Reps. Jordan, Meadows and DeSantis on Gowdy's FBI remarks

close

Video

Reps. Jordan, Meadows and DeSantis on Gowdy's FBI remarks

Rep. Trey Gowdy faces backlash over his defense of the FBI's actions during the 2016 election; Reps. Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows and Ron DeSantis weigh in on 'Justice with Judge Jeanine.'

This is a rush transcript from "Justice with Judge Jeanine," June 2, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JEANINE PIRRO, HOST: Hello, and welcome to "Justice." I'm Jeanine Pirro. Thanks for being with us tonight and thanks for once again making "Justice" number one all last weekend. Thank you.

What a show on tap for tonight. Kellyanne Conway, Anthony Scaramucci are both live, Candace Owens also, Patti Blagojevich, wife of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich joins me to talk about the big move President Trump is considering for her husband.

But first, as you know, if you are a regular "Justice" viewer. I do an opening statement at this time every Saturday, and more often than not, it's about whatever has got me fired up that week.

And this week I am fired up, I am angry, but I am even more confused. Confused as to why Congressman Trey Gowdy of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, one of the few people in Washington who has the intelligence, the expertise and the ability to see through the nonsense, if not illegality going on at the FBI and the Department of Justice. Trey Gowdy would say this about a spy placed in the Trump campaign.

(VIDEO CLIP STARTS)

REP. TREY GOWDY, R-S.C.: I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got, and it has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

(VIDEO CLIP ENDS)

PIRRO: So, why was I stunned and why was I upset with that answer? Number one, Trey Gowdy knows he's not supposed to confirm or deny spy gate. Number two, saying that the placing of a spy or a confidential human source as the big shots call it in the Trump campaign has nothing to do with Donald Trump is ridiculous. But instead of me taking on Trey Gowdy tonight in an opening statement, which I fully intended to do, I instead decided to get some insight into what may be his thinking from some of his closest colleagues.

So joining me now, Congressman Jim Jordan, Chairman Mark Meadows and Congressman Ron deSantis, all members of the Freedom Caucus and unrelenting voices in the fight for truth in this Russia probe, all on the Congressional -- the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

Now, I am going to start with you, Mark Meadows. Under no circumstances would anyone even think of placing a spy or as they want to call it, a confidential human source, someone who clearly has foreign intelligence capabilities in the campaign of a man running for President of the United States. It has never happened in the history of this country, but these guys did it. So why shouldn't I be furious and who do they think they are kidding?

REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-NORTH CAROLINA: Well, Judge, you should be furious, and I can tell you that as we look at the evidence, and Jim and I and Ron have read thousands of pages as we look at this, you should be furious because whether it's spying on the Trump campaign or the Bernie Sanders campaign or any Presidential campaign, it's wrong.

And what do have is a growing body of evidence that would suggest just the opposite of what my good friend, Trey Gowdy said, is indeed the FBI and DOJ did do things improperly. We know that indeed that there was informants within the Trump campaign prior to the FBI opening an investigation, so we have got to make sure that we get to the bottom of it.

PIRRO: Yes, and that point is a very important one. And I want my viewers to understand that the timeline here is extremely significant.

Now, that bozo Clapper made a statement on "The View," and I think we may have it, and I am going to ask Jim Jordan to take a listen to it.

(VIDEO CLIP STARTS)

JOY BEHAR, HOST, THE VIEW: Was the FBI spying on Trump's campaign?

JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: No, they were not. They were spying on -- a term I don't particularly like -- but on what the Russians were doing, trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating and trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage and influence, which is what they do.

BEHAR: So, why doesn't he like that? He should be happy.

CLAPPER: Well, he should be.

(VIDEO CLIP ENDS)

PIRRO: Okay, so Jim Jordan, I think you know where I am going with this. Since when do we put spies in a Presidential campaign to find out what the Russians are doing? Why not intercept them on the way in unless you are trying to infiltrate the President's campaign?

REP. JIM JORDAN, R-OHIO: And more importantly, Judge, why not tell the Trump campaign? Why not tell the candidate himself? Why not tell the guy who is now President of the United States, "Hey, we think Russians are trying to infiltrate your campaign." Work with people in the periphery -- why not give them a briefing -- a defensive briefing. That didn't take place.

