Trump ramps up illegal immigration fight

close

Video

Trump ramps up illegal immigration fight

Pentagon preparing for national/guard deployment at the border; reaction and analysis on 'The Five.'

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," April 5, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kimberly Guilfoyle along with Juan Williams, Congressman Jason Chaffetz, Kennedy, and Greg Gutfeld. It's 5 o'clock in New York City and this is "The Five."

President Trump appears this afternoon at a tax event in West Virginia, after ordering the National Guard to the Mexican border to combat illegal immigration and drug smuggling. He remains firm on his plans to secure the border with our military as the situation, he says, has reached a point of crisis.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We have to have strong borders. We're going to have the wall. We've already started building it. We're going to have our wall, and we're going to get it very strongly. The military is going to be building some of it. We cannot let people enter our country. We have no idea who they are, what they do, where they came from. We have no idea what their records are. We're working out systems now, and we called out the National Guard. And, you know, we're doing a real job. But, I'll tell you what, the laws of this country have to be strengthened and toughened up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: The Pentagon hasn't determined yet whether troops deployed will be armed. The move drawing heavy criticism from the left who claim this is all just a rallying cry to the president's base.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: This president doesn't plan out anything, doesn't coordinated. Essentially, using, again, our troops as a political ploy so he can, you know, again, boast his numbers with his base voters.

UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't see the urgency, but there clearly is a political imperative. Political urgency might be different than national security urgency. And.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: Sham might be the word you're looking for.

(LAUGHTER)

UNINDENTIFIED FEMALE: Border security is an issue that won him lots of support during the campaign, and he's playing to that base again.

UNINDENTIFIED MALE: This is more about the politics, given how the wheels have kind of come off for the president on the DACA side of things when you get Ann Coulter and many on the very conservative, hard right saying what the hell is your problem? What are you doing? That rattled him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: OK, Greg, so is this just a rallying call to the base? And, like.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: No.

GUILFOYLE: . Juanito said yesterday, Ann Coulter.

GUTFELD: She runs the whole world.

GUILFOYLE: She's running the world.

GUTFELD: With the left there's two angles they're working right now. The first one is they're calling the security theater. This is all security theater.

GUILFOYLE: Like the TSA.

GUTFELD: Exactly. However, it's actually left-wing activist theater because that illegal border crossing was manufactured by an activist group. The caravan was organized to create a confrontation. But, Trump was able to stop the confrontation by creating a metaphorical wall, I.E., himself, saying I'm sending in the army. That -- the whole thing capitulated and Mexico cooperated. He won this round in a highly visual manner. Now, the new media angle is this wasn't a story until Trump needed one, right? Nobody ever knew about this caravan. Well, you're absolutely right. You figured out how Trump works. He takes a story that the media ignores and then he makes it his story. Especially -- like, look at Kate Steinle. This is like -- he takes something that is very visual that people understand, and he makes it a national story. Much like what Fox News does. We tackle stories that the rest of the media doesn't cover.

GUILFOYLE: All right. We can let little Juan follow-up.

GUTFELD: Yes, ma'am.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. OK, you've been very good so far. And so, you'll be blown away to bits in a moment.

GUTFELD: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: How about the fact that none of the troops -- not sure they're going to be armed on the border. I don't like that.

GUTFELD: I don't know if it's necessary. I think he's already proved the point, right? Hasn't he already? He is a metaphorical wall. I mean, nobody -- like, the way he responded was all that was necessary. It's security theater. Trump's activist theater.

GUILFOYLE: OK. So, Kennedy, perhaps they're going to link arms at the border.

KENNEDY, GUEST CO-HOST: Maybe. I mean, what are they doing there? And why have past presidents sent the National Guard in the first place? You know, maybe President Bush was worried that there were terrorists who are going to pour over the border. Perhaps, President Obama was worried because of the drug war and the escalating violence and homicides on the border. This isn't the first president who's done that. You wouldn't know that by the hysterical reaction on the left. But, anytime you're going to spend a bunch of money like this, you better have a point to it, because when President Bush sent 6,000 National Guard troops, it cost about half a billion dollars. And it's a lot of money. And it's money that we don't have.

I also understand it's a way of the president looking like he's doing something because, right now, congress is not going to give him money for the wall. You know, they may give him a little bit of seed money. $1.5 billion really isn't that much. And so, this is the only other thing he can do to show that he's doing something. We also have to ask, what kind of a hellhole is Honduras? That's number one. What is going on in that country that people are leaving in droves and taking a very perilous journey through Mexico? The other question is what is Mexico's immigration policy? And is the president putting pressure on them to do their work for that leg of the journey?

GUILFOYLE: OK, congressman?

