Giuliani on possibility of Cohen cooperating, Mueller probe

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," June 13, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: All right good evening from Washington, I'm Laura Ingraham and this is "The Ingraham Angle." Great stories, incredible line up of guests tonight, Rudy Giuliani, Alan Dershowitz, Andy McCarthy, Jason Chaffetz and a lot more. On the eve of the release of the IG report on the Clinton probe, there are reports that it could hold devastating news for Jim Comey and Andrew McCabe, so our experts will be setting the able for all of you. And Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is expected to speak any moment from South Korea, we'll bring you that. While the North Korea is saying Kim Jong Un could visit the United States soon, can you believe that? Plus in Seen and Unseen, Raymond Arroyo will show us the unbelievable lengths that one Democrats is going to, to make a point about guns, wait till you see it, it's unbelievable. And what do you think God looks like? A new story offers some hints. But first we look at President Trump's return to Washington after his stunning success in Singapore. Remember before the President departed for the Summit, America got some of its most incredible economic news, since probably I worked for the Reagan administration. So now the President is basking in this glow of this historic diplomatic triumph and he should. Now the Mueller probe still going on, it's in its second year and it continues to loom. But the President continues to rack up these successes and I think Americans are beginning to really notice, and so is Washington. Even Mueller friendly Republicans are growing tired of the endless probe.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN THUNE, R-S.D.: Let's get the process moving forward. Let's get it wrapped and concluded because it just seems to me at least that this thing is sort of a never ending episode and I think the American people are growing weary of it.

REP. PAUL RYAN, R-WIS., SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: I would like to see it get wrapped up, of course and we want to see this thing come to its conclusion.

GREG GUTFIELD, FOX HOST: Is it a witch hunt?

REP. STEVE SCALISE, R-LA., HOUSE MAJORITY WHIP: Well I think it's becoming a witch hunt-

GUTFILED: Becoming or is?

SCALISE: Look if they've got facts about collusion with Russia, and that's what this is supposed to be about, we've never seen any-

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well the public seems to be growing weary of this too. The support from Mueller just hit an all-time low despite the media's constant cheerleading for the Russia Probe. A record 36% of registered voters now view Mueller unfavourably according to a new Politico Morning Consult Poll. That's a big jump, 13% more than last July. Not long after the Special Counsel's investigation began. And that includes by the way a record 53% of Republicans, an enormous jump of 26 points over the last year. So people have been paying attention to the story folks. Predictably the left is not yet ready to give up on their beloved witch hunt however

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN RHODES, FORMER OBAMA DEPUTY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: There's all this noise and Trump tries to create a distraction. Bob Mueller is just methodically building up a case that I think adds up to very high levels around Trump.

PHIL MUDD, CNN COUTERTERRORISM ANALYST: The law enforcement and the investigative guys at the department of justice and the FBI, including Trump appointees like the deputy attorney general and the FBI Director say that this investigation is significant we should continue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well even Democratic voters, though, are losing faith in Mueller. The polling also found that Mueller is now viewed unfavourable by 24 percent of Democrats and a record 33% of Independents. What's the translation on this? President Trump is riding higher than ever before and support for the Mueller probe is sliding. Imagine if the press was actually fair about this, where these numbers would be. So here's a question for you, is the time right for the President to voluntarily submit to an interview with Mueller to get this thing wrapped up? Who better to answer that question but the President's lawyer himself Rudy Giuliani, great to see you, how are you? So lots of news, President looked great in Singapore, no doubt about it. He came back, he's in a great mood. However, of course right when he comes back, few hours go by and the news about Michael Cohen perhaps cooperating with authorities. What's your reaction to this?

RUDY GIULIANI, ATTORNEY TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Well I checked into this last night, it's not so, he's not cooperating, nor do we care because President did nothing wrong. We are very comfortable if he cooperates. There's nothing he can cooperate about with regard to President Trump. I am absolutely certain of that from everything I know about that investigation, including the things that Rosenstein said to President Trump himself, that he's not involved in that investigation. My concern is that the Mueller investigation now is going on interminably and I think it is reflected in public opinion. Public opinion is disgusted with, how about he's wasted $20 million? Maybe he should put out an interim report, maybe he should tell us wat he's got on collusion. They don't have anything on collusion. Obstruction of justice is really, totally negated by article two of the constitution, President can fire anybody he wants, for any reason he wants, they can't even enquire about that so I don't know what he's got left. He's harassing Michael Cohen, the Manafort case looks like it's falling apart--

INGRAHAM: Well there's twenties, a guilty pleas--

GIULIANI: You take out the Manafort case which may go out on lack of authorization and now this ridiculous witness tampering, I can't even figure it out. Second you've got the Russians that are all in Russia, they're not coming to the US, it's a phoney indictment, they don't need to prosecute it and they were harassing Hillary rallies dressing up like clowns, we got a lot worse than that.

INGRAHAM: Have you probed, have you asked the special counsel's office why they haven't brought certain people in for questioning? If they're going to focus on this Trump Tower meeting, as we know that's they're focus, why wouldn't they bring in the Russian attorney who they make this big pitch for? "Oh she's close to Putin, she was trying to--

GIULIANI: Maybe because she said nothing happened, over and over.