So that to me is the fundamental reason and to say he doesn't like the term spy, what else can you call it? It wasn't an informant, it wasn't inside, it was someone from the outside contacting people associated with the Trump campaign to try to get information. If that's not a spy, I don't know what is.

PIRRO: Well, you know what's interesting, Jim is that, I think it was Comey who said it's not a spy, a confidential source. But then, he never answers it, he just says there is a difference.

JORDAN: Yes, Judge and the FBI and the DOJ want us to say, "Oh, you can trust us now. We are giving you a briefing." They gave these guys a briefing last week, didn't show them any information to my understanding...

PIRRO: Well, that's where I am going.

JORDAN: Think about this, we have caught them hiding information from us in the past. They hid the fact that Peter Strzok and Judge Contreras were friends. To say, a FISA court judge Contreras, the same judge who heard Flynn's case. They tried to hide that from us, redacted that information when they gave us some of the Strzok-Page text messages, so now, they tell us, "Don't worry, even though you caught us hiding information from us, don't worry, you can trust us now." Come on.

PIRRO: You know what's interesting, Congressman Jordan, is the fact that then Contreras is recused from the case, so clearly there was wrongdoing there like within a week.

But I want to go to Congressman deSantis. Trey Gowdy makes this statement, which unfortunately reminds me of Clapper's statement basically saying, you know, "I'm going to rely on Rod Rosenstein from the Department of Justice who has put Mueller in there after Mueller was taken to the head of the FBI and Christopher Wray, the head of the FBI, all right, he then says, "Oh, I don't believe any of this was a problem, and my fellow Americans would want this to happen."

The guy is too smart, Ron. He is too sophisticated. He is a prosecutor. He is in fact one of my heroes, I have got to tell you that. I always loved Trey Gowdy, but I don't know if he went to the dark side or what is going on here, so why would Trey Gowdy, who understands credibility, understands lying, understands a courtroom talk to Christopher Wray and Rod Rosenstein and say, "I haven't seen the documents, but hey, I believe everything they are saying." That's hog wash.

REP. RON DESANTIS, R-FLORIDA: Well, look, I mean, I disagree with his analysis and it goes to what Jim said, it is obviously, they should have just told candidate Trump that this was something they were concerned about. Instead, they chose to take taken aggressive posture vis-a-vis the entire campaign, and they continued that. They launched this massive counter-intelligence investigation based off of Papadopoulos saying something to Downer.

And we now know Judge, when Downer reported that to US authorities, he didn't even mention e-mails. It was supposedly, "Oh, the e-mails got hacked. He heard about e-mails." There was never a discussion about e- mails.

So, the start of this is as thin as you can possibly be, and I would also say there was more information or evidence that would require you to surveil Hillary's campaign than Trump's campaign.

I mean, look at the national security implications with the e-mails. Look at the Clinton Foundation. Look at the fact that they were paying a foreign national, Christopher Steele to collect dirt on candidate Donald Trump, and yet, they never took any aggressive action vis-a-vis Hillary, it's a big double standard.

PIRRO: Well, you know what -- but we are going to go beyond double standard tonight, but I want to go back to Congressman Meadows. So, we are now supposed to take the word of the FBI and the Department of Justice when they started this investigation or the FBI did under the guise of it being a counter intelligence investigation.

I want my viewers, I want you to follow this. There is an Ambassador from Australia who invites a low-level fourth layer volunteer on the Trump campaign, they have a drink at a bar in the United Kingdom, all right, and then this kid supposedly says, "Hey, you know, they've got dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russians."

Now, the problem with that is the guy who is the Ambassador from Australia, he was involved in $25 million from Australia going to the Clinton Foundation. So, let me just remind my viewers, the Ambassador from Australia, $25 million going to the Clinton Foundation is the guy who basically gets the information to say to the FBI, we've got to start a counter-intelligence investigation. That smells to high hell or heaven.

MEADOWS: Well, it does smell. I think probably the other thing, Judge, is this. When we look at all of this, the collusion narrative is really more a collusion narrative with the Hillary Clinton campaign and Christopher Steele and some of the other contacts. When we see this, all the evidence would suggest that the FBI and DOJ are not coming clean.

