Tom Fitton: Mueller has conflicts that have been unaddressed

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," January 26, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: Hey. Welcome to "Hannity."

And breaking right now, President Trump is now firing back at The New York Times, calling their reporting that he ordered the firing of the special counsel Robert Mueller as fake news.

Now, this is the biggest non-story ever being hyped by the liberal media that absolutely we all know hates President Trump, and the reason the brain-dead partisan press is breathlessly spreading this fake news in their liberal echo chamber is because they desperately want to create a distraction. As I told you last night, they do not want you the American people to know about the biggest story in their lifetimes that involve real evidence of wrongdoings and crimes that they have missed.

It's been a huge week of revelations about corruptions at the highest levels of the FBI and the DOJ, and tonight, we have even more new text messages we will share with you from the Trump bashing FBI lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and all of this will prove that we've been on the right course.

Now, also, Fox News is learning that the classified memo -- the one we've been talking about, release the memo -- detailing major FISA abuses against the Trump campaign that will be released likely midweek next week. And also, tonight, a stunning report that Hillary Clinton actually protected a senior adviser on her 2008 presidential campaign that was accused of sexually harassing a young staffer.

But, first, a lot to get to. We start with tonight's Friday breaking news opening monologue. Glad you're with us.


HANNITY: All right. All you members of the Trump-hating media, we know you're watching.

Well, let's start with a little news flash for you. President Trump did not -- let me repeat -- did not fire the special counsel Robert Mueller. So, all of you rigid, radical, left-wing ideologues, you need to take a collective deep breath or Xanax or a drink whatever works better. Now, you can take it and you can breathe in through the nose and out through the mouth and see if you can stop with your hysteria, you're breathless reporting, this rampant speculation.

And I want you to listen closely, President Trump, he did not fire the special counsel Robert Mueller. In fact, the president and his legal team have been more than cooperative, they have voluntarily handed over 20,000 pages to the special counsel. In total, Robert Mueller has collected 1.4 million pages of documents from the campaign.

And then there's this, according to The New York Times and other liberal media outlets, President Trump demanded Robert Mueller be fired. But Fox News tonight is reporting the president did not order Mueller to be removed. Instead, there was just a conversation back in June about the possibility given Mueller's massive conflicts of interest.

This is why last night, I did not and will never in the future trust The New York Times because they have gotten it wrong time after time after time, and it's why President Trump is ripping the so-called paper of record, let's take a look.


REPORTER: Mr. President, did you seek to fire Robert Mueller?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Fake news, folks. Fake news. Typical New York Times fake stories.


HANNITY: See facts truth. We've been telling you for a long time it doesn't matter to the liberal mainstream media and it's why last night when The New York Times posted their story about ten minutes until show time for this show, the media goes into a frenzy, they're foaming at the mouth.
They completely lost it.

It's funny on the one hand but sad because journalism is dead. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president of the United States tried to fire the independent counsel Robert Mueller III. Does that rise to the level of an impeachable offense?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's always been a question of whether or not Donald Trump is simply ignorant or whether he's corrupt. I think the more information, we get you sort of lean toward corrupt.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Love all things, Donald Trump through his first year in office has done everything possible to undermine, obstruct, demean and halt this legitimate investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It adds to the mounting evidence that there is a serious obstruction case here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know how this movie ends, but there was a lot of bloodshed in "The Godfather" and this is going to be a rough year.


HANNITY: It is so pathetically predictable from the news media. You know what? They never waste an opportunity to smear this president, peddled fake news. They don't care any longer about the truth. That's sad.

Now, their singular goal is to damage, destroy President Trump. You can see an hour in, hour out, day in, day out, minute by minute. It's why the media has been getting caught in the wrong, countless times, so-called major news stories.

Let's give you a few examples just from last year. Remember fake news CNN, the sh-hole network -- well, they falsely reported that Donald Trump Jr. received an email by WikiLeaks in advance of their release of the DNC emails and other documents. Well, it turned out that fake news CNN -- well, they got the date of the email totally wrong, it came one day after WikiLeaks made the DNC documents public.