INGRAHAM: Well not only that, she said was willing, happy to come into the United States to film this guy. She'd be happy to come and they're not calling her in.

GIULIANI: Here's one of the things we pulled out very early in this, Mueller can't indict anybody. A sitting President cannot be indicted, no body disputes that and he's not. So he gets to right a report, maybe, and doesn't right the report, Rosenstein has to right the report. So let's just get it over with. He's gotten one point four million documents, 32 witnesses, we've raised no executive privilege over any of it, unlike Clinton, unlike Nixon. He's got the material from which to write a report right now, except the report would say, "No evidence of collusion on the part of President Trump"

INGRAHAM: He wants to get into the state of mind that the President was thinking when he fired Comey. It's a state of mind question, correct?

GIULIANI: That becomes a guessing game and I think he gets the--

INGRAHAM: But he can't do that until he gets the President across the table, or any written answers.

GIULIANI: He's not getting the President on any kind of obstruction of justice questioning, it's not going to happen. His whole theory is cockamamie, his whole theory is, I can interpret it, the President can have five reasons, all if which are legitimate, plus an article to immunity to do what he was doing and I think he really did it for a corrupt reason so I'm going to recommend that he did something wrong. Plus his main witness there is Comey and I don't know the Horowitz report detail. I think it's going to be a tough one, 500 pages.

INGRAHAM: The President has seen it, or he's seeing it-

GIULIANI: Tomorrow at three of four.

INGRAHAM: He gets it before other people?

GIULIANI: An unedited version of it, without all the excising that they do because that's where the juicy stuff will be. We might not get to see that, we can guess on it, but at a minimum we know already from the leaks, and you wonder how these leaks take place, that it's going to criticize him heavily for his first Hillary Press Conference, for his second Hillary Press Conference.

INGRAHAM: And so that goes to his credibility of how he handled the Russian investigation, in your mind?

GIULIANI: He usurped the responsibility of the attorney general, you know that. He became the attorney general, he's not the attorney general, he's the director of the FBI. It's like the chief detective deciding whether to prosecute or not. He wrote the report two months before. I asked Mueller when we met him if he would do that for us. How about writing the report now and giving it to us, he said, "No, no, that would be an improper investigation".

INGRHAHAM: When is he going to determine the issue of providing written answers or limited questioning?

GIULINANI: Very quickly. We're addressing that now with the President. Jay and the Raskins, we're all working on it.

INGRAHAM: Is there a dispute among you about how to proceed? I mean it's healthy to have a dispute.

GIULIANI: Yeah probably a little bit but all of us know he shouldn't testify unless we get everything we want and he wants. Remember, you know him he wants to testify, his complaint is, "I did nothing wrong, I can stand up to any questioning". What he doesn't realize is how pernicious they are. They're all disreputable, unethical lawyers.

INGRAHAM: No they're really good lawyers? If they were really good lawyers, this case would be done. And a number of them have already shown a bias and an animus against this President.

GIULIANI: How about the ones who have already been cited for ethic violations for not turning over exculpatory material? You think I'm going to trust them with the President of the United States?

INGRAHAM: Are you talking about who would do the questioning? Are you getting into that level of detail now?

GIULIANI: I think it should be Mueller, right?

INGRAHM: Mueller himself. Was it Ken Starr I remember Sol Wisenberg was the interviewer of Clinton.

GIULIANI: Ken was an independent lawyer, I was a trial lawyer, and he was a trial lawyer. So it's his reputation at stake, shouldn't be turned over to quarrels, should be turned over to--

INGRAHAM: Are you guys worried that there are any tape recordings that Michael Cohen might have in his possession of conversations with the President or about the President that either he could have exaggerated things to other people to curry favour or to look like he is bigger than he is? I'm not saying that he did that but you guys don't know, you have some of the documents but you don't have the documents, correct, that was turned over to the Southern District of New York that they seized. So you're looking at him for privilege, some concerns--

GIULIANI: No. I got something better than that. I've known him for thirsty years, I know him as a businessman in New York. The President of the United States was a tough businessman, but just like he's done nothing wrong in this thing, he was as clean as a whistle in the way, he might have been tough, he might have been difficult on situations like he was on North Korea, but he was a man of his word. And Michael Cohen, I think, would tell you that he's got nothing incriminating with the President and really, they should stop going after him, they're torturing the guy.

INGRAHAM: You're a former prosecutor, they threatened to bankrupt you or you know you will be bankrupt. He's switched lawyers, he trying to find a new lawyer. We don't know what that means, we don't know his legal team before but high bills pile up real fast. And you go to jail for ten years.

GIULIANI: Of course they do and the reality is that they are trying to frighten him. Michael's a tough guy, I don't think that going to happen, and if it does, he surely isn't going to lie.

INGRAHAM: Eric Swalwell, frequent Democrat on the relevant committee said this

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ERIC SWALWELL , D-CALIF.: Innocent people don't worry about whether someone's going to flip on them, and also let's just be real, honest Presidents don't have fixers. And I think we're so in a thick of this that we take a step back and realize every day we talk about Mr. Cohen as Donald Trump's fixer, that's a problem. Innocent people don't need fixers, innocent people fix things themselves by just shooting straight and telling the truth. And so I think this is the beginning of a dark, dark storm coming for the President.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Avenatti was basically saying the same thing.