Jim Jordan said this right. We are having to not only get documents but read those document and then find the evidence that they should have been forthcoming with. You know, it's not just about a judge, it's about the fact that there were redactions made or and over again. It's the fact that Brennan, the CIA Director actually briefed Harry Reid on some of this very information with the knowledge of the White House and colluded with the FBI.

PIRRO: the Obama White House.

MEADOWS: Exactly. Exactly.

PIRRO: Okay...

MEADOWS: We have got to get to the bottom of it. We need the documents is what we need.

PIRRO: Well, that's where I am going in about two minutes, so give me a second here. I want my viewers tonight to see what's going on here. So Rod Rosenstein, the guy who appoint Mueller who is a friend of Comey to investigate the President of the United States, because Rosenstein convinced Sessions to back out.

I mean, the whole thing if you throw in a movie on this, no one would believe it. He says that the House Committee Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that it is constitutionally obligated to have oversight over his own department, the Department of Justice is committing extortion. Because extortion -- that's a quote because you guys want the information that you are entitled to have. What say you? Whoever is next.

JORDAN: Well, it can't be extortion, Judge, when it's your constitutional duty. We have an obligation as a separate and equal branch of government to get the information, to get answers for the American people. I have the utmost respect for Trey Gowdy, but when he made the statement, the FBI behaved exactly like my fellow citizens would want them to behave, really? The FBI behaved appropriately when James Comey didn't tell the American people that the guy he leaked information through Daniel Richman was actually an employee of the FBI? Was Andy McCabe behaving appropriately when he lied three times under oath? Or Strzok and Page when they said all the terrible things they said about the President of the United States? Behaving appropriately?

And when they took the dossier to the court and didn't tell the court who paid for it and (inaudible).

(CROSSTALK)

PIRRO: Listen, here is my question, guys, when are you going to do something? What we need is McConnell and we need Paul Ryan to get their big boy pants on and do something. The American public is being torn apart over this unrelenting investigation that just won't end. The FBI and the DOJ are stalling, they are redacting. they are not complying with subpoenas. They are a bunch of -- at the upper echelon -- they are a bunch of fosters right now trying to make you look like fools and trying to make this 2018 election get past them, so that they can say that the President is corrupt.

DESANTIS: A couple of things, Judge, let me just say, I mean, one, Rosenstein should be recused from this. He wrote the memo saying to fire Comey. He should be recused.

PIRRO: I know guys, I know the intellectual arguments. My viewers want to know, what is the next step? What are you guys going to do? Does the President need to declassify? Tell me, Jim?

JORDAN: Yes, you know to do that, but the next step is we are going to start deposing witnesses this month. We should have done a long time ago, but we finally put -- we are going to depose -- pre-step, we are going to depose Steinbeck, other people the FBI and what we are pushing for is we need a deposition of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, so that needs to happen ASAP. It should have happened months ago, you are right, but let's do that and the President should in fact -- the three of us sent a letter to him, Judge. We have asked the President to give us the information we are entitled to see.

PIRRO: But you know what, here is a questions, guys, how does the President know what to seek to declassify other than the FISA warrant and the application if all this stuff is being prevented from him seeing it because they are covering up the dirty work.

(CROSSTALK)

JORDAN: The August 2 memo.

MEADOWS: Here is the interesting thing, judge. The President is all for transparency., whether it helps him or hurts him, he wants to get the message out, and I think that's the message that your viewers and the American people need to hear, it's all about transparency and it's time that the DOJ and FBI will not do it, they must be held in contempt.

We must put pressure on our leadership to do that. And if they are not willing to come forward, this is the (inaudible)...

(CROSSTALK)

PIRRO: I want all my viewers to get in touch with Paul Ryan. Tell him to get off his duff, get the leadership behind this thing and whoever is going to impeach Rod Rosenstein has got to do it, and if Jeff Sessions can't do his job because he's too scared and recusing himself, maybe he ought to resign himself, but that's just me.

Congressmen Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, Ron deSantis, thanks so much to all of you for being here today.

MEADOWS: Thank you, Judge. Great to be with you.