Remember ABC's Brian Ross -- spectacularly wrong when he reported the former national security adviser, General Michael Flynn, that he was going to testify the President Trump ordered him during the campaign to contact Russian officials. Oh, that fake news actually tanked the stock market and Ross then had to issue a correction, saying, oh, it happened during the transition, which means he was talking to a future counterpart, a huge difference. Now, Ross was suspended and is now banned from even covering President Trump. I can think of a lot of other people that should be banned as well.

Now, we also have a totally dishonest Washington Post reporter -- this is David Weigel. And he posts a picture from President Trump's recent rally showing that little tiny itsy-bitsy crowd and the caption reads packed to the rafters. Here's the problem, that picture is deceptive because it was taken before most people had gotten in there. And why go later -- well, I'm sorry, Weigel later apologized and deleted the tweet. Whoopsie-daisy.

Well, that's your media at its finest at work, and by the way, those are only a few of the many examples of epic fake news screw-ups and anonymous sourcing, of course. It's why The New York Times, you know, they report about Robert Mueller and the media is over the top, the sky is falling down, hysteria, coverage, breathless coverage.

Well, it's not surprising, for over a year, they have been pushing conspiracy theories. They have been chasing ghosts about Trump-Russia collusion and we still have no evidence. Now, meanwhile, the media has been completely oblivious to the biggest stories it's right there of their lifetime. Now, from what we've seen, it's shaping up to be the biggest scandal in American history, and they have missed the boat.

Now, this is going to make Watergate look like an afterthought and only a fraction of the information is yet to come out. We have been uncovering and reporting night after night on massive, severe constitutional abuses that were committed by top ranking Obama DOJ, FBI officials against the Trump campaign.

New evidence is also showing that the Clinton email investigation was a total sham. It was rigged. The fix was in. And tonight, we have new text messages from corrupt, Trump-bashing FBI lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in a new exchange it appears the couple was leaking information about the Clinton email investigation to the media.

Look at the date, just before the election. October 28, 2016, after news broke that the FBI found Huma Abedin's emails on creepy Anthony Weiner's laptop computer, Lisa Page writes, well, still on with Devlin, Politico is saying that's now Washington Post reporter Devlin Barrett. And Page finishes, Mike's phone is on fire. Strzok responds, it's on the news, then adds, you may want to tell Devlin he should turn on CNN, there's news going on. And Strzok also says, sorry.

And then Page replies, he knows he just got handed a note and Strzok says, ha, he's asking about it now? And Page answers, yes, it was pretty funny, coming now. Now, minutes after those texts are sent, Devlin Barrett then writes on Twitter sources are telling him that emails on Weiner's computer might not be new and instead were just copies of Clinton emails that the FBI has already looked at.

Now, we reached out to the reporter and he told us no comment. Shocking.

So we have what looks like leaks from Page and Strzok and there's so many more 50,000 total. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

Let's go back to February 26th, 2016. Look at this, Page messaging her boyfriend Strzok, one more thing, she might be our next president. The last thing you need is us going in there loaded for bear, you think she's going to remember or care that it was more DOJ than FBI? And Strzok replies, agreed.

So, on February, Strzok and Page are actually saying they're worried about actually investigating Clinton because she might end up being mad at them and may want revenge if she wins because they think she's going to win and they're trying to help her. Then just months later, in May, remember it was James Comey and Strzok and other key FBI officials, they started writing Clinton's exoneration statement. This is months before interviewing her and 17 other key witnesses. When do you write an exoneration before an investigation?

Now, this is where they change the language, remember, from the legal standard. Gross negligence is a crime. They take that out. They put in extreme carelessness means the same thing but legally, a very big distinction.

Well, that means they gave Clinton to get out of jail free card, then they also alter language about foreign actors, likely hacking Clinton's server. That puts people's lives at risk and they removed a reference to Clinton emailing with then-President Obama, which means he knew about the server. That means he needs to be investigated. That means he needs to be put under oath.

So, in other words, the fix on the email server scandal was in. Now, remember, any of these issues that we're talking about with the email service scandal, they're all crimes, mishandling classified information, destroying top-secret classified special access program information -- they're all crimes. Deleting 33,000 subpoenaed emails crime, acid washing, bleach bit, hard drives, crime, that's obstruction. Bashing devices with hammers, obstruction.