GIULIANI: Oh come one. First of all, fixer means somebody who can get things done, people hire them in New York, they're called experditists to get their building permit.

INGRAHAM: They don't know New York lingo, really.

GIULIANI: Michael said I was Ray Donovan, I was a fixer. What he meant by that is I expedited things, I got them done, not in an illegally. Nobody's ever really said anything about that up until now and this idea that the President is perfectly clean and hasn't done anything wrong isn't going to be framed by somebody when they donated thirty-six grand to the Hillary campaign where at her victory/defeat party cried the night she lost, hey. These are guys that already have been cited for not turning over exculpatory evidence about innocent people and this idiot Congressman wants me to trust them? Look, I've been a lawyer a long time, that kid doesn't know what he's talking about. That guy is not representing anybody.

INGRAHAM: Are you also going to make an argument about the underlying constitutionality of the special counsel in this process?

GIULIANI: Both on his face, and as applied, because on his face--

INGRAHAM: The statute, just the statute.

GIULIANI: The statute itself, and the second, fact that it was produced by what might have been a totally illegal counterintelligence investigation that they tried to make into a criminal investigation. And clearly by the Comey memo, we have to see what Horowitz says tomorrow, like Professor Calabresi said, that memo could blow the whole thing up.

INGRAHAM: Why is Kellyanne Conway's husband George, I've known him for 30 years, he's a close friend, he's brilliant. We thought he might be SG at the justice department, he would have made a great one. He's written an article for the Hill, I think it was in the Hill, where he basically said this argument about the unconstitutionality of the statute. He just smashes Calabresi's argument. He says it absurd, no serious legal scholar buys into the appointment clause argument and he just destroys it. And he's Kellyanne's husband, is there any concern about that at the White House?

GIULIANI: No concern about it-

INGRAHAM: Husbands and wives don't have to agree on everything, by the way.

GIULIANI: That is not as clear an argument as let's say they're inability to indict, even their inability to subpoena, that intrudes article two.

INGRAHAM: You guys already written the briefs on that?

GIULIANI: Well, more or less, yeah.

INGRAHAM: More or less done? Figured.

GIULIANI: However, I would think that it's an undecided question. So how can Conway decide the question? Maybe he wants to be on the Supreme Court but he not going to get the appointment.

INGRAHAM: George is --

GIULIANI: George is not getting on the Supreme Court, I think I can predict that.

INGRAHAM: Is there a concern about, just going back to Cohen for a moment, I know because I've had clients like this where they're screws are put to them. This is where I'm not as big a fan or prosecutors, we love you Rudy, but I'm not as big a fan of prosecutors as come Conservative are because with unbridled power, unchecked power becomes abuse of discretion from Patrick Fitzgerald, what happened with people like Conrad Black.

GIULIANI: Yeah I agree with that. Seems like a little group right?

INGRAHAM: Well it's like four people.

GUILIANI: Fitzgerald, Comey, big pile of Muellers, Wiseman, these guys, come on.

INGRAHAM: Now Patrick Fitzgerald is Comey's attorney, Scooter Libby and all the rest of it.

GIULIANI: And now he's representing him. I think is going down tomorrow.

INGRAHAM: So when someone like Cohen, or anybody, has the screws turned on him, you're going to lose your family, you're going to be in jail for 10 years, you're going to do this. What are you going to give us? Tell us, you're going to tell us. I mean people freak out, that's what the power of prosecutors do.

GIULIANI: I empathize greatly with Michael. I do not believe he's going to tell a false-it. And I think he's going to tell the truth and we are very comfortable with that. President's very comfortable with, we've known him for years--

INGRAHAM: So what if he's in trouble on another matter? What if he's in trouble on something else?

GIULIANI: He'll deal with it and I think--

INGRAHAM: I have no idea whether he is, I'm just putting it out.

GIULIANI: I know they guy and I still trust in him until they show me something to the contrary and I haven't seen it yet.

INGRAHAM: Reports are that he's upset that he hasn't, obviously he can't talk to the President now that he's involved but reports are that he's feeling all alone out there and that's also a hard--

GIULIANI: The President is feeling that was too. Shane and I advised the President that that would be misunderstood. You would tell your client all the time, don't talk to this one. Look at Mananfort. Manafort was probably totally innocent and talking to these people in wanting to find out about his case, and now they've turned the whole thing into another charge against him because their first charge is going under.

INGRAHAM: No, you can't pick up the phone, that's witness tampering and all. What's your guess about when this thing will be decided over the testimony because that's it. Everything you hear from Mueller, they've interviewed pretty much everybody that they wanted to.

GIULIANI: I believe we will decided on it unless something goes wrong and we've had a couple of things go wrong, the Cohen situation, the Spygate situation, but if nothing else breaks like that, possible this Horowitz thing, that may delay us, I don't know. It is 500 pages but we should get it done in the next week or two, get the decision done. Which means then we got to battling over a subpoena or getting him ready for a small tailored, limited interview.

INGRAHAM: 150 subpoenas, blank subpoenas, this came out late today, Mueller has requested. What could be about do you think? Is that a mind game he's playing with you guys, "Okay, there's more people coming in, this is never going to end".