PIRRO: Thank you. This Monday will mark President Trump's 500th day in office. Joining me now to discuss that, and all of the developing news this week is counselor to the President, Kellyanne Conway. Good evening, Kellyanne, thank you so much for taking time on a Saturday night, we get it (inaudible).

(CROSSTALK)

KELLYANNE CONWAY, COUNSEL TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: Good evening, Judge Jeanine, and happy, happy healthy birthday to you.

PIRRO: Thank you. Now, they are going to Google. All right, Kellyanne, 500 days. What has the President accomplished, and don't go through a long list, but the big ones, the big things...

CONWAY: Well, I could go through a long list, but I will just give you the highlights, that's the whole point isn't it? There is so much that has happened. The sheer volume and velocity t which this President does his work and progresses on behalf of the American people, Jeanine, very simply, we are more prosperous, we are more secure and our government is more accountable.

Any one major achievement taken by itself would be enough in the first 500 days, but when you think of all them put together, ISIS is decimated. We are being respected in the world stage. This President's leadership has brought North Korea literally to the White House, literally to the negotiating table, the discussion table, and as the President said yesterday, a meeting will take place June 12the.

South Korea and Japan have also been very helpful in getting that to happen. The jobs numbers -- the "New York Times" itself admitted yesterday, they ran out of ways to describe these jobs numbers. Meaning, they had exhausted all of the superlatives. Listen, America, if you are a man, if you are a woman, if you are a teenager, if you are African- American, if you are Asian, if you are Hispanic -- you have the lowest unemployment rate in 18 years if ever.

For only the seventh time since 1970, Jeanine, the unemployment rate is below 4%. The seventh time since 1970, think of that, in 48 years. That doesn't happen by coincidence. That happens by causation. And Jeanine, right up your alley, one-eighth of our US Circuit Court now includes a Trump judge. That's very important. Twenty one US circuit court judges, and of course, Justice Neil Gorsuch of the United States Supreme Court, so everywhere you look, there is Trump progress, the regulatory reductions, small business confidence, consumer confidence -- it's all around us.

And those who deny it are just spitting into the wind as they always are, but who cares. We won't even pay attention. He's there for the forgotten men and the forgotten women, not the cranks on cable TV who don't want to give him any credit.

PIRRO: You know, and so I want to go into that Kellyanne now, you know, we will always have the cranks on TV, Nancy Pelosi, when she heard that the meeting was off with Kim Jong-un, she basically was -- she was almost cheering and saying it was a big win for Kim Jong-un.

Now that it's back on for June 12th, and you know, all the naysayers said, "Oh, it will never be back on. It will never be back on." Americans have to say to themselves, this guy really does know what he's doing. He's bringing Kim Jong-un to the table. Yes?

CONWAY: Literally. And everyone should be happy about it. Jeanine, a denuclearized Korean peninsula is in everybody's interest. I don't know why the Democrats would cheer the lowering of the fortunes or the rising of the probability that maybe the meeting wouldn't happen. It is the President of the United States who sent that letter only ten days ago, only eight days before North Korea was here in Washington, DC trying to get to the next step for that June 12th summit to actually occur.

And that letter from the President covered the entire waterfront, that it was North Korea who was sending the invitation, the United States accepted it, it looked like things weren't happening, that's fine, meeting cancelled. But the President -- and now it is back on.

The President himself said, on Thursday on the record to the media that it may take more than one meeting. Jeanine, we had nearly 70 years of war. This President has been at it for seven weeks, seven months. He and Secretary of State Pompeo, in earnest on this issue. It's been a very short period of time, but people should stop cheering depending on who is involved and they should actually look at the substance of the issue, and that is why I have such faith in the American people. They see it. They know we are more prosperous, we are more secure and that's why we are calling Monday 500 days of American Greatness, any one of these accomplishments by itself would be plenty but all of them put together is 500 days of American greatness.

And if people aren't going to get the message out, we will.

PIRRO: Okay, and you are, but I must tell you, you know, with all of the stuff that happened this week with that Samantha Bee and the horrible things she said about Ivanka, and I have always said, Ivanka is a woman who has spent her adult career trying to empower women. She is someone who has done everything she can, it's not just in the United States, but around the world, to give women the ability to start businesses.