So, you have Strzok and Page literally putting the fix in, along with Kobe and apparently McCabe and Loretta Lynch all knew, and they're talking about the need at one point for a special counsel to investigate Clinton's emails.

On March 18th, Strzok writes, thought of the perfect person and they can bounce off of. Page asked, who and responds, Pat, who's Senator Grassley says is Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel, remember, in the Valerie Plame affair. He's the guy that put innocent Scooter Libby in jail or got him a guilty plea in that case, and you got to give me some credit if we go with him and delay briefing him until I can get back and do it, in other words with his own prejudice, his own point of view, his own spin, late next week or later he says.

And then Strzok says later, I could work with him again and damn, we get blank done. And Page follows up with, I know, like I said, we discussed boss and him yesterday. And on May 13th, 2016, Page follows up on the idea she says to Strzok. Hey, forgot to ask if you mentioned the whole special counsel thing to Andy. We assume that's Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

Now, what Strzok and Page are doing here is stunning and here's why. Strzok had a massive, massive role in the entire Clinton email probe. He oversaw the interview with Hillary Clinton and her top aides long after they wrote the exoneration, and Page as you might remember was McCabe's legal counselor, and they're both saying special counsel is needed, which means that they had doubts that the FBI would do a real investigation which they didn't do.

Now, Senator Ron Johnson also made news this week, releasing text messages on May 19th, Strzok appears to be talking about getting an offer to join Mueller's investigation. This is key here -- Strzok says, oh, my answer is no, I don't want to join that investigation, and then you know the lead division and then I think, wait a minute, this may be a case, we'll be in the history books, a chapter, much like you tell me about my extra time in the field in all the field cases, would you trade it? A million people sitting in odd (ph) and staff jobs, this is a chance to do. It maybe the most important case of our lives.

And around minutes later, Strzok asked Page the question, an investigation leading to impeachment? He's the one that said there's no there there.

So, in this case it seems like Strzok knew that Mueller was going to try and impeach the president and he wanted to be a part of history, but he didn't think there was any there there.

Go back to May 19th in the exchange. Two days after, Mueller was named special counsel, Strzok says, you and I both know the odds are nothing if I thought it was likely I'd be there, no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concerned there's no big there there.

So, Strzok who served -- it was a top intelligence official at the FBI. He signed the papers to start this phony Russia investigation, and he's saying that he knew from the start that Mueller would be carrying out a witch hunt. He didn't know if he wanted to be a part of it, and revelations about former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and her involvement in the Clinton email server cover-up.

Now, it's June 2016, remember Bill Clinton, he meets Loretta Lynch on a tarmac that supposedly talking about grandchildren for 40 minutes, which causes Lynch to say on July 1st, that she was, you know, literally stepping away from the investigation and she would accept whatever the FBI concluded.

Now, keep in mind all of this is before Hillary Clinton's interviewed. That happened on the 4th of July weekend, three days later. So, after Lynch's statement, is she's going to step back here, let the FBI decide she'll go along with what they decide after she met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac, well, Strzok he writes back to Page, timing looks like hell, talking about Clinton and Lynch meeting on the tarmac. Page replies, yes, awful timing, and Page later adds, it's a real profile in courage, meaning Loretta Lynch, since she knows no charges will be brought.

Here's a problem, no decision was made. Four days later -- well three days later, Hillary's interviewed, four days later, Comey holds his press conference, spends and a half minutes laying out the case that Hillary Clinton should be indicted and at the last 30 seconds of that lets her off the hook.

So, you have Strzok and Paige and Lynch and Andrew McCabe and James Comey all apparently knowing Clinton's never going to get charged and the Obama administration put the fix in.

The corruption here if you're a New York Times writer is unprecedented. You should maybe be covering a real story, because when you put it all together here's what it all means, you have Hillary Clinton we now know fix the primary against Bernie Sanders or I'll use Donna Brazile's word, rigged it. Then Strzok, Comey, Lynch, McCabe, others, they all put to fix in. That allows Clinton to stay in the presidential race, they don't want to rock the boat, they want her to beat Donald Trump, so they're overlooked the crimes, the obvious crimes, with the incontrovertible evidence.

