary cities, but, certainly, I think there's an argument to be made that we don't want to send a message that coming here by any means, and they you'll be offered protection when sometimes, you know, this is what that desperation can look like.
HOLMES: Right. I agree with you completely, Eboni. I mean, I would say, first of all, the responsibility lies with the truck driver. That he says he doesn't know his cargo. I just don't buy that. And to think of those people suffering in the back of that...
WILLIAMS: Including four children, by the way.
HOLMES: Yes. I mean, it's just, you know, almost unimaginable, that all he had to do was open the doors. I mean, this is just unbelievable. And I hope that he, you know, faces the full force of the law.
But in terms of the broader issue of people crossing the border illegally, it's a multipronged approach. We need to get rid of sanctuary cities. Sanctuary cities also have the effect of attracting criminal elements, because they know that they can go there and that they won't -- that the local police won't be turning them over to ICE to deport them. That's what Kate's Law was trying to address.
And then, of course, you have employers who are employing people under the table. That's another problem. We need to crack down on that.
WILLIAMS: Let me pick just that point. So to that point, Congress, a lot of people talk about immigration reform. We know it was the signature issue of the Trump administration.
But we've had President George W. Bush. We've had Barack Obama. We've had lots of presidents, lots of different parties try to tackle this, but not really.
CHAFFETZ: No, no.
WILLIAMS: Why hasn't there not been any real effort? Because my suspicion is that a lot of people benefit from a broken immigration system.
CHAFFETZ: No, I think there was a lack of political will on both the Democrats and the Republican side to just enforce the law, but I actually agree a lot with Eric. Until you fix illegal immigration, you don't, ultimately, I think, solve this problem.
But I talked to Brandon Judge, who's the -- who's the head of the Border Patrol union. Their -- their morale has never been higher. But he also talked to the acting ICE director -- I heard him on Neil Cavuto's show. He's had almost 200 people lose their lives trying to get across the desert. And if you talk about the percentage of women who are sexually assaulted as they're moved north, it is -- it is so cruel.
And yet, you have these liberal Democrats who think they're doing all these people such a great favor. But the human trafficking is just devastating.
HOLMES: It's disgusting. And I recall seeing a sign some years ago in Arizona on federal land saying, you know, "Warning: Do not occupy this federal land," to U.S. citizens. Because there was so much illegal and violent activity happening on our side of the border being committed by people in our country illegally. And it was Americans who were told to not be there.
TIMPF: I think that there really is no reason. I agree with Eric on this. There's no reason for legal immigration to be as difficult as it is. There's no reason why the number of green cards, et cetera, that are allowed are so low right now. There's no reason for that, and it's always better if we know who these people are and if we give them the opportunity to participate fully in society: have jobs, pay taxes, which is what they come here wanting to do, largely, on the large part.
This is obviously a very sad story. I completely agree with you that he doesn't not know what's in his truck.
HOLMES: I don't buy that.
TIMPF: That's one of the most ridiculous things that I've ever heard in my entire life. And he deserves a lot of blame for this, absolutely.
Sanctuary cities, I just you know -- for me, it's just the constitutional issue of not -- the federal government forcing the local police to do its bidding for them, which is not constitutional. But I think it has to center around legal immigration being made easier.
BOLLING: I'm going to hold your feet to the fire, Miss Eboni K. Williams.
WILLIAMS: Go for it.
BOLLING: You talked about, over the last few years, how many decades we've had this issue of a broken immigration system. We had a Bush. Then we had a Clinton. Then we had a Bush. Then we had an Obama. And frankly, none of them were very hard on immigration, period. It wasn't -- and we had two Republican presidents in there who worked hard on immigration. They were more -- maybe softer on immigration.
But now we have a Trump in there, and look what's happened. Immigration at the southern border, depending on who you hear, down 53 to 70 percent.
WILLIAMS: Eric, I told you I think President Trump is doing so well rhetorically on immigration that we could just leave it there.
WILLIAMS: All right. Up next, Democrats unveiling their "Better Deal" economic agenda today, trying to win back some of their voters. Is this just more of the same failed product in a new package? Stay with us.
BOLLING: Welcome back to "The Fox News Specialists." Our specialists today are today are Jason Chaffetz and Amy Holmes. And we will continue the conversation right now.