But -- so the President is in Washington. He works 24/7, and he never stops, but the hits just keep on coming. Does it affect him at all?

CONWAY: Not really, and I will tell you why. The President sees in the faces of the American people, especially when he gets out of Washington when he travels. He met with families from Santa Fe, off the record, no media in the room on Thursday, I happened to be there with him. He went to Nashville.

He travels about once or twice a week now and will continue to. I mean, he's out there with the people who are so excited about his progress. He sees it and it matters, and look...

(CROSSTALK)

CONWAY: The Ivanka legacy will be great for women. She has such an investment and it's incredible and that's what matters in the end.

PIRRO: All right, Kellyanne Conway, thanks so much for being with us tonight.

And The Mooch, Scaramucci still on deck, plus "Street Justice" take on Samantha Bee, and next, President Trump goes on the record saying he's considering a move that could free controversial former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, but will it happen.

Joining me next live is Patti Blagojevich, the former governor's wife. It's a "Justice" exclusive and it's next.

Developing tonight, the President is still considering a possible pardon of celebrity TV personality, Martha Stewart and commuting the sentence of controversial former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. This as he did pardon conservative commentator Dinesh D'Souza.

Now, D'Souza says that he was singled out for prosecution by former President Obama's administration because of his conservative politics. In fact, he wrote a not so flattering movie about President Obama.

Joining me now, one of "Justice's" exclusive is Patti Blagojevich, former Illinois Governor's wife. Patti, good evening and thank you for joining us tonight.

PATTI BLAGOJEVICH, FORMER ILLINOIS GOVERNOR'S WIFE: Oh, thank you, Judge, thanks for having me.

PIRRO: My pleasure, now, your husband Rod has been in jail for how many years?

BLAGOJEVICH: He's going into his seventh year right now.

PIRRO: Okay, and how old were your children when they first went to jail in.

BLAGOJEVICH: Well, let's see, seven years ago, so my little one was fourth grade and my older one, I think I go by grades instead, and my older one was in seventh grade, and it really tough.

PIRRO: But now your older one is how old? She was in seventh grade?

BLAGOJEVICH: So my older one is graduating from college this month, and my little one, her high school graduation -- it was just -- it was awful. Senior prom. All those big special events, he missed, but most of importantly, he missed those like every day driving her to school, teaching her to drive. All that kind of stuff. And my younger one is now 15, so finishing up her freshman year of high school.

PIRRO: And I remember, I was living in Chicago at the time, and I remember your husband walking out on the street, and people -- I mean, I think, he was on trial, but people loved this guy, and there were many who feel, and I believe maybe the President does as well, that you know, the guy was just kind of practicing politics.

He never really got any money in exchange or gifts or you know -- we hear about this stuff all the time in Washington, but he seemed to be on the bad side, like Dinesh D'Souza of the Obama administration. Is that accurate?

BLAGOJEVICH: Right, yes, the same people that went after Mr. D'Souza are the same people that went after my husband, the same people that are going after the President now. I's the same MO, and you know, they are using their offices to try to undo elections and try to play politics instead of trying to do what they are supposed to do, which is to seek justice.

You know, our system of government has got a system of checks and balances for a reason. And sometimes, the courts and these prosecutors get it wrong whether maliciously or just by accident, and it takes a strong leader like President Trump to right those wrongs.

PIRRO: But you know, it's interesting, Patti, it's very interesting when you say the same prosecutors, and I think my viewers need to understand what you are saying.

The guy who prosecuted your husband was a guy by the name of name Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald is pals with Comey who put Martha Stewart in prison and Fitzgerald is the one who is now representing Comey, and you know, it's like this triumvirate of Comey, Fitzgerald and Comey's other attorney, Kelly, who have together you know, kind of gone over to the dark side, many think, in terms of the way they are handling these cases.

BLAGOJEVICH: Absolutely. They create crimes when there are no crimes. This is the case with my husband. It was this ridiculous selling of the senate seat crime that they invented. It was overturned on appeal years ago. People don't understand that. That was considered political log rolling. They make up crimes where there are none and they make a big splash in the press just to try to bring down people that are either controversial or people that they just don't like.

