This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," December 14, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
JASON CHAFFETZ, HOST: Welcome to this special edition of “Hannity”: Trump Versus the Establishment. I'm Jason Chaffetz, in tonight for Sean.
Lots of breaking news tonight, with President Trump naming Mick Mulvaney as his new chief of staff and earlier, special counsel Robert Mueller released documents in the Michael Flynn case.
Joining us now with more is Kristin Fisher -- Kristin.
KRISTIN FISHER, CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jason, the big news out of the White House tonight is what you were just referencing, the fact that President Trump has named an interim replacement for his outgoing chief of staff, John Kelly. Mick Mulvaney, he's the current budget director, will become the acting chief of staff when Kelly departs at the end of the year. Mulvaney is going to have to deal with Democrats taking control of the House and the ongoing special counsel investigation.
Today, Robert Mueller pushed back hard against accusation that the FBI acted improperly, in an interview with the president's former national security advisor Michael Flynn. A judge had ordered a special counsel to respond to the charge by this afternoon and it did forcefully. According to the special counsel filing, Michael Flynn as a seasoned military officer who dealt regularly with the bureau knew he should not lie to federal agents, it also says he was tricked into lying is false.
Now, Flynn has accused the FBI's the-director Andrew McCabe of suggesting that he should not bring a lawyer to that interview. It's a move George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley calls highly irregular.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONATHAN TURLEY, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW PROFESSOR: What did they get from Flynn? They got from him that he met with the Russians which was neither illegal nor unprecedented and he failed to say they talked about sanctions. But then they intentionally didn't bring that up to him but the agents at the time said apparently that they didn't believe he was lying. And then Mueller decided to go back and charge him. It became a canned hunt. They put this guy in a cage and they shot him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FISHER: Flynn's sentencing is set for this Tuesday. He's facing up to six months in prison. The special counsel office has recommended that he serve no jail time, Jason.
CHAFFETZ: Kristin, thank you very much.
Also today, "Good Morning America" aired a sit-down interview with President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, following his sentencing for three years in prison for lying to Congress in campaign finance violations among others.
During the interview, Cohen describes how he wants to be remembered. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: Do you what you were doing --
MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP LAWYER: I'm angry at myself because I knew what I was doing was wrong, I stood up before the world yesterday, and I accepted the responsibility for my actions, the actions that I gave to a man who, as I also said in my allocution, I was loyal to. I should not be the only one taking responsibility for his actions. One of the hopes that I have out of the punishment that I have received as well as the cooperation that I have given, I will be remembered in history as helping to bring this country back together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Of course, the media had a field day following the interview. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We already now know that the president has committed a felony in order to obtain the office of the presidency.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The case has been built this week that the president was not legitimately elected.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is literally a check list for how a campaign finance violation becomes criminal.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Trump is in real trouble for a variety of reasons.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every day, we learn more information to show just how involved he was in this conspiracy which I think prosecutors believe ultimately led to a felony.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHAFFETZ: The media is also going crazy over reports of an investigation into illegal donations to President Trump's inauguration, but where was the collective meltdown over Obama's second inauguration being dominated by special interest money?
Joining us now is Fox News contributor Sara Carter, the author of "Why We Fight," Fox News national security strategist, Sebastian Gorka, and the author of "The Russia Hoax," Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, who's joining us here in New York.
Gregg, I want to start with you because I think part of the story that's really missing at this point is what was the pretext, what was the precursor, if you will, as to why the FBI would even go talk to Flynn given that the administration had literally been in office for hours at that point?
GREGG JARRETT, LEGAL ANALYST: It was a faulty premise and a lie. These are the documents filed today, and in them we learned that, yes, the FBI had a transcript of a perfectly legal conversation between Michael Flynn and ambassador Sergey Kislyak. They use that as a pretext to lie to Flynn to entice him into granting an interview, to ensnare him in the crime of making a false statement even though FBI agents determined at the end of the interview that he didn't make a false statement.