Clinton and the DNC, then they try to influence the election, with a bought and paid for $12 million Russian dossier full of Russian salacious lies and propaganda and the Obama administration, they took the dossier, they weaponized the powerful tools of surveillance and intelligence and then use the phony dossier to get a FISA warrant to target members of then the Trump campaign and later the incoming president.

If this isn't Watergate on steroids and every single person involved not investigated and not prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law we have shredded our Constitution, because you have powerful Obama administration officials in the FBI, in the DOJ, clearly trying to circumvent what is the will of you the American people, because they did not want Donald Trump to become president. We can never let this happen again and the only way to do that is to make sure we get every fact, every bit of truth, expose it to the American people and those people that committed crimes need to go to jail. The key players need to be exposed.

Now which is what congressional Republicans they're trying to do. They've been fighting to release the memo, release the memo, some of them. You've been helping a lot you, in this audience. And what do we know from that memo that will be released probably next Wednesday or Thursday. We are told that will show severe FISA abuses against the Trump campaign and the president-elect and his team. And FOX News is learning that memo is going to be released likely in a matter of days.

It is imperative, keep the pressure on, keep calling your members of Congress, demand release the memo. The number of your bottom of the screen will get through, 202-224-3121. You've got to put the pressure on them. Tell Congress, release the memo. We deserve to know the truth and while they're at it release all 50,000 texts.

All right. Joining us now with reaction, former deputy assistant to the president, Fox News national security strategist, Sebastian Gorka, and Fox News legal analyst, Gregg Jarrett.

Gregg, let's start with you and the legal side of this. Look, it is a lot to take in. We take every bit of new text messages now every night, we put it with the old text messages every night, and put it with other information that we've gleaned over the year. All facts, now we have a very clear picture of what went on.

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, increasingly, the evidence is mounting now that Strzok and Page and others at the FBI we're engaged in what's called a corrupt purpose. That's important because that's in the obstruction of justice statute. So, these messages reveal several things.

One, they knew the evidence against Hillary Clinton enough to charge her. Second of all, they changed the language from charging her to exonerating her, and third, they did it for political reasons because they wanted her to be president. They thought, she would be president, they didn't want to anger or alienate her.

HANNITY: Did Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe and Loretta Lynch, who all know ahead of time no charge that's not a real investigation you don't write exoneration before investigation.


HANNITY: All right. Did they obstruct justice?

JARRETT: Oh, absolutely, if they did it for a political reason I think the evidence demonstrates that they did.


HANNITY: -- any reason?

JARRETT: Thank goodness for electronic technology because this is the smoking gun evidence of their motivations and motivations is how you prove obstruction of justice.

HANNITY: Sebastian Gorka, you were in the White House story a lot of this time. I'm sure it took a lot of energy time attention away from governing the country. Maybe that was the goal of some people the president's did a lot of great year.

But when you see the level, the use of FISA courts, the weaponry of intelligence, when you see people at the highest levels doing this, to me, it's chilling as somebody that believes in the rule of law, equal justice under the law and the U.S. Constitution.

SEBASTIAN GORKA, FOX NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIST: Yes, it is truly chilling, Sean. As the child of parents who escaped a communist dictatorship, where the police was used for political purposes and now that I'm a proud American, I never thought I'd see the day where the vaunted FBI, people inside that agency, senior management individuals would be openly talking about giving special treatment to an individual they wanted to become president.

We were in the White House, I was secure that there was no issue. The president told me, they will find nothing because there was no collusion. We've been accused of obstruction of justice, of conspiring with the Russians, not one piece of evidence.

And what do we know today? We now know that inside Obama's FBI there was a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. One woman who had committed felonies, there's not question as Gregg has said, you mishandle classified information, you have committed a felony. That individual was treated with kid gloves, given a pass and then we know the FBI gives money to Steele.

HANNITY: Let's talk about the media - and you're right in every point and so was Gregg. What about the media? They'll go with an anonymous source about a story that never came to fruition about Donald Trump, you know, in case of Donald Trump was -- he's asking if there's conflicts. They say, no, he doesn't fire and they make that big news.