PIRRO: They don't like if they are part of the Obama group, but Patti Blagojevich, I want to wish you much luck on this, but I have one quick question. Is your husband's hair still as thick as it used to be? He was known for his hair, is it?

BLAGOJEVICH: Yes, he's very blessed that way.

PIRRO: Shouldn't we all be. Patti Blagojevich, much luck and prayers to you. Thank you.

BLAGOJEVICH: Thank you so much.

PIRRO: All right, and Candace Owens from Turning Point USA is just minutes away. But next, the Mooch comes to "Justice," Anthony Scaramucci standing by live to talk about this week in the White House and more. Don't miss this interview. It's next.

Another big week for the Trump administration and a lot to talk about with my next guest, former White House Communications Director, Anthony Scaramucci. He joins me now from The Hamptons. Thanks for taking the time out, Anthony. All right, you may have just heard...

ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: I requested a beach backdrop, but I didn't get it.

PIRRO: Sorry, but you're there, so I don't care. But listen, we were just talking with Patti Blagojevich. A lot of people think that 14 years in jail for her husband who apparently had upset the Obama administration was a bit much given there was nothing other their run-of-the-mill campaign stuff where what you guys should do is, you know, let's do some fundraising. I mean, come on, who doesn't do that? Your local mayor does it.

SCARAMUCCI: My heart goes out to her. I thought that the story that she was telling about her children was obviously, I am very sympathetic to her, but what happened there was the sort of the fire starter for what ultimately they ended up doing to candidate Trump and President Trump because they were getting away with so much latitude and prosecutorial overreach and basically weaponizing these agencies and using them as political instruments, to take out their enemies.

And so, whether they were crimes like Dinesh D'Souza or the nonsense and factual incorrectness of the Blagojevich situation, they knew that they could put people in jail and make big splashes and really disrupt and subvert the rule of law. One of the things that the President is doing by putting out these pardons, he's basically sending a message to the American people that this nonsense is over.

He is effectively resetting the fairness in the judicial process, Judge, and so, I'm super happy about that, particularly for the people I know that I know were treated unfairly.

PIRRO: You know what is amazing about it, so many of the Presidents wait until their last week or even their last day in office to pardon individuals. President Trump is being transparent. He's doing it now. He's willing to take them on. Give me whatever your criticism is. But you know, here is the difference between what they did, what a lot of them did.

Nobody gave donald Trump money to do this. And if you think about Bill Clinton pardoning Marc Rich after his wife gave him millions of dollars for whatever, maybe the Foundation -- the library, and he does it on his way out. This President has the fortitude or the chutzpah, let's say, to just do it and say, "You know what? Come at me, I'll tell you why."

SCARAMUCCI: He has the constitutional right to do that. What has not been mentioned all week is that President Clinton also pardoned his brother Roger Clinton for cocaine trafficking and cocaine use.

And by the way, I have absolutely no problem with him doing that, that is his constitutional right to do so. And so I am proud of the President's moves. It's once again the disrupter-in-chief doing the things that he thinks makes sense for the American people and is off the mark of that system that we now call the swamp, Judge.

You know, you were talking about Trey Gowdy earlier in the show, I have an enormous amount of respect for Trey Gowdy, but what happens when you spend too much time in that system, you get some swamp juice on you.

And so, he is saying things now, where he's parsing things in a way that Trey Gowdy, two or three years ago wouldn't be sounding the way he's sounding today on the way out.

PIRRO: Yes, there is no doubt about it.

SCARAMUCCI: I mean, I don't know what his future is, but it just smells like he's going to be doing a lobbyist job or something along those lines to be talking the way he is.

PIRRO: Yes, because it doesn't make sense, and I agree with you. I want to continue to talk about what is going on this week with Ivanka and the left, the main stream media and the left-wing liberals. What do you think of what happened with Samantha Bee?

SCARAMUCCI: Well, listen, I mean, it's actually a matter of fact that there is a double standard in our society because the left controls the mainstream media and most of Hollywood, and so Samantha Bee, she will get full latitude and license. Apologies accepted. No problem. We will issue a tweet and a statement.