JASON CHAFFETZ, GUEST CO-HOST: The president is doing exactly what he told America he was going to do if he got into office. He needs to lock down that border and get rid of the rewards and incentives. And, hallelujah, he's actually doing it. I'm glad he's doing it. And, I'm kind of sick and tired of these people in the left saying, oh, thing this is just, you know, show and he's just playing to his base. Over the last two years, more than 100,000 miners have come across that border. And when you're an unaccompanied minor and you come across the border, guess what, we don't do any vetting to figure out who we're handing you over too. So, you've got 12-year-old girls coming across that border and we're handing them off to who knows who.

GUILFOYLE: Yeah, that's true.

CHAFFETZ: And why isn't the left just yelling and screaming about human trafficking and the scourge of drugs. These aren't all people coming to just, you know, make life better for their families. These are people purposely moving kids into America. Some of them are going into gangs. Some of them are going over to perverts. You don't know who they're going into. And it's time that the left actually realized we shouldn't be complicit in allowing this trafficking of children.

GUILFOYLE: Such an important point and it such a real, you know, problem. And just yesterday, they made the announcement that 99 unaccompanied minors, they were identified as members of MS-13.

CHAFFETZ: Yeah.

I'm: . were taken into custody by the president, had them arrested. I mean, you really have to be careful in terms of why wouldn't you? I mean, it's not mean-spirited. It's looking for justice and making sure that you do not let people come in, unaccompanied minors, human trafficking, gang, or cartel elements coming in here to do wrong.

KENNEDY: Well, it just shows that the government isn't doing a good job vetting either. We can't rely on the government for all of that stuff. And I don't think we have proper vetting processes in place because, frankly, congress won't do its job.

CHAFFETZ: Congress didn't fund more beds, so you can't just continue to house them. So, when you get to the overflow situation, the bad guys know this. They have to just release them and they go out to --elsewhere.

GUILFOYLE: God knows. And to the ether, Juan.

JUAN WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Well, I mean, I do think this is theater.

GUILFOYLE: Charity theater.

WILLIAMS: Absolutely, theater. But it's theater launched by President Trump in a moment when he is going into chaos at the White House. He's sending off tweets about everything. He's blaming everybody. He blames President Obama. He blames the Mexican government. He blames the left- wing. He blames California. In this situation, by the way, Greg, I think it was BuzzFeed, or vice, or somebody that first called attention to it. Fox & Friends picked up on it.

KENNEDY: It was BuzzFeed.

WILLIAMS: BuzzFeed. Thank you, Kennedy. And then, Fox & Friends picks up, then the president sees it and then he reacts to it. And then blows it way out of proportion.

GUTFELD: But that's.

WILLIAMS: . because these people were never intended to come across the border except to possibly apply for what is quite legal, called, guess what, you know, they wanted some kind of asylum. And that's in the American law.

GUILFOYLE: Not for MS-13 gang members. No asylum for you.

WILLIAMS: This is all part of the vilification.

GUILFOYLE: It's not vilification. It's part of the fact pattern. You don't want to deal with the facts. And you say the president is squirming. Squirming at 51 percent?

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: His average, I think, 39 percent in Real Clear Politics average of polls.

GUILFOYLE: OK. How about Rasmussen?

WILLIAMS: Rasmussen is not even a good poll.

GUILFOYLE: Oh.

WILLIAMS: It's not.

(CROSSTALK) GUTFELD: They were off by one point in the election, Juan. Don't spread lies like that.

WILLIAMS: Oh, don't spread lies like that.

GUTFELD: That's a lie. They were one of the top -- probably.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Rasmussen doesn't -- it doesn't robocall polling. It doesn't even get people who have cell phones which is, at this point, half the country.

GUTFELD: Well, they're right in the election.

(CROSSTALK)

KENNEDY: Juan, let's say it is theater, and it might be. It might be the president, like I said, looking like he's doing something. But there is an effect -- there is a perceptual effect, and that immigration -- illegal immigration has slowed down since the president took the oath of office.

WILLIAMS: No. Actually, it's at a 46-year low. And in March, we saw an uptick.

KENNEDY: There was an uptick. However, and I think a lot of it.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: No, good God.

KENNEDY: . with DACA uncertainty. You have four border states. Three of the governors in those states, New Mexico, Texas and Arizona have commended the president and said thank you. We welcome the help. We want as much law enforcement boosting as we possibly can. California is very much on the fence. Don't be surprised if there is a massive resistance to deploying the National Guard in California. And don't you think that creates the perception that California is now the place to go because the border.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Juan, let me get this in.

KENNEDY: Like it or not, that alters people's behavior.

GUILFOYLE: Meanwhile.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: . revolt in California continues with another city voting to support the Trump administration lawsuit against the state's sanctuary law. Now, today, the president, once again, addressed the sanctuary problem. Take a listen. Juan will respond.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If you look in California and you see what's happening, it's an incredible phenomenon because sanctuary cities, it's the worst. It's basically a city to protect a lot of people that are bad people. Really bad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUILFOYLE: OK, Juan, your response to this.