With all this evidence -- go ahead.

GORKA: Let's put this into context. We are talking -- your team -- you and your team have been doing their heavy lifting every night in your monologues or one day, that data will be used in a court of law to prosecute these people, I am sure of it.

But what's the media doing in the meantime, when they're not colluding with these people inside the Obama administration as those text messages demonstrate, what are they doing? Just a week ago, they're asking the vice admiral, the rear admiral who is the president's surgeon whether he's still drinking Diet Coke every day. This is the biggest scandal in modern American history and the media either ignores it or is complicit, and that's the outrage.

HANNITY: Right. If President Trump is saying, does Robert Mueller have a conflict and doesn't fire him, how is that a story?

JARRETT: It's a legitimate concern. And again, under the obstruction --

HANNITY: A legitimate concern of the president.

JARRETT: Yes, and for the nation for goodness sakes. I've written about it ad nauseam.

You know, journalists have been howling for the last 24 hours, this is obstruction of justice by the president. Those reporters don't know anything about the law. They've never read the statute. As I mentioned before in a different context, it requires a corrupt act by the president.

HANNITY: That didn't happen.

JARRETT: He was engaging in a legitimate act according to The New York Times if you believe them, trying to remove Mueller because of his myriad of conflicts of interest and replacing him with somebody who would be legitimate, objective, fair and neutral.

HANNITY: A reasonable thing that anyone would do.

JARRETT: Right, it's not obstruction of justice. These idiot journalists and I watched them all morning long --

HANNITY: They're not journalists. They're hacks.

JARRETT: They don't -- they're probably not, and they don't know a damn thing.


HANNITY: Journalism, Gregg.

JARRETT: Right. All they have to do is look it up. It takes a nanosecond for god's sake.

HANNITY: Sheep that follow each other in a little echo chamber.


JARRETT: -- comprehend if they read it.

HANNITY: Thank you both.

And coming up, Newt Gingrich, he sounds off on the so-called huge New York Times exclusive report where nothing happened, straight ahead.



NEWT GINGRICH, R-FORMER HOUSE SPEAKER: Historians are going to look back on this period as schizophrenic insanity. On the one hand, you have genuine FBI information coming out about clearly covering up for Hillary Clinton in ways that are astonishing, which probably won't make page one of The New York Times. On the other hand, you have a non-story about a non- event.

I mean, if the president didn't actually fire Mueller, even though even if the president got really angry and said gee, I'd loved to fire Mueller, there was no event there. Now, the idea that the president somehow is culpable of not liking Mueller, and that is somehow going to be, you know, an obstruction of justice, it tells you how desperate the left is getting.


HANNITY: Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich calling out the schizophrenic insanity surrounding the treatment of President Trump.

Joining us now with more reaction from Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, and Fox News contributor Sara Carter.

Sara, you know, a non-story about a non-event, I think that that pretty much sums up the media hysteria yesterday, but what they missed yesterday was what you were reporting and we were reporting and that is just how abusively biased Strzok and Page were, and how many people were in the loop knowing that the fix was in as it relates to doing a real investigation into Hillary Clinton before they interviewed her, exonerations before any investigation. So, you know, that's got to be frustrating as you have been unpeeling every layer of this onion.

SARA CARTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, it's very frustrating, Sean, because what we see is leaks come out, so it's information comes out about the FBI, about these text messages between these two FBI agents, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and as more evidence starts to unravel, you get a leak like this that goes to The New York Times.

And it's really an on story because the president has every right to question whether or not, you know, special counsel Mueller is right for this job, he has every right to discuss this privately with his attorneys. And as we see, nothing happened. So he didn't fire special counsel Mueller. He talked with someone about the circumstances around special counsel Mueller.

There was no order to actually fire him. And I think what really is frustrating is the American people are not getting well informed by all of these very important news agencies, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, they are not focused on these stories and right what we know is that the FBI -- and let's go back to the story we just talked about the other day, Sean, the fact that the FBI and the DOJ said we lost all of these five months of text messages through a technical glitch and you won't be able to get them and then all of the sudden now they have them. We have to ask, why did they say that to begin with, what are they hiding? What is going on? It is our job to keep watching.