Somebody on the right that does the same thing, they want to hit the eject button like they did in the "Austin Powers" movie and flip people into the fire, and so they do that constantly. And it is upsetting, you know, Sean Hannity and I have actually debated this.

He originally wasn't for boycotts. Now he is for boycotts, because unfortunately, if you don't fight fire with fire, Judge. Sean's position was in the beginning, I don't want anybody boycotted, I believe in free speech. But then they start this boycott nonsense on him. And he is like, "Okay, well, if you don't fight with fire, we are not going to be able to ceasefire."

PIRRO: Well, all right, Anthony...

SCARAMUCCI: So, for me, I don't want people losing their jobs, but at the end of the day we have to stop this nonsense.

PIRRO: It's crazy, and especially with Roseanne. You don't have to end the show. I mean, plus, and I know what she said was horrible -- but anyway, Anthony Scaramucci, I mean, you don't have to get rid of the show with everybody else, is what I am saying, it's between the camera people, the writers, the actors.

Anthony, good to have you on the show tonight. Thank you.

SCARAMUCCI: Great to be here.

PIRRO: Okay, Samantha Bee finally sees justice, "Street Justice" that is. Find out what America thinks about the foul mouth TV host, and next, Candace Owens joins me live to tal.k about the most outrageous things we heard this week from the left. "Justice" rolls on in a moment, and here she comes.

Welcome back to "Justice." Now take a listen to what I heard on CNN this week.

(VIDEO CLIP STARTS)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He has it more popular, I think to be openly racist.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you suggesting they are racist?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All the people who voted for Donald Trump are racist?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

(VIDEO CLIP ENDS)

PIRRO: And that's just one of the most of outrageous comments I've heard this week. Joining me now, Turning Point Communications Director, Candace Owens. Candace, so good to have you back on the show. So, is it true -- I won't even ask you that, are all the people who voted for Donald Trump racist? Where do they get off saying this stuff?

CANDACE OWENS, COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, TURNING POINT: You have to give her some credit for saying it with a straight face and with a little bit of passion and fire. And so, we are going to give her a little bit of credit here. But I don't know, (inaudible) that's completely bored with this, like this narrative is just -- it's exhausting.

Maybe, it stung a little bit the first billion times they said it, but now, it's just like okay, guys, let's wrap this party up. It's ridiculous. There is no meaning to it. It's just them unwilling to accept that maybe people have different ideas and beliefs.

PIRRO: Okay, but here is the problem, you know, it's like something that you were talking about where there are people saying they rather date an MS-13 gang member, than a Trump supporter. I mean, these are young people, these are millennials. And here is my concern that people are buying this crap. You say something often enough and people think it's true.

OWENS: Well, that's definitely true and I think that primarily, with the younger generation, they are a target because they are already in their school systems. They are in college, so it is indoctrination happening at the highest levels.

When they get out into the real world and they start to understand how mortgages work and you know, (inaudible) their checkbook, they go, oh, well maybe they are voting for different reasons, and voting with their brains, and not just their emotions.

PIRRO: But do you think you know, it is interesting though, do you think that the schools, the education system is kind of causing them to think this way and to buy this stuff as opposed to being you know, somewhat critical of information in here?

OWENS; Oh, I know this for a fact. I don't just think it. I know it. This is exactly what we do at Turning Point USA. We go and we talk to these students on campus. Just take a look at a textbook, you see so many students that are speaking out saying that their professors are upset with them for being Trump supporters. They are being tortured for being conservatives.

It is not a safe place to be on a college campus today and hold conservative beliefs.

PIRRO: Yes, yes, and I know because I have spoken on college campuses, but you knw, here is an ad that I want you to listen to. I think we have one coming up here.

(VIDEO CLIP STARTS)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: After 9/11, the greatest threat to our democracy lived in a cave. Today, he lives in the White House.

(VIDEO CLIP ENDS)

PIRRO: Okay, the greatest threat to our democracy lived in a cage and this guy is running for political office and he thinks the greatest threat to democracy lives in the White House today. How outrageous is this?

OWENS: Yes, that is not as funny as other one. I think this is actually very serious. We refer to this colloquially as Trump derangement syndrome, but it's a real thing. People become so obsessed and so deranged with the idea of not understanding how Trump got into the White House that they are willing to correlate him and also forget people that have done abhorrent things in the history of the world.