WILLIAMS: Well, I mean, again, this is all part -- the president didn't get the money in the budget to build a wall. He promised the wall. Ann Coulter and people on the far right had said, hey, what happened to your pledge? Now, we see him reacting impulsively. You point out, by the way, these folks have no authority to arrest or detain any illegal immigrants. Kennedy points out, we don't have the money. We're spending money like, all of a sudden, oh, there's tons of money.

(CROSSTALK)

CHAFFETZ: . tons of money. They've plucked up the domestic budget by 13 percent.

WILLIAMS: OK.

CHAFFETZ: They added hundreds of billions of dollars.

WILLIAMS: Right, but they didn't put in money for this.

CHAFFETZ: But they do for the military.

WILLIAMS: OK.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: So, in other words now, he's changing the terms. By the way, I noticed Mexico is not paying for any of this which was the initial promise, right? So, to me, this is theater. But you guys, apparently, are buying into it.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Can I respond to the fact that -- it is not theater when an actual caravan turns around. What you're seeing, and this is very important as an overall trend when you look at why Donald Trump's numbers are taking up, and it is a trend. You don't look at the absolute value but the trend in the Rasmussen poll, which is a legitimate poll. The reason why it's up ticking is because he represents a certain assumption about law and order. What you're seeing, what you saw with that caravan, was the old school meeting the new school. The old school, hardline, no B.S., send in the army Trump, goes up against -- to the social justice grievance culture that's been around for years, which speaks of amnesty and speaks of sanctuary cities. And, to quote Juan, guess what, he walked all over them. Trump walked all over it. He won. He stood his ground. You know -- I will never use the phrase Reaganesque, but it reminds me of Reagan. In 1969, when he sent the National Guard into the riots in Berkeley, he established, you know, curfew and he refused to negotiate. No one remembers the negotiators. They remember the people that stood their ground for America. America first, not America last. It's working.

WILLIAMS: I mean, just tell you, first of all, the caravan has been coming up every year.

GUTFELD: It's true.

WILLIAMS: . for the last several years.

GUTFELD: And he sends it back.

WILLIAMS: Yeah. And it's never.

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: Return to sender.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: It's not theater, it's fact.

WILLIAMS: And the president congratulated Mexico for helping him.

GUTFELD: True.

WILLIAMS: . deal with it.

GUTFELD: He got them to the table.

(CROSSTALK)

KENNEDY: And this is a part of the story that, it's painful to admit, but part of the reason that Central America is decimated is because of the drug war. And it has not done anything committing these resources, it's not done anything about the demand for drugs in this country. Like it or not, for better or for worse.

WILLIAMS: Be careful. Don't tell the truth like that. The audience.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: You said something different yesterday.

WILLIAMS: What I say?

GUTFELD: You said that heroin is all coming from prescriptions.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. Heroin from prescriptions?

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: Jesse brought up that an overwhelming percentage in overdoses are caused by street drugs. Ninety percent of all heroin comes from Mexico. You dismissed that.

WILLIAMS: No, what I'm saying to you.

GUTFELD: Jesse watch the post.

WILLIAMS: Well, I'm just telling you, DEA says most of the illegal drugs entering this country come from legal points of entry. People hide them on themselves.

GUTFELD: But you've dismissed Mexico. Ninety percent of heroin comes from them.

WILLIAMS: Just a small source. More people die.

GUILFOYLE: Drug smuggling that's handled and at the direction of the cartel. That's what we're talking about.

WILLIAMS: Let me just tell you what I'm talking about. The big threats, to us as Americans at this moment, are prescription drugs, the opioids. That's what's killing us as an American people. They're killing five times the number of people that are killed by cocaine, heroin.

KENNEDY: But you know what happens when marijuana is legal, the states where there's medical marijuana, not only are there far fewer prescriptions for morphine and hydrocodone. There are also far fewer opioid deaths. The rate of overdose drops by about 25 percent.

WILLIAMS: Well, you're not going to get an argument for me.

GUILFOYLE: That is the pro-marijuana legalization lobbyist over there at the end of the table.

GUTFELD: Yeah. It doesn't help to demonize people who are experiencing cancer pain by saying opioids are evil, so there.

GUILFOYLE: OK. You had your say and we've had our peace for the moment. Ahead, what started the Russian investigation? Well, the chairman of the house intelligence committee wants answers, and he's threatening legal action if he doesn't get them. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WILLIAMS: Have you ever wondered what exactly sparked the Russian investigation? Devin Nunes has just picks a new fight with the FBI and DOJ in order to find out. The chairman of the house intelligence committee sent a letter to Rod Rosenstein and Christopher Wray demanding they turn over the original un-redacted memo that kick started the probe into the Trump campaign. He's threatening to enforce subpoenas if it's not provided. Oversight committee chair, Trey Gowdy, would also like answers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. TREY GOWDY, R-S.C.: Most of what I've read is already in the public domain, but I really want to know what information did you view credible enough to launch a pretty serious counterintelligence investigation? When did you learn it, how did you vent it? How did you determine whether or not it was reliable or not? All of that is in a paragraph that I can't read.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAMS: All right. So, the big question now, then Republicans want answers is, where did this investigation start? A new book alleging former CIA director, John Brennan, played a prominent role in getting it going? Congressman Chaffetz, you are inside some of this for a long time, what do you think of Devin Nunes' actions?