Which invites the question why is a guy who told the truth being charged with the crime of lying? That's something that I hope Judge Emmet Sullivan on Tuesday at the sentencing poses to the Mueller team of partisans. Why are you charging this guy with something he didn't do?
And perhaps ask Flynn himself were you coerced? Did these prosecutors over here threaten to prosecute your son? Did they bring such an immense, powerful case against you and you became broke and had to throw in the towel?
CHAFFETZ: Dr. Gorka, I want to -- you've been in the White House. You were there at the beginning of the Trump administration. And given General Flynn's background, 33 years of service to this country and the position that he had been in and was going to be in, he had to have known, in fact, he did know that conversation with the ambassador from Russia had been recorded. Correct?
DR. SEBASTIAN GORKA, NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIST: Well, you would think that, yes, he would know that, but let's be very clear about what he was doing. I worked for General Flynn in the transition team for the NSC, after the election, the official presidential transition team. And it was our job, our job, to reach out to our interlocutors, whether it's allies in NATO or whether it's other countries of geostrategic importance, like Russia. So, the fact that he was doing what he was mandated to do as the only cabinet-level official who was not congressionally approved means that he was absolutely in his lane.
The fact that he misremembered the content or one specific element of a phone conversation, Jason, if that is a crime, then every single person watching this show could commit a felony when they forget what they said to somebody. So, this is entrapment of the highest order, and the fact that they had the transcript tells you everything that you need to know. Also, the two agents who did that interview said they didn't think he was lying and the 302s disappear for eight months.
GORKA: This is a classic abuse of power.
CHAFFETZ: That's what I want to ask Sara about -- because, Sara, you do some of the best reporting, period, but you've done some great reporting on this.
SARA CARTER, CONTRIBUTOR: Thank you.
CHAFFETZ: These agents go over and they talk to General Flynn. But as Sebastian Gorka just mentioned, he knows he has already been recorded, he knows they have the transcript, because that's part of his job. But why this delay? What's this mystery about the interview which happens in January and suddenly this 302 showing up in August?
CARTER: So, we have this 302 in August and let me go back and say something, Jason. You know, General Flynn was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, I interviewed a number of people, even as far back as in December of 2016 and going into the first month, President Trump's presidency, he was president-elect after all of this news broke. Absolutely, General Flynn would know and did know based on his job, that phone conversations with somebody like Ambassador Kislyak were being recorded.
Let's go to the meeting that he had, the very first -- January 24th with the two FBI agents. You know, I was the first to report about this, and both agents, both Peter Strzok and Joe Pietka, who were both the two agents that interviewed him believed after they left that he did not lie whatsoever. Now we see that in writing. In fact, they felt he was so forthcoming because he had actually delivered information to them that only they knew, he had no idea that they knew he had this.
So, when he was just so open about this, they went to the field office and they said we don't believe he's lying. This is straightforward, you know, this guy is very congenial, he's talking to us. He's very open with us. He sees us as an ally, and then what happened?
We see Mueller trying to take him down. Let me tell you something here. I have talked to a number of FBI officials, former officials, senior officials, people in the directorate of security at the State Department, they said this is the most egregious abuse of power they have ever seen.
And, Jason, as we are seeing right now, they are investigating every part of President Trump's life, his campaign. They are going after him with full force. The 302 doesn't -- they didn't even turn over the original 302. By the way, that August 302 is an interview with Peter Strzok about the January 24th interview.
CHAFFETZ: Now, Gregg, we've seen -- you know, you have Director Comey who's suddenly full of memories and experiences when he goes on his book tour, he can't seem to come up with the same information when he talks to Mr. Gowdy and Mr. Radcliffe when he's under oath. But he suddenly has his full memory on his book tour.
CHAFFETZ: There is an exchange actually between Comey and Yates, who's the acting attorney general. Again, they are days into this new administration. What do you make that exchange?