They are willing to forgive those people and paint them to be lighthearted characters, like Hitler, like Mussolini. I have seen it and now, we are talking about Osama Bin Laden, so this is very serious and it just goes to show you that this man does not possess the modest intelligence enough to win office anywhere.

PIRRO: But let me ask you this, this guy made an ad, had enough money to make this ad. Okay, he is running for office, and I don't want to give him too much credit or attention, but I find his absolutely frightening -- it is -- that someone in the United States of America. This guy is on the screen. His name is Dan Helmer would actually say that Donald Trump is worse than Osama Bin Laden.

OWENS: It is actually frightening and that is why I said, it is something that we need t have a serious discussion about because that's scary. That's (inaudible)...

PIRRO: But Candace, when do we get to the discussion?

OWENS: I know, I feel like you and I have been having it all the time, and we're constantly going up there and saying this, and certainly, our President is out there having a discussion all the time as well.

But the parents that are upset about Donald Trump's presidency need to exit this sort of extreme narrative and say to their children, "Listen, maybe I don't like him personally, but this is very extreme."

PIRRO: Yes, it is frightening. Anyway, Candace Owens, so good to have you here.

OWENS: Thank you for having me.

PIRRO: And my pleasure. All right, and speaking of outrageous, Samantha Bee gets some "Street Justice". It's next.

So what do people really think of Samantha Bee's hateful comments? Take a look at tonight's "Street Justice."

All right, so here I am in Manhattan, trying to figure out what New Yorkers think of what Samantha Bee said about President Trump's daughter, Ivanka -- so Samantha Bee calls President Trump's daughter, Ivanka, a feckless c- word, that most people have never even said, but she still has her show. Should she be able to keep her show?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, I don't think she'd get much support for using language like that. I know I wouldn't watch it.

PIRRO: So, if that were said against a Democrat President's daughter like Chelsea Clinton...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh forget it, the world would be in uproar.

PIRRO: Okay, and she would lose her show?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Absolutely, yes.

PIRRO: Roseanne Barr lost her show, what should happen to Samantha Bee?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think she has the right to say what she wants to say but I think she better be prepared for people to not pay any attention.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I definitely believe in the First Amendment, she has the right to say something, but she should be held accountable the same way Roseanne had the right to say something, but should be held accountable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that was personal. It wasn't racial.

PIRRO: It was misogynistic. Woman hating.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But a woman said it.

PIRRO: That doesn't make it any less misogynistic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I didn't say it did.

PIRRO: Is there a difference between the way they treat liberals and the way they treat Republicans.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, yes, I think there is a double standard across the board. It's kind of -- not just Democratic and Republican, but it kind of -- a lot of people are hypocritic, they will say one thing and do another.

PIRRO: So Samantha Bee says something terrible about President Trump's daughter, she calls her a feckless c-word. I can't even say the word.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She should be fired also then.

PIRRO: But she is not being fired.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why is that? Fair is fair.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I agree to believe it is not appropriate to say these kinds of things on television in public. You can think something, but I think to keep it for yourself and not talk to a big audience.

PIRRO: What should happen? I love you, too, but what about Samantha Bee? Should she lose her job?

(VIDEO CLIP ENDS)

PIRRO: We'll be right back. That was Persia the dog. Finally, tonight, don't forget to friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter and on Instagram @judge_jeanine. You never have to miss "Justice." Set your DVR if you are not going to be home, plus get ready, my new book, "Liars, Leakers and Liberals: The Case Against the Anti-Trump Conspiracy" comes out in July, but it's my birthday today, so you can preorder it now on amazon.com and Barnes & Noble.

To all those people I went to Israel with on United West, it was great being with you all. To Prime Minister Netanyahu, the only interview who gave an interview on the day of the opening of the embassy, it was a pleasure interviewing you.

And I want to thank the Vanderhogans (ph) for opening their home to us when we were there.

Thanks for watching, I'm Jeanine Pirro, advocating for truth, justice and the American way. "The Greg Gutfeld Show" is coming up and I'll see you next Saturday.

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.