Democrats may finally realize that their policy sells as well as expired deli meat or old milk. This week, they're unveiling their "A Better Deal." That's what they call it, "A Better Deal" economic agenda to try and win over American workers. And if you heard Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer over the weekend, it sure sounded like Democrats were learning from all their failures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y., MINORITY LEADER: Week after month, month after month, we're going to roll out specific pieces here that are quite different than the Democratic Party you heard in the past. We were too cautious. We were too namby-pamby. This is sharp, bold.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: I didn't hear Russia in that. Anyway, how about that? Democrats are finally going to abandon the big-government-loving, anti-free agenda that they've embraced ad nauseum for decades. Right? Well, here's what they said during their official "A Better Deal" kickoff today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, D-MASS.: Giant corporations crush competition. They shut out small rivals, and they kill young start-ups.
REP. BEN RAY LUJAN, D-N.M.: We must close the tax loopholes so big corporations pay their fair share, and we must stop big corporations from monopolizing and stifling competition.
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES, D-N.Y.: We will raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour and make sure that every single American can have a living wage.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: What? That's the better deal? Are you kidding me? It was a prank, right? Democrats are using the exact same language they've been pushing, the exact same failed policies that you've been pedaling longer than any of us care to remember. And this is your plan to gain the support of voters? We can't wait for midterms and 2020.
Kat, can you help me decipher this? Chuck Schumer comes out with one thing, saying this is A Better Deal. And then all these Democrats get out there and just peddle the same stuff.
TIMPF: Yes, it's the exact same stuff. And you could say better deal? Do they mean better than themselves or do they mean better than Republicans? They mean A Better Deal, like better than President Trump? Because if that's the case, then they'd be running on the exact same thing that they keep losing trying to run on, just trying to compare themselves to President Trump.
But no. This is the same stuff as always. This isn't new. And it's not even catchy, too, which is also important. If that's in a hat, that says, "A Better Deal," I'm not going to wear that.
BOLLING: Making America A Better Deal again.
Eboni, buried inside this better deal...
WILLIAMS: OK, I'm waiting for it.
BOLLING: ... single-payer health care.
WILLIAMS: OK. I've got to shake my head, Eric. You know I've been saying until the Dems get an economic message that resonates with the American people, they will lose, lose, lose, lose, lose. No matter how much the GOP gets in its own way.
Here's the issue. Until the -- camera. Dems, OK, you want to be successful, this is what you have to do. Stop demonizing economic success. Everybody in America wants to do well. Some people do better than others. That's called capitalism. What you need to do is come up with an economic policy that permits opportunity for all in this country, but you cannot win 2018 or 2020 by demonizing success, capitalism or otherwise.
CHAFFETZ: Kat's exactly right. Can you imagine people walking around with "A Better Deal" on their shirt?
Look, there's a crisis of leadership. As long as they're putting up Nancy Pelosi to be the next speaker of the House and Chuck Schumer to continue to run -- to run the United States Senate, they will continue to fail.
When I was a kid growing up, they had a little sign, "better deal." And my dad used to buy the worst meat, and it was this stale, old.
TIMPF: That's what "better deal" means.
CHAFFETZ: Yes. It was these pork chops that me and my brother Alex never wanted to eat. And that's exactly what it reminds me of. And I don't ever want to go back there again.
BOLLING: Amy Holmes, some of these things sounded a lot like Bernie Sanders' policies.
HOLMES: I was going to say, a better deal? Is it lukewarm? Is it moist? I mean, these are just, like, really meaningless adjectives. Make America good again. That's not really...
TIMPF: It's better.
HOLMES: It's better than it was. It also ignores the fact that Democrats had President Obama for eight years. They had the majority, and they didn't, apparently, deliver on this better deal. And the better deal is this rhetoric that we've been hearing from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. And it's actually fairly radical.
I mean, Eboni, what you're talking about is the Bill Clinton DLC Democrat model that was very successful. And in fact, when President Obama was campaigning, at least the first time around in 2008, he campaigned as a centrist. What these Democrats are talking about is a much more leftist radical agenda.
WILLIAMS: Socialism. Quite frankly.
HOLMES: Well, economy redistribution, and they're constantly attacking, of course, income inequality by saying it's the rich people who are the problem.
WILLIAMS: That's a detrimental phrase. Income inequality, get out of here. It is opportunity inequality.
HOLMES: And you know what I'm also -- you know what I'm also not hearing, Eboni, is educational opportunity.
WILLIAMS: That's what I'm saying. Exactly right.
BOLLING: So I'll throw it out here. We only have about a minute or so. Anyone can take this. But Chuck Schumer said the Democrats lost in 2016. They lost to a guy with a 40 percent approval rating not because of Russia or collusion but because they didn't have an economic message.