JARRETT: Yes. Comey was hiding the fact he's going to send over FBI agents to interview, he was hiding it from Yates. They said we aren't going to tell her until right before the interview and she got mad about it, that's in today's court documents. But she didn't stop it.
So, you know, they lie to Flynn to get the interview. And also in today's documents, they had a scheme where we're not going to tell him we had a transcript and we'll try to ensnare him into making a false statement. In the end, they didn't do that.
But what's really disturbing is not just lying to Flynn but encouraging him not to have an attorney there and several other deceptions that are all contained in this document which is really a document of corruption by the FBI.
CHAFFETZ: I think it's going to be fascinating what Judge Sullivan, what he's going to do it the first part of the week here. But I want to move on to Mr. Cohen in a minute or so that we have left.
And, Sebastian Gorka, I want to ask you about this. Alan Dershowitz has come out and said there are some things that are wrong, but there are other things that are illegal. Mr. Cohen doesn't seem to know the difference between the two. I mean, what is the role of this attorney who was advising Donald Trump? What's your take on what's going on here?
GORKA: This man is a scumbag. It's very simple. He's a liar. He's a scumbag.
He was caught avoiding taxes on more than $3 million worth of income. He has to make something up to save his skin. This is what he did.
This is a man who doesn't understand, he's trying to paint a picture that if your client tells you to do something illegal, you as a lawyer aren't obliged to tell him I'm not going to do that. He is making things up. Let's remind everybody who illegally recorded his phone conversations with his clients. That's all you need to know about Cohen.
CHAFFETZ: Sara, I want to give you the last word and your thoughts on what we've seen with Mr. Cohen in that interview.
CARTER: Well, of course, you know, Mr. Cohen is trying to reframe himself. We saw in that interview, he is trying to change the American perception of him. And, Mr. Cohen is a liar, he's being convicted and as Sebastian said, you know, Mueller was trying to compose using Cohen.
CARTER: He's trying to compose some type of argument to find some way to indict President Trump. But in the end, Michael Cohen cannot be trusted, he has proven that. He is just not worthy of being trusted and personally his attempts to try to change his image are just not working.
CHAFFETZ: Yes, I thought it was fascinating that interview at one point Mr. Cohen says now truthfully -- and you have to giggle and say really? Sure, you believe you.
Thank you, Sebastian, Sara, and Gregg, you always are some of the best and most insightful, we appreciate you being here on this beautiful Friday night.
Let's move onto another important topic: the Democrats finally showing some self-awareness that they have moved way too far to the left and maybe, just maybe, they have overreached. Watch this.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
GOV. JERRY BROWN, D-CALIF.: The weakness of the Republican Party has let the Democratic Party, I think, get further out than I think the majority of the people want. So, there is plenty of opportunity for Republicans if they just pause and look at the world as it really is and try to come up with something in the tradition of Lincoln and Eisenhower.
SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, D-MO.: I think one of this mistakes that we make as a party is spending too much time talking about the gender thing. We are a party of all kinds of people. And, you know, white men, white working-class men have traditionally been a huge part of our party. We have lost a lot of them, and one of those reasons is we have a tendency to talk maybe too much about gender.
REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., MINORITY LEADER: I wish, I wish that the press would spend a lot more time on what we need to do here to meet the needs of the American people instead of morning, noon, and night allegations against the president. The Justice Department, the Mueller investigation, they will work their will. But there are other things going on that are newsworthy. And I think you would have more viewers and readers if you addressed concerns that people had rather than just this ongoing, ongoing coverage of what's current with the president from one day to the next.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHAFFETZ: Whoa, mainstream media, you know it's bad when Nancy Pelosi is criticizing you for doing too much over there on the left.
Listen, joining me now for reaction, former Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee and radio talk show host Larry Elder.
Thank you, gentlemen, both for being here.
Larry, I want to ask you, when you've got Pelosi, Governor Brown, Moonbeam Brown, and Claire McCaskill making the case that the left is going too far left, the media's paying attention to things that really don't matter, what's your take on it?