CHAFFETZ: Look, the documents that we're under subpoena have been in place since August of last year. This is a two-page document. It is not some big massive file. It is a two page document that the intelligence committee wants to see. They were told they could see it. Trey Gowdy went over to see it. Then they redacted a bunch. Then, they went through these arguments. Trey Gowdy went back over after they agreed to, you know, unveil it. Again, this one paragraph is redacted. And it begs the question why, because it is the genesis of this investigation. It is the document you're supposed to fill out to start this.

The part about John Brennan is really kind of mysterious, because here is John Brennan, he's the head of the CIA, he then goes and talks to Harry Reid, less than 48 hours, of the allegation in the book, less than 48 hours, Harry Reid then sends a letter to the FBI demanding that they go and do this investigation. So, what is Brennan's role? You've got Brennan, you've got the FBI director, you've got, you know, the CIA is involved here. It really does beg the question why. And I think it's very legitimate for the oversight of the intelligence operations and the FBI to say how did you start this? What's sort of vetting? And, Trey Gowdy is exactly right. They should be able to see that.

WILLIAMS: Quick thought, but to what end? If it's redacted, I guess, it's a national security issue. We know that Devin Nunes didn't.

CHAFFETZ: They have all the security. No, no, no. Gowdy and Devin Nunes have all the security clearance needed to be able to see that.

WILLIAMS: OK.

KENNEDY: They can go into a SCIF.

WILLIAMS: What?

CHAFFETZ: Secured compartmentalize information facility.

WILLIAMS: But, remember that Devin Nunes.

GUILFOYLE: Don't you have one?

WILLIAMS: . didn't challenge.

CHAFFETZ: We all have one.

WILLIAMS: . the authorization of FISA, right? I mean, he didn't have -- so, now, it seems like he has trouble with the very tool.

CHAFFETZ: Remember, some of this stuff is a closed case. So, it begs the question, why won't the intelligence community, why won't the FBI allow the congressional investigators to see it? If the American people are paying for it.

KENNEDY: right.

CHAFFETZ: . then their representatives ought to be able to see it if they have the proper security clearance, as Trey Gowdy and Devin Nunes has. Why won't they let them see a two-page document? In a secure facility, let the Democrats and Republicans see it.

WILLIAMS: Kimberly.

CHAFFETZ: It's a lot of question.

WILLIAMS: . what do you make of this?

GUILFOYLE: Yeah, I think it's very suspect. I think it's inappropriate. This is exactly the principle that our government was founded on. We have representation in the congress. They have every right to be able to see this. No one has been able to proffer any kind of proper explanation to say why they shouldn't. So, that's why people are asking these important questions. We shouldn't have this kind of secrecy, especially as it relates to this. We need to know. And they have the right to be able to see it. So, why isn't it happening?

And by the way, I don't know why Rosenstein didn't recuse himself from the beginning. He is more to involve to do with this than Sessions.

WILLIAMS: What are you saying?

(CROSSTALK)

GUILFOYLE: I think, because of all the conflicts that he's had being directly involved in the whole Russian collusion thing, the Hillary Clinton investigation, all of it. There's tentacles throughout and I think it's very suspect.

WILLIAMS: Kennedy, when you look at the situation, though, you have the FBI, CIA people saying, you know, we don't have proof. And, guess what, we might not want the Russians to know what we knew about George Papadopoulos or some of these other characters that they think had ties to the Trump campaign.

KENNEDY: Yeah, fresh attacking they're already spying, so chances are they've already know. But, it's really shocking to think that this entire investigation was launched because George Papadopoulos was drunk. You know, if you had a special counsel that was launched every time someone was hammered in D.C., and was going on and on about some internal conspiracy theory, the government would have gone broke decades ago. It is a little terrifying that, you know, you talk about collusion, which as we get deeper and deeper into this investigation, that seems like a flimsier reach. But, it appears as though you have the director of the CIA meeting with the senate minority leader who then goes to the FBI director imploring him to at least start an investigation into something that, at this point, if you take those facts, seems kind of manufactured. If it's not manufactured, if there is substance there, then if we can't see it, and we should be able to see it, we absolutely should, as Americans, have that level of transparency. If we can't see it -- Kimberly's right, our elected officials and the ones who have that highest level clearance should be able to go into those secure facilities and read that information.

WILLIAMS: I don't think, by the way, they have the authority to read FISA warrants. I think some of that is.

CHAFFETZ: Doesn't that scare you?