GIULIANI: Frankly, if it's a mind game, it works the opposite way, at this late stage, if he's issuing 150 subpoenas, he's got nothing.

INGRAHAM: What have they been doing for the last year?

GIULIANI: Where's the collusion, where's the obstruction, except in their head. So if they have to do 150 subpoenas at this point, everybody knows this, they have no case because Donald Trump didn't do anything wrong.

INGRAHAM: When you talked to Cohen back a year ago or so, I don't know if you saw that he was going to try and get the Trump Tower Moscow done. Look at all these business interests all over the country. He dropped the stuff when he ran for President. And he wanted to get that done and reportedly he had written a note to Putin saying, "this is a log jam here, what's going to happen?" It didn't go anywhere but that's all he's listed on one or two or three Russian contacts that Cohen made. Are you aware of this, have you been discussing this with the (Woolertons)?

GIULIANI: We're aware of it and we think it has no connection.

INGRAHAM: Was it greenlighted by candidate Trump?

GIULIANI: I can't tell you that, that would be confidence. But the reality is, it wouldn't matter. Nothing came of it, there was no quit pro-quo for it. In essence if the President had colluded, which he didn't, President will tell you for the two years up to the election, "I didn't talk to any Russians, I don't know any Russians".

INGRAHAM: He doesn't drink so he didn't order any white Russians.

GIULIANI: "I didn't drink vodka with them, so what the hell are they talking about?" What they're talking about they're bitter over losing this election and some of the people right in Mueller's office were the ones crying, crying like babies, the night that Hillary lost. They are trying to delegitimize him.

INGRAHAM: The President said that he regrets not being able to have a better relationship with Russia because of all of this.

GIULIANI: Well that's a national security collateral damage of this investigation. Thank God he was able to do Korea. Thank God he's a man of discipline and he could do Korea.

INGRAHAM: Rudy Giuliani, always great to see you my friend, great to see you. And tomorrow's the day that could rock, as Rudy said, Jim Comey's world. Tonight we have Alan Dershowitz, Andy MaCarthy, Jason Chaffetz to tell us what to expect when that report is handed down tomorrow on Hillary's email investigation. Will she be walking in the woods when it comes out? Oh the suspense is building, can you feel it, and tomorrow will be a huge news day in Washington. The DOJ's inspector general will release his highly anticipated report, it's about time, on the Clinton email investigation. Congressman Peter King is predicting it will have devastating news for former FBI Chief Jim Comey and his ex-deputy Andrew McCabe. So let's bring in a stellar panel of experts to tell us what to expect. Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of the book coming out next month, ‘The Case Against Impeaching Trump", you're going to be real popular up there in Martha's Vineyard Alan, when that comes out. And Fox News Contributor Jason Chaffetz, with Chairman of the House Oversight Committee and we're so pleased to announce that making his debut tonight, as a Fox News Contributor is former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy, great to see all of you. Andy since you're the new kid on the block here, let's talk about where we are tonight. This interview I just had with Rudy, there are going to make a decision he said, in the next week or so, about whether the President will in any way testify, circumscribe questions by written answers unless something really unusual comes out in this IG Report. Your take on that.

ANDY MACCARTHY, FORMER US ATTORNEY: Well I still think Laura, that if the President was a journalist, there would be hoops that you'd have to go through in the justice department in order to even think about getting a sit down with him so I continue to not understand why, if you want to interview the President of the United States, as a prosecutor, you don't have to establish preliminarily, that there's a serious offense that he's been implicated in and that he's a repository of information that nobody else has and can only get from him. And frankly unless Mueller can satisfy that test, I don't understand why the justice department even allows this to be an issue.

INGRAHAM: Jason your role on the House Oversight Committee of course, well known. You've wrestled with the justice department so many time, trying to get records, what do you expect in this IG Report tomorrow?

JASON CHAFFETZ, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: I think it will be devastating to the higher echelon of the FBI. I think they misused and abused their power, I think they went outside of the normal protocols. Mr Horowitz was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate. He was appointed by President Obama and should be widely accepted by anybody and everybody on both sides of the isle as the closest that we are going to get to the truth. But they deviated from every norm, it's important to know what it's not going to do. It's not going to look at Pfizer abuse. It's not going to look at anything to do with Russia, but how that Clinton case was handled from suit to nuts, from top to bottom. You already have a criminal referral out of the IG's office, I think you're going to see more texts, more emails, and the deputies in particular, as well as Mr Comey. It's going to shed light on their inappropriate activities, there as they handled this case, which was apparently wrong.