HANNITY: Why didn't Rob Rosenstein hours before the House Intel Committee was going to get the subpoenaed documents was begging Paul Ryan, please, please, don't release this. Tom Fitton, one of the roles of the judicial watch has played key in getting information -- I know you file a lot of freedom of information act requests. I think, I hope it looks like we'll get the memos next week probably after the State of the Union, but why do we have to wait for the 50,000 text messages. Why not release -- ok, maybe they can look for information that puts someone in harm's way, fair enough, but that doesn't take that long.

TOM FITTON, JUDICIAL WATCH PRESIDENT: That is exactly right. We have numerous requests to which the text messages are probably responsive and lawsuits and getting the run around and we have been asking about them since we found out about it. We ask FBI what is going on here. They simply told us if you want them, sue us, again. And we did sue them. We asked for the text message and sued and a few hours later they found them. This is about the news story that was planted this week about the President Trump's concerns about Mueller.

The text messages, the gamesmanship there, the Justice Department fighting the house on releasing a summary memo of the underlying material. It's all about protecting the Mueller operation. What I think the headline is in the New York Times and the Washington Post is, Mueller has conflicts that had been unaddressed, he for instance is investigating the firing of Comey. The very job opening which he interviewed. Why is he near this investigation given that conflict? Why is the president the one having to raise it? Where's the Justice Department, Rob Rosenstein to make sure it's not conflict free.

HANNITY: The Daily Beast said it, Rosenstein, Comey, McCabe are all in this memo. That is the one leak we got. All right Sara you want to discuss, next week's a big news week. Even the memo is only a small portion of what's coming out in the case. I know you're in the middle of two big investigative reports and I think you'll be breaking next week. One about Andrew Weissmann if I'm allowed to tip your hand for you, being the nice guy I am, what's coming next week and how big do you think the memo ends up being.

CARTER: First, it's true. We need to focus on members of the special counsel and Andrew Weissmann has come up over and over again. He is very important, because he is a central part of the investigation. So I do have something coming out next week with regard to Andrew Weissmann. Another very important gossip, another story that is going to be out next week is the FISA memo. And we expect that to be out some time after the State of the Union in midweek.

It's explosive. I know this not just from talking to congressional members, but other law enforcement officials who have gone to congress as whistleblowers about FISA cases. It should shock every American and it's a way to keep the country up check. It's one part of so many more pieces of the puzzle. Be remember a lot of this information is classified. It's classified information so we can't get our hand on it. They'll go ahead and put out the pieces, redact it, I think after the FISA memo.

HANNITY: Real quick, Tom I got to roll.

FITTON: Andrew Weissmann, the number two at Mueller's operation send an e- mail supporting Sally Yates is attack on Trump order and refuses to follow it, went to Hillary Clinton's election-night Party. Why is he anywhere near this?

HANNITY: And he leaked information about Paul Manafort before he started investigating him to the A.P. so many conflicts with all of them, it all beginning to come together. Next week will be a massive news week on top the State of the Union and the memo being released. All right. When we come back, more breaking news this Friday. The president pushed his America-first agenda in front of the world and world leaders today. We have highlights. What a difference a year makes. Straight ahead.



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Since my election, we created 2.4 million jobs, small business optimism is in an all-time high, no unemployment claims are near the lowest we had seen in almost half a century. I'm here to deliver a simple message, there's never been a better time to hire, to build, to invest and grow in the United States. We've just enacted the most significant tax cut and reform in American history. As president of the United States I will always put America first just like the leaders of other countries should put their country first also. But America first does not mean America alone. When the United States grows so does the world.


HANNITY: That was the president earlier in front of world leaders in Switzerland, touting his administration's economic accomplishments and pushing his America-first agenda. After his big speech he tweeted quote, heading back from a very exciting two days in Davos, Switzerland, my speech on the American economic revival was well received.

Many people I met will be investing in the USA. The president is right, European CEO's praise the giant tax cuts and many of them said in fact they will or they have made huge investments in the U.S., that means more good jobs for the forgotten men and women in the country and meanwhile here at home a heated battle over immigration reform is now ramping up.