WILLIAMS: No, but I'm just saying -- you said they have clearance. I'm just saying, I don't think they can do that.

CHAFFETZ: That is a different subject than the initiation documents that the FBI just started the investigation.

WILLIAMS: May include some of the same information. Greg?

GUTFELD: Yes, sir. Well, I think that this is further proof of a cabal of emotional officials that would wanted to do anything to make sure Trump was out and Hillary is in. You can throw the tarmac incident or calling an investigation a matter. These are all the same people with this, like, kind of like, irrational fear that something awful was going to happen. However, we have to settle this, perhaps with a penalty kick, because right now this Nunes thing is counter programming -- it's counter programming to the collusion, right? They throw up the collusion, then Nunes does this. But, the bottomline is, to Kennedy's point is, there's this much evidence in April 2018 of collusion as there was in January 2017. And watching the media trying to create a Watergate out of this is like watching a chimp do a crossword puzzle. It's not going to happen. So let it go. You're boring the hell out if us. It is like soccer. It's like 0-0 at half.

CHAFFETZ: I love soccer.

GUTFELD: I know, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: I watch the English Premier League.

GUTFELD: That was directed for you.

(CROSSTALK)

GUTFELD: But it's always 0-0 at half.

GUILFOYLE: So that's why he gave you the little -- little love there with the penalty kick.

CHAFFETZ: It's not everything about soccer.

GUTFELD: Scoring doesn't matter, Jason?

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: My goodness. Well, but one thing I just want to say to guys, so why is Nunes using this to try to get money from his donors? I don't get it. Why is he politicizing it if, as you say.

(CROSSTALK)

KENNEDY: They all politicize it. They all do.

WILLIAMS: OK. Ahead, some employees at Google going to war with our government, are they putting politics before national security? That's next on "The Five."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUTFELD: I would like to apologize for playing with the Red Hot Chili Peppers in the earlier segment. We will never do that again.

All right. My, how the world has changed. Thousands of Google employees just signed a letter chastising their company for working with the Pentagon to improve the precision of drones so only bad guys get killed in war, not civilians. It could change war forever, reducing mass death. Yet, these employees think that's evil. Go figure.

So think about this: How does a company like Google thrive? Well, it helps to exist in a country with the world's greatest defenses, which enables freedom to thrive. It also helps that over half a century ago American companies made up of young men and women helped us win some World Wars. Without that, we'd be speaking German instead of using Google.

During World War II, U.S. industries produce more than three Axis countries combined: 300,000 planes, 100,000 tanks and -- plug your ears, Juan -- 15 million guns. All of this from the home front.

So how's the home front now? Well, these childlike Googleheads think they can live forever in a silicone bubble, immune to the real world's risks and responsibilities, seemingly unaware of the sacrifices grandparents and great-parents made to enable the comfy Google lifestyle.

As terrorists refine their own technology and plan the next 9/11, these kids at Google think their expertise should only be used for getting directions to a Thai restaurant. Thank God they weren't around in the 1940s.

So Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: Yes.

GUTFELD: This -- drones are going to be used to target bad guys so you have less collateral damage. How can you be against that?

GUILFOYLE: Well, right, it just doesn't make sense. But you know, when you look at in terms of the political ideology, you have, like, Eric Schmidt, you know, running Google was at Hillary Clinton campaign events, et cetera. Wearing the political badge, all of the above.

Anyway, they go through this whole background checking, et cetera. It's pretty much a little bit of a lockstep over there --

GUTFELD: Right.

GUILFOYLE: -- in terms of progressive ideals. So they think that it's the right idea to be on the right side of it to say, "Oh, we're against war. We're against this" and have this kind of positioning. But they really don't understand what they're protesting against.

They're protesting against the Pentagon, the Department of Defense, or anything like that being involved. This is what's actually helping you be safe --

GUTFELD: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: -- in terms of even cyber security. So why are they -- why would they be opposed to this? It just -- it's just not very well thought out.

GUTFELD: Yes, you know, Kennedy, I could see this in a world without terror --

GUILFOYLE: Correct.

GUTFELD: -- and toxic existential ideologies that want to destroy the Earth. We are in a different kind of war. It's not a war that is on a battlefield. It's a war that's kind of around and waiting for the opportunity. Should these people be arrested that work at Google?

KENNEDY: That's a little authoritarian.

GUTFELD: Yes, it is.

KENNEDY: I don't necessarily think --

GUTFELD: Should you be arrested, Kennedy?

KENNEDY: I -- that's for other things, believe you me. The night is young.

But I will say that there is merit to being antiwar. And I understand that. And I understand the desire and the thrust to use technology for positive means, for bringing people out of poverty, for educating people. That's all well and good. And that's fine. I don't have a problem with that.

And I also agree with them that the marriage of big government with big technology is really scary. Because --

GUTFELD: In a good way you mean?