INGRAHAM: And it goes to the credibility of Comey as an impartial guy who's calling balls and strikes, just trying to get to the truth. Alan Dershowitz, Jeff Sessions said in an interview today on The Hill TV, he talked about where we are with this IG Report. I want to play this for you. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFF SESSIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I think it will be lengthy report and a careful report. I think it will help us better fix any problem that we have and reassure the American people that some of the concerns that have been raised are not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Professor Dershowitz, your reaction to Sessions.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR EMERITUS: Well I think there are going to be two IG Reports, the one that's released and the one that was changed. And I hope that the various Senate and House investigating committees subpoena the original draft of the report so we can see what was in it before efforts were made to try to soften it and perhaps white wash the justice department. I think in the end the IG will come out with more public support than the Mueller probe now has. And I think if that happens it will demonstrate once again, we didn't need a special counsel. That the justice department career people, people who don't have a stake or a partisan interest, could have investigated every aspect of this case. We didn't need to spend $20 million, put targets on people's back, get a bunch of people indicted, not for what they allegedly did before the investigation began, but in response to the investigation. In other words investigations themselves create crimes when people get nervous and upset, as the clich, goes, ‘it's in the cover up'. So I think we're expecting a very, very significant report. I will certainly read it with great care. The one thing we know is that the inspector general has maintained his credibility at a time when few have maintained that in the justice department.

INGRAHAM: Well that's a great point and Andy I want to go to you because you just wrote this lengthy article about the manner in which the justice department has played this slow walking game of documents. Redacting documents saying they would harm national security. You went through point by point, their justifications for withholding information, and then in each case, you showed that that either that was not the case, not true, totally not necessary and just delayed getting to the bottom of what the real truth is here. Given that, how do we not call into question how they've been behaving all along on hurting and harming the ability of the Congress to do its oversight role?

MCCARTHY: Yeah it's really depressing in that regard Laura because national security is really the one area of the law where we really do have to keep secrets. We really do have to maintain the security of methods of gathering intelligence sources so it's got be the one place when you think about intelligence counter espionage, it's got to be the one pace that the government can look you in the eye and say you can trust us. And the problem with this transcends the whole business of Trump and Russia which, I understand everybody's obsessed with now, but what concerns me in the long term is that there a lot of things that we need to do to protect the United States that require that we will be able to maintain the integrity of intelligence and I think when the look you in the eye now and say, "You can trust us", a lot of people are going to look back and say, "I don't think so". INGRAHAM: Let's take a look at the deputy attorney general's war with Congress. FOX News' Catherine Herridge reported the bombshell yesterday that Rod Rosenstein threatened to subpoena the records of lawmakers investigating the DOJ and FBI, which includes their staff, of course.

I have to ask you this, Jason. I need to get Dershowitz's response as well. This is wild. The reports on Capitol Hill are that these 25-year- old staffers are shaking, going, oh, my God, am I going to jail, because they don't know how this stuff works. But is that an unprecedented move? Is it just Rosenstein getting his back up? And what does that do to the future relationship between Congress, which has a constitutional obligation to do oversight, and the Justice Department.

CHAFFETZ: It's wholly inappropriate if the deputy attorney general or anybody in government did that, it was wholly wrong. Unfortunately it's not unprecedented. I can tell you as the chairman of the Oversight Committee, I was targeted by the Secret Service. The inspector general came out with a report, they literally from the number three person at Secret Service it's time to target Jason Chaffetz and embarrass him. More than 40 agents and abused their powers in looking into my background. They didn't really find anything.

Then I had the problems with the IRS. And I also had some targeting that was done within the TSA. I'm the chairman of the committee. I can handle it. I'm an elected official. But when you are a young staffer and you've got this senior person at the department of justice threatening to dive into her background and subpoena your emails. But the problem is the leadership within the Republican Party never has your back. They don't support and they don't go after and they don't stand up for members of Congress, and they don't up for the staff.

INGRAHAM: Professor Dershowitz, Mark Meadows was on with me last night. He heard in real time because he hadn't heard it before what Jeff Sessions had said in defense of what Rosenstein had done there. This was Mark Meadows response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C., FREEDOM CAUCUS CHAIRMAN: We are a separate branch of government. They don't have the right to do that unless they are coming under some kind of criminal investigation. And for the attorney general to say he is confident that Rod Rosenstein did everything right, I'm confident that he doesn't know what he's talking about. I'm here to tell you we're fed up with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Professor, your reaction.

DERSHOWITZ: They idea that the Justice Department can threaten to issue subpoenas in retaliation for the legislative branch performing its duty to oversee the executive branch should frighten every American. This sounds like the prosecutor on "Billions" more than the real prosecutors in the United States. We have to be concerned as civil libertarians when prosecutors threaten to use subpoenas in retaliation for a branch of government engaging in appropriate checks and balances.

INGRAHAM: Gentlemen, thank you so much gentleman. We have breaking news. Right now we have to go do Seoul, South Korea, where Mike Pompeo, of course the secretary of state, is addressing reporters.

MIKE POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE: The discussions we held today amongst the three of us reflected our three country's commitment to continue to work together towards the ultimate success of this effort. Today the foreign minister and I discussed the outcome of President Trump's summit with Chairman Kim Jong Un and the importance of staying closely coordinated through the entire process of denuclearization.

The president's summit with North Korean leaders Kim Jong Un two days ago does indeed mark a turning point in the U.S.-North Korea relationship. Kim Jong Un's public commitment to completely denuclearize is an important step towards bringing lasting peace and stability to northeast Asia and indeed to the entire world.

As the president said this will be a process, and not an easy one. Staying closely aligned with our allies, the Republic of Korea and Japan will be critical to the success of that outcome. The world should rest assured that the United States, the Republic of Korea, and Japan remain committed to achieving the complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of North Korea. The U.S. alliances with these two countries are absolutely ironclad. Minister Kang, Minster Kono and I have developed a close friendship, and together we will continue to closely coordinate with respect to North Korea as we move forward together.