BOLLING: You don't know -- you wouldn't know this if you watch mainstream media.
TIMPF: Right, absolutely. And they still kind of -- "A Better Deal." Again, I'm never going to vote for or support anybody that doesn't support liberty. And it's just even more anti-liberty than normal.
And I think that, Eboni, you're right. People want to do well. This is not a country where we're supposed to be demonizing success. That's not what we do here. Someone should let them know.
HOLMES: And I've just got to say, I love that right now -- right now, Kid Rock is out-polling Debbie Stabenow.
TIMPF: Kid Rock is 100 percent going to win. I'm from Michigan. Nobody likes Debbie Stabenow. Nobody does. I'm calling it. He's going to win.
BOLLING: You're from Michigan, right?
BOLLING: Kid Rock, will you call us tomorrow on the show?
TIMPF: He's going to win. A fellow Detroiter.
BOLLING: All right. Straight ahead, viewer uproar over a much-hyped race between Michael Phelps and a Great White Shark proves to be anything but. Stay tuned.
TIMPF: Many viewers of last night's Michael Phelps versus shark, great gold versus Great White, are outraged -- outraged at the Discovery Channel. That's because the network wildly hyped the finale to its annual Shark Week like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: It's man against beast. Can the greatest Olympian of all time outswim the king of the oceans?
MICHAEL PHELPS, OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST: I'm always somebody who believes that, if you put your mind to absolutely anything, you can achieve anything.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michael spent his life trying to become the most efficient swimmer, and he's now face-to-face with the most efficient swimmer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: Wow. I mean, who would want to miss that? In reality, after 57 minutes of absurd, mind-numbing buildup, viewers got this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Clearly, we can't put Michael in one lane and a white shark on the far lane. Yes, we're going to have to do a simulation. I'm going to use the speed data that we obtained from all of our testing in order to have him race against a white shark.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Great White Shark takes the gold.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TIMPF: Can't believe that network of fabricated mermaid documentaries would do this.
TIMPF: The guy's right, though. The first thing you think is, "Wait a minute. How are you going to put a shark in a pool and, like, tell him to go? Then, seeing as he does speak English, he'll know that means he can start swimming." I mean, if you really think about it...
BOLLING: I lost 50 bucks. Unbelievable.
HOLMES: I think the real suspense was, was he going to have the -- you know, would he have the courage to actually dive in a swimming pool with a Great White Shark and then, would the Great White Shark eat him? I think that's what everyone was waiting for.
TIMPF: I don't think that's a courage thing. I think that's an idiot thing. You know? I know statistically, they don't eat you like that. But that's not enough for me. If they eat anyone at all, then I don't want to go near them.
HOLMES: Actually, I learned this from Shark Week from Discovery. That Great Whites, they don't eat you. They take an exploratory bite, but that kills you. So that's the real danger.
WILLIAMS: Yes. I just feel like this is fake news, Kat. I'm disappointed, you know? This is a nothing burger, a nothing sandwich. I was really excited about it. I'm a big Michael Phelps fan.
And this even had a British accent. You don't get any more authentic than that.
BOLLING: I was told, as Kat maybe alluded to, that they were going to use meat to drag the shark in one direction. Michael Phelps decided they were going to use weed to do it for him. He was going to swim really fast.
HOLMES: Eric Bolling! He is a family man. He is a father now. You can't make those jokes.
CHAFFETZ: That was really good. I can't believe you said that. But I, you know -- I want my money back. Come on.
TIMPF: I guess. But I mean, it worked. People watched it. They thought it was going to be a shark.
HOLMES: Because they thought they were going to see a real shark.
BOLLING: The dis is the hour and a half lead up. So if they'd just done it in, like, 30 minutes or maybe do 30 minutes of play time. But everyone kind of knew this was going to....
HOLMES: I thought they were going to put them, like, in separate tanks, like, with glass between them maybe.
WILLIAMS: There you go.
HOLMES: And then, like, let them go.
CHAFFETZ: Why do you think we tuned in? Because they were going to put Michael Phelps in the same tank.
TIMPF: I didn't tune in. I just saw that and I was like...
CHAFFETZ: At SeaWorld they do it all the time. Right? They get in with the killer sharks? You know, come on.
TIMPF: The whales, not the sharks.
HOLMES: Although killer whales are dangerous too. I learned a lot at Shark Week. They're very dangerous, too.