KENNEDY: No. I mean, if it's weapons of war and surveillance are combined, essentially, we're powerless. That's why the Second Amendment is really, really important, so people can defend themselves. But if, you know --

GUTFELD: With drones, though. You could defend yourself with drones.

KENNEDY: Does everyone get a drone?

GUTFELD: Yes.

KENNEDY: Does everyone get an armed drone?

GUTFELD: Yes. Yes.

KENNEDY: Can we target people with A.I. precision? I understand that. And the question is always not how can this be used. What is the intention? Because the intention is almost always good. It's how can it be misused? How can this power be misused, and --?

GUTFELD: You can argue that with every technology, though, Kennedy. You can say that with everyone.

KENNEDY: Well, and then I pose this question to them: What government functions are acceptable?

GUTFELD: Excellent question. Jason, perhaps you could answer that.

CHAFFETZ: Well, look, I think --

GUTFELD: Don't mention anything about soccer.

CHAFFETZ: These Googlers are showing a degree of immaturity. And you know what? If you look at the National Guard, the men and women who serve our nation on both sides of the aisle, they don't have a specific political ideology.

And look at some snotty kid at -- at Google who's trying to say, "Yes, but our technology is better than that. We shouldn't allow you to have this."

I just believe in peace through strength. The reason the United States of America is the greatest country on the face of the planet is because we've had hard people do difficult things, and that there's a price to freedom.

GUTFELD: Right.

CHAFFETZ: And they don't want to participate in that? They don't want to use their expertise to make us -- and keep us the greatest country on the planet? That is so wrong.

GUTFELD: Juan.

WILLIAMS: Well, I don't understand just what the young people -- and I don't know if they're young. They could be Eric Schmidt's age, for all I know.

GUTFELD: Yes, that's true.

WILLIAMS: OK. So the people at Google are saying you can't outsource moral responsibility for your technology.

So what Kennedy says is right. What happens when people start using this for evil purposes? And then you say, "Oh, gee." This is what's going on with Facebook and allowing people to come in, and they create these psychographs, which is now becoming more and more of an issue, on our own voters, on us as citizens, and influence our elections.

Now, in this case, guess what? They have a motto that says don't be evil. Right?

GUTFELD: It's hypocritical.

WILLIAMS: And I think this is -- in this age -- I'm really surprised at you, Greg, because you have been hard on artificial intelligence and saying that artificial intelligence can be used to hurt us as human beings.

And so now you're saying, "Oh, no, just let all artificial intelligence, all technology fall into the hands of people whose job it is to kill people."

GUTFELD: No, what I'm saying is that if this helps make weaponry more precise on the battlefield, you will save innocent lives, civilians. We won't have things like Dresden, where you have to bomb entire cities. Instead, you have a drone that hangs out in front of somebody's window, waiting for that person to leave, that terrorist to leave, and when that person goes out, it just goes and zaps it. That's what they're trying to do.

GUILFOYLE: Like a bug zapper.

GUTFELD: Like a bug zapper, Kimberly.

WILLIAMS: A bug zapper ain't going to --

KENNEDY: We also saw under President Obama how much he misused drones and technology.

WILLIAMS: Oh, there we go. A fair shot.

GUTFELD: Juan's blaming President Obama.

KENNEDY: And speaking of a Republican or Democratic president, if Hillary Clinton were president right now, would these thousands of Google employees manufacture the same letter?

GUTFELD: Good point.

WILLIAMS: They were -- they're upset. They signed a huge letter, thousands of them -- I think it's 3,000 of them signed this letter. They are upset, too, about, for example, getting involved with the conservative CPAC and all those type things. And --

GUTFELD: So it's a political thing.

GUILFOYLE: You just made our point.

WILLIAMS: Well, it could be. It could be.

GUTFELD: We've got to move on. All right, all right, all right. I'm getting yelled at.

WILLIAMS: All right.

GUTFELD: Imagine if Chappaquiddick happened today. A new film revisits the infamous Kennedy crash and cover-up. That is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Nearly, five decades ago, a deadly accident would forever change the legacy of the Kennedy family dynasty. A new film opens tomorrow that revisits Chappaquiddick. Here's a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hello, Mr. Kennedy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the influence.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What the hell happened, Teddy?

JASON CLARKE, ACTOR: It was an accident. I was driving.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A story like this could dominate the headlines for weeks.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Chief, we've got a body.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A dead body holds a lot of secrets.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could be the difference between guilt and innocence. We need to be in control.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Of course, that night, the 28-year-old passenger with Senator Kennedy passed away, and it took Senator Kennedy nearly ten hours before he contacted the local police.

So Kennedy, is this something you want to see?

KENNEDY: Yes, actually, I spoke with Byron Allen, whose entertainment studios bought the movie and released it, and he interestingly said there were powerful people on the left who were trying to get him to stop its release. That there are still people trying to maintain that family's legacy, and there have been a lot of apologists and accusations of coverups for years about the story.