President Trump has also made it clear that if Kim Jong Un denuclearizes, there is a bright future for North Korea and its people. He outlined that vision beautifully here in Seoul when he spoke with the national assembly last November. We envision a strong, connected, secure, and prosperous North Korea that is fully integrated into the community of nations. Kim Jong Un indicated in Singapore that he shared that vision. We are eager to see him take the next steps to achieve it because the United States is ready for a new chapter in our history. Thank you.

INGRAHAM: Joining us now for instant reaction is Senator Lindsey Graham, member of the house -- excuse me, I always think of you as the House impeachment manager.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: I've been called worse. I've been called worse than that.

INGRAHAM: Senate Armed Services Committee. Thanks for joining us. First time on "The Ingraham Angle." It's great to see you.

GRAHAM: Thank you for having me.

INGRAHAM: So you heard a little tidbit there. What's your reaction?

GRAHAM: A very important statement that South Korea, Japan, and the United States thought the summit went well and we're together behind President Trump. Now if my Democratic friends would get behind President Trump, we may actually get a peace deal.

INGRAHAM: Some of them have. Some of the more progressive members of Congress have actually come out, it's kind of shocking, some of them actually for the impeachment of Trump I think. The thought, let's give peace a chance. And yet a lot of the real criticism comes from someone like a Chuck Schumer or some of the more never-Trump Republicans. Sometimes they throw you in that mix but I say that's not true. You and the president have a great relationship.

GRAHAM: I'm a big fan of President Trump. He inherited a problem that's been building for 30 years. There's no place for him to kick the can. Twenty years ago they didn't have any nuclear weapons, now they have got a bunch and they've got a missile that could hit America. If they marry the two up, then we are in trouble.

And President Trump has told me from day one, the first time I met him, I'm not going to let North Korea have a missile that can hit America with a nuclear weapon. That's a nonstarter. I'm going to offer them a deal that they can't refuse or shouldn't refuse.

The fact that South Korea, Japan, and the United States are talking as one really will help. Compliments to the president.

INGRAHAM: I have a brother who has lived in Korea for many, many years, and he's still there. And he said people gathered around little villages, the people are riveted. Every shopkeeper had a television on. And he said, let me tell you, to the South Korean people, this is like Gorbachev and Reagan. This is the biggest news, the most positive development for their lives because they still have family and North Korea. They want to have different scenarios not just for peace and safety but for their culture. They are a proud people, very proud.

GRAHAM: They there are over 2 million Korean-Americans, and they all have families. President and I talked a lot about this. He knows what a war would look like, and he would only do this if he had to because a lot of people are going to get hurt or die and it's unnecessary. But the president has made a decision, he's not going to contain a nuclear armed North Korea because they will sell what they build. He is going to bring the program to end in a win way. But Democrats who have written a letter to him what a good deal should look like, I ask you one thing. Tell the world, North Korea and China, that if diplomacy fails because they play the same old games, all options are on the table, and get behind President Trump when it comes to military --

INGRAHAM: Rand Paul says you are a danger to the world because you said that. Military options, of course aren't military options always on the table until we actually get something?

GRAHAM: If it's not we're never going to get a deal. I don't want to use it. The best way to make sure we have peace is to convince North Korea there will be a war they can't win. Trump has done something no other president has done. He's doing everything he knows how to avoid a war and I would beg North Korea and China to take him up on it.

INGRAHAM: It just came out before you came on that the Pentagon is expected to cancel the August military exercises with South Korea. Are you concerned about that? Is that too soon to cancel?

GRAHAM: So if the president called me on Air Force One and he said, listen, I'm trying to let them know I'm serious. They happen twice a year. Their designed to tell North Korea if you get in a fight with South Korea and the United States you'll lose. I'm willing to stand down to give them the space they need to make an intelligent decision. We can always put the exercises back on schedule, but this may be the last best chance in our lifetime for peace. And this is a bold move by the president. We're not going to withdraw our forces, but we're giving North Korea a sign of good will and some breathing space. And I don't blame him for doing this. To those who criticize the president, how well did you do in North Korea?

INGRAHAM: But you criticized him for complaining about how much it cost to do these -- I watched you on another network last night. Lindsey, I do my research on you. So you said it was ridiculous to question how much money it costs. But I kind of like the fact that the president is always worried about the taxpayers' money, whether it's money that we give overseas to countries that trash us, or -- not to say that it's not important. But I think most people are like, good, he's looking out for our money.

GRAHAM: The number one job of the federal government is to defend the nation. The number one job for those in the Congress and the president is to give the military the training and equipment they need.

INGRAHAM: Absolutely.

GRAHAM: So when you're training together with your allies, it's money well spent. We train so we don't have to fight.

INGRAHAM: It's incredibly important to our readiness. And the military will tell you that morning, noon, and night.

GRAHAM: Good luck President Trump.

INGRAHAM: Are we ever going to pull our troops out of there? He said that to Bret Baier, that's what he ultimately wants, 28,000 home.

GRAHAM: If we pulled that out, China would run through. They're doing the South China Sea.