The real dangerous ones are hammerheads. You don't want to get anywhere near a hammerhead.
TIMPF: Everything's dangerous, everybody. Never go in the water.
BOLLING: Monica was -- Monica was wondering if we jumped the shark.
TIMPF: Yes, I don't know. I mean, Shark Week is supposed to be how sharks are friendly and all that. But again, if there's some times...
HOLMES: You believe sharks are friendly?
TIMPF: People say that they're not really dangerous. But if they bite you, even if, like, there's a chance, not really worth it for me. You know? I'll just not do that.
All right. We're going to say goodbye here to our "FOX News Specialists" today, Jason Chaffetz and Amy Holmes. We loved having you guys. That's because up next, we're debuting the show's newest segment, called "Wait, what?" Don't go away.
WILLIAMS: All right. We're debuting a brand-new segment today called "Wait, What?" So it's where Eric, Kat and I share something that's caught our eye or that we are passionate about. And I'm going to kick things off. Because July 24, National Tequila Day. Who knew that?
WILLIAMS: Today. It's National Tequila Day.
TIMPF: Yes, we should have had shots.
WILLIAMS: I tried, but I got pushback from upstairs.
So instead, I'm going to share with you guys and our audience watching, Eboni K's signature margarita. So this is my tequila cocktail, my favorite way to have one. Two ounces of Reposodo tequila. You can do whatever kind. I put an ounce of ginger liquor, three wedges of a fresh-squeezed lime and then a splash of sparkling water. I prefer a salted rim. And you have a nice low-calorie summer cocktail that features a beautiful tequila. It's really good, you guys.
TIMPF: I know. That looks good. I like it.
BOLLING: Sugar rim, right?
WILLIAMS: No, I do salt.
TIMPF: I like salt.
WILLIAMS: You know, got to keep it slim and trim. You know? Don't be trying to sabotage, Bolling.
BOLLING: I just can't believe we didn't bring shots.
WILLIAMS: No, next time. Next time.
Eric, what caught your eye?
BOLLING: So yesterday, I had the opportunity to go on ABC to sell the book a little bit. Sat down with George Stephanopoulos this week. A bunch of journalists and Roland Martin happened to be there, too. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: The Sessions thing is on his mind. When I spoke to him yesterday, he is concerned that, hey, he appointed Jeff Sessions. He shook his hand and said, "You're the attorney general."
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS: Then how do you explain them saying -- I want to move on to Roland. How do you explain Sarah Sanders coming out and saying the president has confidence in Jeff Sessions? From talking to you, from talking to Maggie Haberman, he does not have confidence in Jeff Sessions.
BOLLING: I didn't say he didn't have confidence. He's frustrated that, had he known that Jeff was going to recuse himself within, you know, days of being appointed over a handshake on a receiving line at a book event, that he probably wouldn't be the attorney general.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOLLING: I had a really nice conversation.
WILLIAMS: You looked great in a tie.
BOLLING: It was four not-so-loving Trumpers and me, and then Stephanopoulos. But it was a good time. Thank you very much.
WILLIAMS: Eric, you did your thing. It was good.
TIMPF: Great stuff. Yes, I was like, "Eric Bolling, ABC?" It's great. I agree with the tie. The pink was...
WILLIAMS: That was a power -- pink power tie. Not here, but you know, Sunday. Sunday's best, Eric.
All right. Kat.
TIMPF: Well, mine is a little bit sad. My favorite mayor died. Can we get a picture? Stubbs. The mayor kitty, Stubbs. This is an amazing inspiration to us all. He apparently jumped into a fryer on accident once. He's had a dog -- that's not how he died. He's had a dog. And he lived for 20 years. A 20-year-old cat.
WILLIAMS: Are those your toes, by the way? Are those your toes.
TIMPF: No. Not those toes. Here's the thing. Here's the thing. Their owners say that they're putting up another kitten that they also own for a new mayor. Which I think they should. I think that this town should have a cat mayor for always, and maybe we all should have a cat mayor.
WILLIAMS: They deserve that.
BOLLING: Twenty years, that's a long time for a cat, right?
TIMPF: Yes, a really long time. This cat is amazing. So I'm just trying to give him credit where credit is due.
WILLIAMS: God bless you, Kat.
BOLLING: Rest in peace.
TIMPF: RIP Stubbs.
WILLIAMS: That's all we've got time for today. Thank you all for watching. Make sure you follow us on social media, @SpecialistsFNC on both Twitter and Facebook.
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.