And it's really tragic, because a woman lost her life. And we'll see if this film sheds any light on what really happened and how a family can institutionally insulate itself from justice.

CHAFFETZ: Juan, is this something you want to see?

WILLIAMS: Yes, I mean, I'm interested I've got to say. You know, I remember my mom telling me. You know, she's a big Democrat, Kennedy supporter. And after this, she said she could never vote for him. So that was telling to me.

So I'm interested because I don't know the story, and it is a politically intriguing story, because it looks to me like much of the reason that they didn't go within the ten hours that you mentioned, Jason, is that they were trying to create a cover-up to save his political career. He had already been elected Senate majority whip. I guess he was in the minority. So -- but the whip.

And then secondly he was the frontrunner for the '72 nomination in the Democratic Party. So there was a lot going on here.

But I must say I'm reminded that when there was a book going on about Ronald Reagan and Alzheimer's and the like, all then the right came out, and they were defensive and said this is not true. We don't want this book out, et cetera.

Now you have a book about the Kennedys, and it's the left wing that's saying, "Oh, we don't want this." Bob Shrum and all the other Kennedy acolytes are saying, what do we need this. What's this about? This is not true. I'd like to know the truth. I hope it's a good movie. I hope it's more than just left versus right warfare.

CHAFFETZ: I mean, Kimberly, this is an important part of our political history.

GUILFOYLE: It really is.

CHAFFETZ: This guy was on a trajectory to become the next president of the United States, if not down the road.

GUILFOYLE: It's a good point, and there's so much fascination and interest in it.

Also, you know, as a former prosecutor, I think about, you know, who was allowed to testify, who wasn't, the suggestions that perhaps she was alive for two hours in the car, and the way that contortion, positioning of her body, was searching, looking for pockets of air. The chauffeur said that he was not allowed to testify to that fact. The prosecution didn't let him. So it's very interesting when you look back at it historically, and I think it's good that they finally made this.

CHAFFETZ: So Greg, if that would happen in today's day and age, can you imagine what would happen? What would it be like?

GUTFELD: Well, I don't know. What I'm wondering, the question that bugs me is why did it take so long? Why did it take so long for this movie to be made when you consider how many TV shows, documentaries and movies have been made about Watergate, in which there was an event in which no one died and no one was killed? But that water was much more interesting to the media than the water that killed Mary Jo. So I find that interesting, why the media thought this wasn't a big story for so long, and they waited perhaps until he passed away to do this movie. Who knows?

KENNEDY: I think that's it. I think that has a huge part in the timing and, you know, the writer getting started.

CHAFFETZ: Look, it's got a great cast. And "Chappaquiddick" opens up on Friday.

Ahead, if you're not against our president, Robert de Niro doesn't want to hear from you. The actor's new rant on Trump supporters, coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KENNEDY: Welcome to Kennedy's dance party.

Bobby de Niro rarely does interviews without dropping "F"-bombs on President Trump. He held his tongue. This time, he did voice major disdain for Trump supporters like Roseanne Barr, saying, quote, "I didn't know she was supporting Trump, but I have no interest in that. We're at a point with all of this, where it's beyond trying to see another person's point of view. Things that are happening in our country are so bad, and it comes from Trump. So I don't care about Roseanne. They want that thing, fine. We have real issues in this country."

Greg, can you translate? What exactly is Robert de Niro saying? I found that to be a little incoherent.

GUTFELD: It's kind of depressing to see a once great actor diminished to a blithering hack with food in his beard. But he's being honest. He doesn't want a conversation. He just wants his opinion heard so you can ignore the old, simpering gasbag that he's become or find him entertaining, which I do.

But remember, he also advocated at one point physical violence. So the two things he's doing, advocating some kind of violence at some point and eliminating words, means there's no step between anger and violence. Like he doesn't want to have that step, which is a little bit interesting.

KENNEDY: It is interesting. And Juan, I understand that people are dug in on both sides. And one of the points that Roseanne raised when she was doing her show was now it's kind of obvious our characters would have been Trump supporters. Twenty years later, their lives are not better. And, you know, for half of that time almost, President Obama was, of course, the commander in chief. And, you know, a lot of working-class people in this country were not helped.

So is there a point that a sitcom can make, having characters who are diametrically opposed politically?

WILLIAMS: Yes, in fact I would encourage it. I think it's a little miniature of "The Five," that we have actual discussion. I like to see it, so that's all good stuff. I will say, in de Niro's defense, that there's a big option to violence, which is that he was encouraging people to go out and vote.

GUILFOYLE: It's also hypocritical, because look at his career, all the money that has been made on playing violent characters who use weapons, too. So charming, isn't it?

KENNEDY: "Goodfellas," that's not a violent movie.

CHAFFETZ: My wife Julie and I were at this fancy black-tie affair, and we got to meet Mr. De Niro. He could not have been less interested and gave me the wet, cold, dead fish of a handshake.