INGRAHAM: The islands.

GRAHAM: It would be a sign of weakness to China. And China is double dealing now. They are beginning to back off. If you play Trump, you met with him, you shook his hand, you told him you wanted to give up your nukes for a good deal. If you play this guy, you're going to regret it. This is not Barack Obama. Don't play Trump.

INGRAHAM: Look at poor Justin Trudeau.

GRAHAM: He'll do that to Canada, what would he do to you.

INGRAHAM: Justin criticized him, it was like, he's going to pay. Lindsey Graham, always great to have you on. Thanks so much.

GRAHAM: Thanks.

INGRAHAM: All right, a Colorado Democrat thinking that going to extremes on camera is going to get him elected to Congress? This is the video. The video is awesome. "Seen and Unseen" with Raymond Arroyo, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's time for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we expose what's really behind the big cultural stories of the day. We kick off today's edition was something so ridiculous that it has to be seen to be believed. This is a candidate for Congress making a complete buffoon of himself in a desperate bid for votes. Here to fill us in is FOX News contributor, author of the "New York Times," bestselling author series of the Will Wilder series Raymond Arroyo. Who is this guy?

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: His name is Levi Tillemann. He's a Democrat from Colorado. He feels Congress has been talking over each other in regard to school safety. The Trump administration would like to arm teachers. Tillemann has a different approach and he demonstrates it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Empower schools and teachers with nonlethal self- defense tools, like this can of pepper spray. Trust me, this will stop anyone in their tracks.

It's incredibly painful. Now I just can't see anything.

For less than $1 per person in the U.S., we can have a secure canister of pepper spray in every classroom in America.

It's just unbearable. It's like lava in your eyes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: The ad is like lava in your eyes. Thank god he is not a wild game advocate. He would be setting off bear traps and bleeding all over the floor.

INGRAHAM: He looks like he is waterboarding himself. I'm like what is this. At the end of it I wanted to spray myself with pepper spray just so I didn't have to watch it anymore.

ARROYO: I think we should call him and produce a new show candidate versus the world. He could just do stunts like this. He could protest climate change by breathing in carbon monoxide. He could drink toilet water --

INGRAHAM: They say that there is a certain type of black spider that's an endangered species, so I'm living with him. Here they are.

ARROYO: Here's the big question. How can you just the judgment of a man who does something like that?

INGRAHAM: Is he a candidate?

ARROYO: He's a Democratic candidate for a House seat in Colorado.

INGRAHAM: Disturbing.

What is going on with the bishop of Tucson?

ARROYO: The Catholic bishops are meeting this week in Florida and they lamented the Trump administration's new asylum rules, particularly those separating children from families entered the country illegally. At one point the bishop of Tucson, Arizona, as you mentioned, Edward Weisenburger seemed to morally equate those enforcing the border with people committing abortions. He's speaking here about border security that takes the part in separating families. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BISHOP EDWARD WEISENBURGER, TUSCON, ARIZONA: In light of the canonical penalties that are there for life issues, I'm simply asking the question if perhaps our canonical affairs committee could give recommendations at least to those of us who are border bishops on the possibility of canonical penalties for Catholics who are involved in this. For the salvation of these people's souls, maybe it is time for us to look at canonical penalties.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Maybe it's time for you to read a canon law. What is he talking about?

ARROYO: Canonical penalties mean rescinding communion and the sacraments.

INGRAHAM: They don't do that for politicians that advocate for abortion, thank you very much.

ARROYO: I got a call this afternoon from some ICE and border security guys. I said when Nancy Pelosi, Biden, and Schwarzenegger get their letters of excommunication, then you can worry. But remember, the Catholic catechism says those new to an adoptive country must respect the law.

INGRAHAM: Laws of the country, thank you.

ARROYO: None of us want families divided. I think it's an awful thing. But we have to come up with policies that don't incentivize people to send their children alone across the border. That's what's happening now. But look, people of faith, Catholics, they should be advocating for family unity in their home country and here.

INGRAHAM: Do it legally.

ARROYO: And orderly.

INGRAHAM: You walk across the border illegally it's not going to work for you.

All right, what does God look like? All right, 60 seconds, what does God look like.

ARROYO: The University of North Carolina did a study, five years and 11 Americans. This is what they think God looks like.

INGRAHAM: That looks like one of the guys in the control room in New York.

ARROYO: It's Nick Robertson. He is basically a nice white guy.

INGRAHAM: He has too much hair for Nick.

ARROYO: What the researchers found is people tend to project their image and their beliefs onto their image of God. I thought, how would we define god? So I came up with my own images. These are my two picks. Here is what I think God might look like. Frank Sinatra and John Huston in the greatest story.

INGRAHAM: Frank Sinatra?

ARROYO: I want a God that sings well.

INGRAHAM: Come on.

ARROYO: Now you had your picks, who were?

INGRAHAM: My picks are Burt Lancaster and Charlton Heston which is really -- but Charlton Heston plays Moses there.

ARROYO: He looks like God the father.

INGRAHAM: That's God. That seems like God. God can't look like the kid in the apple commercial, like Mac versus PC. That's like a millennial thing. God has skinny jeans, a man bun, and he is a soy boy.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: God is a soy boy, I don't think so.