The president released his frame wok for immigration reform today, it includes $25 billion for the border well system in exchange for a pathway to citizenship for DACA eligible individuals, but of course Democrats are already attacking hit. Listen to what crazy Nancy Pelosi had to say about the president's proposal.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALI., MINORITY LEADER: That plan is a campaign to make America white again. They want the ransom for these children to be $25 billion for the wall, when we have all the needs that we have for infrastructure in our country.


HANNITY: Chuckie Schumer also rejected it and prompting Trump to tweet, DACA is made increasingly difficult by the fact crying Chuck Schumer took such a beating over the shutdown that he is unable to act on immigration, here with reaction. On a Fox Business network Lou Dobbs is with us. Good to see you my friend.

LOU DOBBS, FBN HOST: Great to see you Sean.

HANNITY: I want the wall.


HANNITY: Democrats don't want the wall and they don't want DACA because that is what they want to run on in 2018 and Lindsey Graham and Jeff "snow" Flake are helping the Democrats. Am I right or wrong?

DOBBS: You are right. This is the problem, Schumer will be there and the Democrats will be there and lie through their teeth, just like they did since Ronald Reagan in 1986 with the first amnesty. By the way, it's not a border wall anymore. It's a border wall system -- well, we're going to bill ramparts around the ports of entry. It's not a wall. It's a trust fund. Don't you feel better about that?

HANNITY: I don't.

DOBBS: Because I do, I trust (inaudible) and the Dems.

HANNITY: Listen, there's no deal for the president at all unless he gets the money.

DOBBS: He is the one who proposed the money.


HANNITY: He said that the border agents prefer a see-through wall that will be built along --

DOBBS: With a light veneer and chiffon on the side. It should be a big beautiful wall with big beautiful doors.

HANNITY: Agreed. But see-through is fine. The border agents say they want that.

DOBBS: That is great. But they're not testing that with the commandos. So I don't know where we are going with that. What I do know is that the forgotten men and women you are talking about in the president campaigned for a year and a half are still forgotten when it comes to amnesty.

HANNITY: Here is where we are, a hundred house Republicans campaign for years for repeal and replace, they have no intention we learn last year. Seven Democrats, 2015 vote for clean repeal and in 2017 they wouldn't do it. We have Lindsey Graham, Jeff Snowflake and other Republican with no intention. They want amnesty. Here's your trade-off. Do you pick the wall if you can eliminate chain immigration and the visa lottery?

DOBBS: Do you mean like under the four pillars from the Trump administration -

HANNITY: Or do you want nothing?

DOBBS: Right now have you got nothing brother.

HANNITY: I am asking if you have a choice. Why are you being difficult to me, I'm your friend.

DOBBS: You are my friend. I'm your friend. You're being difficult with me suggesting it's a proposal --


HANNITY: No, if the president could get the wall and end the chain immigration and the visa lottery, would you accept what the Democrats are demanding or is that a bad deal. That is my question.

DOBBS: First of all, I don't know what they're demanding.

HANNITY: Demanding DACA legalization.

DOBBS: Yes that was for $800,000 --

HANNITY: No, $3.6 million.

DOBBS: Right now Donald Trump has tripled Barack Obama's $800,000 I'm not mad at the president in anyway. He is doing great things, it is his outstanding year.

HANNITY: What should he do?

DOBBS: He should do what he is done on the economy and military and law enforcement. Making sure every damn thing he is promised comes to pass and he'll go into history forever.

HANNITY: It is my turn, tell me if you agree with this, if the Republicans don't build 200 or 300 miles of wall by November it will hurt them significantly in November, true or false?

DOBBS: It is false, because they couldn't even screen out erosion --

HANNITY: So they'll break another promise?

DOBBS: Are you kidding?

HANNITY: I am asking, what do you think?

DOBBS: I don't know what to think, you know the answer to this. Democrats are the problem. The left is the problem.

HANNITY: So are liberal Republicans. Huge problem.

DOBBS: You mentioned Graham and Flake -- I can't remember.

HANNITY: Yes, I did. Boy, you are on fire. Have a great weekend.

DOBBS: You too.