GUTFELD: He knew you liked soccer. That's what it was. He just saw a soccer player and he goes, "No, I don't have time."

KENNEDY: He's soccer-ist.

GUTFELD: Yes.

KENNEDY: And that is just plain rude. Guess what's coming up? "One More Thing" up next. Stay right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GUILFOYLE: Hello there. Yes, it looks so good. Get your hand out of the shot. Wow. Someone take them away.

It's time now for "One More Thing." I'll begin with myself and royalty, because it's time for "Kimberly's Royal News."

KENNEDY: Darling.

GUILFOYLE: So Lifetime, highly-acclaimed channel, has a thing for charming movies, because I like them, so I'm not going to say cheesy, Megan (ph). Remember "William and Kate" back in 2011? Well, not they're back at it with "Harry and Meghan: A Royal Romance." This is going to chronicle their courtship, love story between the prince and his new fiancee. Gutfeld and I are going to watch this together.

GUTFELD: That will be funny.

GUILFOYLE: It will be fabulous, baby. And we're going to share the crown back and forth. OK. So we've got a first look. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm Meghan.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Harry. You look lovely.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She's American. She's divorced.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is it true about you and Prince Harry?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She makes me happy, so to hell with tradition!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: Yes!

GUILFOYLE: I think this looks so good. I cannot wait.

Now your head is in the shot. You're out of control. I demand that you take him away from the royal court. You've got to be there. You've got to watch it.

GUTFELD: Now two important things. It is time for --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAPHIC: Greg's Is This Real?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: "Greg's Is This Real?" Now, I'm asking the audience at home and the people here at "The Five" to take a look at this video. And what you will see is what seems to be a cat floating with balloons in a basket.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CAT APPARENTLY FLOATING UP IN BASKET LIFTED BY BALLOONS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GUTFELD: But I'm asking all of you. Is this real? Could somebody be holding it from behind the wall? I've been watching this -- I've been watching this for days, and I can't quite find out if it's real or not. Anybody?

GUILFOYLE: Someone -- thanks God someone didn't B.B. gun the balloons.

GUTFELD: That would have been terrible.

KENNEDY: That would have been so sad.

GUTFELD: Anyway, so I believe that's not real. It's not real. I think somebody is behind the wall holding the thing.

KENNEDY: Cats are quite smart. It's a little kitty suicide.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my God.

CHAFFETZ: Cats always land on their feet. They'll be fine.

GUILFOYLE: Can't get -- can't get the time back that we lost with that winning "One More Thing."

OK, Juan.

WILLIAMS: Fifteen-year-old Luke Terry has one arm, but that hasn't stopped him from becoming a baseball star. Watch this.

Yes, the high school catcher from Tennessee lost his arm at 19 months. Now video of him playing has gone viral and attracted attention from Major League teams.

The Baltimore Orioles invited him to Orioles Park at Camden Yards to talk with coaches and players, even got his own jersey.

By the way, if you doubt that a one-armed baseball player can make it to the majors, think about this. Remember, Yankee pitcher Jim Abbott. He played ten seasons. He even threw a no-hitter in 1993 with one arm.

Good luck to you, Luke. You are an inspiration to us all.

GUILFOYLE: God bless him.

OK. Kennedy.

KENNEDY: Well, if there's one thing we love almost as much as inspiring stories, it's baby pandas. And look at this little guy. His zookeeper is trying to clean the panda enclosure, but the 6-month-old panda cub is like, "No, I'm going to play with the broom and I'm going to bat on it, and you're going to be my friend. And you're going to pay attention to me."

GUILFOYLE: He's riding him.

KENNEDY: Oh, my gosh. I know. It's so cute. It's so fun. They just put little saddles on him, they have panda rides.

GUTFELD: You know, after that, the panda -- the panda mauled him to death.

KENNEDY: That's actually right. That's why we didn't show it, because we wanted to leave on a happy note.

GUILFOYLE: Jason.

CHAFFETZ: The Masters have started in Augusta, Georgia. And there's a tradition to start on a par three the day before. This is Jack Nicklaus' 15-year-old grandson, and he hits a hole-in-one asked mike this is one of his greatest moments. He would gladly turn in his six green jackets to experience that with his grandson.

Tony Finau (ph), who also actually had a hole-in-one, he got so excited, he runs down, goes towards the hole. Oh, he's in the hole. But after 17 holes, he is leading the Masters today. He's still on the course with playing the 18th. But look at this. Ouch. Went to the hospital, but he leads the Masters today.

GUTFELD: I think he learned a lesson.

GUILFOYLE: OK. And Greg loves golf.

GUTFELD: I hate golf.

GUILFOYLE: I know. I was being facetious.

Never miss an episode of "The Five." "Special Report" up next. Hi, Bret. Bret is a great golfer.

BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS: Hi, Kimberly.

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.