ARROYO: We want a God with some authority and gravitas, but I think we can agree God does not look like this.

INGRAHAM: These two, George Burn and Morgan Freeman. I never bought either one of those.

ARROYO: I kind of like Morgan Freeman as God. You want God to sound like him.

INGRAHAM: George Burns was hilarious.

ARROYO: But you don't want God to sound like --

INGRAHAM: God doesn't smoke, absolutely not.

ARROYO: I hope not, not the God I want to see.

INGRAHAM: No flames where we're going, we hope. Pray for us.

ARROYO: Bye-bye.

INGRAHAM: "Seen and Unseen." President Trump is on a big-time role, but how is it playing in Peoria? Frank Luntz is here to tell us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: President Trump, you have to admit it, people hate to say this, he's on a major role. Any world leader would envy where he is right now. A soaring economy at home, diplomatic triumphs overseas, and then there is this headline from NPR. Tuesday's primaries underscore that the GOP is Trump's party now. You just had to read my book "Billionaire at the Barricades." I told you that a year-and-a-half ago. And that is driving the resistance and the never-Trumpres absolutely bonkers especially given the loss of South Carolina Congressman Mark Sanford.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": If you dare to speak against the king, Donald Trump, then he will screw with you and he will tweet something against you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why don't we just say it has devolved into a cult? Primary voters in the Republican Party have devolved into a Trumpist cult.

SEN. BOB CORKER, R-TENN.: It's becoming a cultish thing, isn't it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Why did you want to be his secretary of state? But to their chagrin, Trump now has tons of political capital to spend as he wishes, just as the all-important midterm elections are in view.

Let's discuss all this with pollster Frank Luntz. Frank, I love hearing these people complain that it's Trump's party now. He's the president, he won states that we hadn't seen Republicans win in some time, hadn't won a national election since 2004. Diplomatic triumph early, but still with North Korea, economy soaring, people want the border enforced. The old Bush party is gone. Never coming back. Never.

FRANK LUNTZ, POLLSTER: What people don't realize is that his numbers are now better than Barack Obama's at the same points two years into Obama's presidency. No one talks about that. You know that I've been on occasion critical of the president. And yet I look at North Korea, I look at the economy, I look at jobs, not just the polling numbers but the actual real numbers of the country. And how can you be critical at this point?

INGRAHAM: How about the judges they put on the court of appeals even with the delays?

LUNTZ: So the question now is, does they follow through for the GOP? And that's the big question. Trump's numbers are going up, both his favorability and job approval. Both of them are now in the mid-40s. The question is, does this generic ballot between Republicans and Democrats, does that also improve? And what we have seen is, it does, with one exception. The intensity among Democrats to vote against Trump is stronger than the intensity right now for Republicans to support keeping the House and Senate in GOP hands.

INGRAHAM: What's the best way for Republicans to hone their message and really spur turnout in November, given your research?

LUNTZ: Jobs and taxes, taxes and jobs, jobs and taxes, taxes and jobs. Trump is responsible for the overall messaging, and Korea did it. If I were advising the president right now, which I don't, I would suggest that he visit the troops in November. I would suggest he invites the North Korean leader to the White House. That is significant. I would suggest that he goes himself. But a picture is worth 10,000 words. And a picture of him shaking hands with a North Korean leader is as significant as Nixon going to China. It was as much of a threat and has as much of an impact. These are good days for the president.

INGRAHAM: Now it looks like he's, they're going to nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize. That happened today.

LUNTZ: You know he will never get it.

INGRAHAM: They might have to give it to him this time because if this goes as well as I think it will go. He wants to run against the media as well. He did it all campaign long. This is what Brian Stelter said on CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The president is on Twitter right now saying CNN and other networks are the greatest enemy the America people have. That is absolutely disgusting. Disgusting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LUNTZ: Yes, but you know what. It's disgusting that they don't give him credit for what he has done over the last 72 hours, that they don't give him credit for an economy that is truly improved. They are getting what they deserve by the tone and the demeanor of the coverage. They are actually helping not just the Republicans, they are helping to reelect Donald Trump should he run again.

INGRAHAM: You got engaged in a bit of a Twitter back and forth with Brian.

LUNTZ: I know what it's like also to be on the --

INGRAHAM: The opposition.

LUNTZ: Yes. And you have to accept what the facts are. If the economy is good, doesn't he deserve credit? If foreign policy is going in the right direction, why not give him credit?

INGRAHAM: That was Trump's point today in his tweet, look, six months ago you guys would have begged for this deal and you were saying I was going to blow up the world essentially. This is ridiculous. And I don't think he's thinking he's going to get credit from them, but I think he's amazed that people don't want what is good for the country. They'd rather have a recession or a depression if he can get out of office. Frank Luntz, great analysis.

LUNTZ: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: I hope the president listens. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Some big news coming out of that Pompeo press conference in South Korea that just wrapped up. The secretary of state said that despite the North Korean state media claim, the U.S. will not ease sanctions until the North denuclearizes. That's good news.

And that is it for us tonight. We'll be seeing you right back here tomorrow to bring you all the details of that I.G. report, which is dropping in about 18 hours or so. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team is next.


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.