HANNITY: When we come back, Hillary Clinton caught in a major scandal. Another one. Details next.


HANNITY: So Hillary Clinton claimed for decades she was a champion of women, according to a brand-new report during her 2008 presidential campaign she allegedly intervened to keep a Burns Strider a senior adviser from her campaign for being fired after accusations arose that he repeatedly sexually harassed a subordinate. Instead Strider was ordered to receive counselling and lost several weeks of pay.

And we reached out to Clinton for a comment and her spokesman referred us to a statement from the law firm that represented the campaign in L.A. saying quote, to ensure a safe working environment the campaign had a process to address complaint of misconduct or harassment when matters arose they were reviewed in accordance with the policies and appropriate action was taken. This complaint was no exception.

Here with reaction, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and radio talk show host Dr. Gina Loudon. Pam your take, because I'm looking at that and thinking the same campaign that was paying women less and the same women that took money from country that abused women, kill gays and persecuted Christians and Jews, that Hillary?

PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FLORIDA: That Hillary. It's not a partisan issue at all. If this is a Republican woman I'd be saying the same thing. She covered this up. Her campaign manager said that she should fire Strider yet she kept him on after doing this to a young staffer on a campaign. How does that young staffer feel for the rest of her career that another woman did that to her. After the #metoo movement, women are now coming out and that is why this story after all this time is coming out. It is shame on her.

HANNITY: Dr. Loudon?

GINA LOUDON, RADIO TALKSHOW HOST: This is a pattern that Hillary has demonstrated her entire career since her husband a sexual harasser and he was president right? She not only covers up the any wrongdoing and she also piles on and makes it worst for that victim, so much for caring about young women and helping them in their career. She is been completely discredited in this as has her Democrat Party as much as they want to try own this #metoo movement.

HANNITY: How is it possible Pam, look what we've been covering and uncovered. How does she fix a primary campaign against Bernie? How does Hillary Clinton have Comey and Strzok and all this other people who know McCabe and Loretta Lynch? How do they all know she is not being investigated for what we know are felonies in the e-mail server scandal? How does she get to try and fix a general election with phony Russian propaganda for only investigating Trump-Russia collusion and it never happened? And then how did she get that phony dossier to be used as a basis for a FISA warrant and the media ignores it. You're an Attorney General, explain.

BONDI: Sean, the media can ignore all they want, but the Justice Department better not. I'm sure Jeff Sessions and his staff will be opening an investigation against her. They have to. The fake dossier and everything she did. It's been horrible. She can condone what her husband did as long as she wants to, but a young staffer on her campaign -- we just sent a bipartisan letter to congress to address issues like this. Attorney General throughout this country, shame on her. She has to be investigated.
She must be investigated and this -- now we're finally seeing her real colors. Every station in the country isn't going to cover this story, they better.

HANNITY: All right. Guys good to see you. Have a great weekend.

LOUDON: You too.

HANNITY: We have the greatest, it is the greatest video of the day and the "Hannity Hotline" that is next.


HANNITY: All right. So many parents know what it's like to have a child that doesn't ever want to go to bed and miss a thing. When a British man's daughter kept leaving night and he did it night after night the daughter, he tucked her in and thought he put in a second safety gate that would do the job. The problem is, he guessed wrong. Here's tonight's video of the day.





HANNITY: That is amazing. What a great kid. Thank god she is safe. Time for the "Hannity Hotline." Let us see what they had to say last night.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My cat doesn't even like you. You (BEEP) all of the sudden.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just want to say you remind me, don't take this wrong you remind me of a little bit of an older Eddie Muenster more than Fred Flintstone. Have a great day and go after those liberal snowflakes because they deserve it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hannity you're supposed to be so bright you can't pronounce the word remember, not member. You dumb (BLEEP).


HANNITY: Pretty hostile. You have anything to stay, sound off, we don't care, 8772258587. All right remember we will always be fair and balance and we're not the destroy Trump media and will not give up on the stories they're not reporting on and we have a big news week, next week, releasing the memo, that will happen, State of the Union that will happen. I hope you set your DVR so you never miss an episode. Stay tune Laura's next. It is Friday, weekend time. Have a great weekend.


Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.