LARRY ELDER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, when you have Governor Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown lecturing the Democratic Party that they've gotten too far to the left, maybe, just maybe, they've gotten too far to the left.
This is a governor, by the way, who probably thinks global warming is a bigger peril than even Al Gore does. He wants single payer. He wants a bullet train to nowhere, and here he is lecturing Democratic Party that they've gone too far to the left. I think it's a sign of the apocalypse.
And regarding Claire McCaskill, this is a woman who's saying we've gotten too much involved with identity politics. When she first ran, Jason, she said George W. Bush let people die on rooftops during Hurricane Katrina because they were poor and because they were black. It was outrageous. She played the race card then.
And maybe her saying that we play the gender card too much means for the first time, Democrats will stop lying to women and telling them falsely, as they do every single year, that women make less money doing the very same work that men do. They say that women make $0.87 on the dollar compared to men for doing the very same work. They say all the time to gin up anger against the Republican Party that doesn't want to raise the minimum wage.
It's a lie. Maybe they'll stop doing it.
One more thing too real fast.
CHAFFETZ: Go ahead.
ELDER: However, you have Jerry Brown and Claire McCaskill, both no longer going to be in office. That's when politicians start getting really, really honest.
CHAFFETZ: that happens on both sides of the aisle, I can tell you that.
Austan, when you have Pelosi, you have McCaskill, you have Brown, do you agree with them or disagree with them? Is the left going too far left or are they wrong?
AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, FORMER OBAMA ECONOMIC ADVISER: Well, you had three different statements in there. I thought Nancy Pelosi's statement, I did somewhat agree. If the media is going to spend all of their time talking about Mueller and talking about investigating the president and not about giving health care to Americans or protecting the ACA or talking about policy, I agree with Pelosi.
Now, I am really surprised that you guys took comfort from what Jerry Brown said, because the whole context of Jerry Brown's interview was him saying the Republican Party has gone crazy and the president is so far out of line that it doesn't provide any check on the Democrats, and so it unleashes more extreme forces within the Democratic Party. But the whole context was about the Republican Party.
CHAFFETZ: I don't think I find comfort in Governor Brown here.
But, real quickly, do you think they are going to take their own advice? These 80-plus investigations the Democrats have already announced. You think they're going to do that and impeach the president? We've got just a minute. You've got to go quickly.
GOOLSBEE: Look, they are going to do investigations. I hope the president didn't commit crimes. If he did, he's going to be in trouble. But they are going to do policy in addition to investigations.
CHAFFETZ: Larry, what's your thought?
ELDER: Jason, what Austan is saying is the Democratic party has moved too far to the left because Republicans won't move the way they want them to move. I'm really confused.
GOOLSBEE: That's what Jerry Brown said. I didn't say that.
ELDER: I didn't say you did. But your analysis is he's blaming the Republicans for it? Explain that to me.
CHAFFETZ: Thank you, gentlemen, it's fascinating to me to see the Democrats can control the House, suddenly they want to change the subject and talk about that, because Republicans have done an awful lot of good policy along the way, too.
But, gentlemen, thanks for being here.
Directly ahead, more trouble for the Clintons. Congressman Matt Gaetz and Congressman Andy Biggs from Arizona will be here with more.
Plus, more breaking news, a federal judge has just struck down Obamacare. What's that all about? More after this quick break.
CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of HANNITY: Trump Versus the Establishment.
Joining me now with the latest update on one of the president's most notable establishment foes, Hillary Clinton, and the ongoing investigation into her private email server among others, FOX News correspondent Trace Gallagher -- Trace.
TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Jason, good evening to you.
Hillary Clinton initially objected and refused to answer questions about Clintonmail.com, her private email system, but after District Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered her to do so, the former secretary of state submitted written answers which have now been acquired by the conservative Judicial Watch. In her answers, Mrs. Clinton says the system was set up inst 2009 by an aide to her husband, the former president, and that the system was set up for, quote, the purpose of convenience.
But Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton says it's not credible to say the email was for convenience. Fitton reminds us that District Judge Royce Lambert once called the Clinton email issue one of the greatest modern offenses to government transparency and ordered additional discovery into whether Hillary Clinton's email was instead an attempt to shelter documents and stymie the Freedom of Information Act.
Meantime, financial experts who filed a whistle-blower complaint against the Clinton Foundation have not testified before the House Oversight Committee confirming the FBI does have an open and ongoing investigation into the foundation. The tax and financial forensic experts also claimed they obtained thousands of pages of documents on the Clinton Foundation containing evidence of pay to play, financial crimes, and showing the foundation operated more like a family partnership than a nonprofit.
But that same oversight hearing blew up and the financial experts refused to turn over 6,000 pages of documents they say back up their claims. That prompted GOP Oversight Chairman Mark Meadows to warn them that his patience is running out.
And breaking right now, a federal judge just ruled the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, is unconstitutional because without the individual mandate, the penalty that mandates you have insurance, the law is invalid because it cannot pay for itself -- Jason.
CHAFFETZ: Wow, Trace, thank you.
President Trump reacting to Obamacare ruling, writing: As I predicted all along, Obamacare has been struck down as an unconstitutional disaster. Now, Congress must pass a strong law that provides great health care and protects pre-existing conditions. Mitch and Nancy, get it done.
Joining me now with reaction, Florida Congressman Gaetz and Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs.
Now, Congressman Biggs, I served with these two gentlemen in the 115th Congress. It's good to have you on tonight. I do appreciate this. I want to start with Andy Biggs.
Republicans are soon to be in the minority in the House. How do you keep all of these Republican-led investigations going or are they just going to be dismissed and they're done with it?
REP. ANDY BIGGS, R-ARIZ.: Well, the only way we can keep them going since they're going to pull the plug on us from the Democrat side is to use investigations they promise they are going to open up to our advantage. And so, we see things like the OGR hearing, the subcommittee hearing, where we start looking at what was going on today with the Clinton Foundation investigation, and guess what? Huber wasn't there again.
So, one of our responsibilities is going to keep pushing the DOJ to make sure they respond, even if it's the Democrats that are holding hearings on the Trump administration or Trump officials, we have to demand the DOJ and FBI provide transparency in the documents, because I think when those come out, we are going to find, just as we see in the Clinton Foundation scandal, that there is ample evidence of pay for play misuse of funds, co- mingling of funds.
CHAFFETZ: Yes, this is an important thing and the cohesiveness that can be there between the House and the Senate working together, because in the Senate, they are the majority.
But, Matt Gaetz, you have been instrumental. You've been aggressive in these investigations.
What do you think has to happen next?
REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA.: Well, Andy Biggs just laid out how Huber did not show up to the oversight hearing, so we don't know if he's doing his job or not. What we do know is that Congress isn't doing its job.
Jim Comey is coming back in on Monday, and that really is I think that is a smoke screen. We want Rosenstein. We're hungry for Rosenstein. And our leadership is feeding us Jim Comey bite by bite.
The reason we need to hear from Rosenstein is because he knows the plan to wiretap the president and potentially remove him from office.
CHAFFETZ: Why hasn't it come up?
GAETZ: I can tell you why. I can tell you why. Our leadership knows the first question we are going to ask Rosenstein is which members of the cabinet he was speaking to to potentially invoke the 25th Amendment and run the president out of town. And some of those people may still be serving in the cabinet, and I think they are doing everything they can to make sure that in the final days of Republican control, we can't ask Rosenstein who he was talking to and who he was scheming with to undermine and potentially end the presidency of Donald Trump.
I want those answers. The American people want those answers, and by the way, Jason, your book "The Deep State," lays the premise, lays the foundation for the fact that this stuff actually happens. But with the Democrats in charge, we are not going to get the answers, and that's why we need to have Rosenstein before the Republican-controlled Judiciary Committee.
CHAFFETZ: Andy, who else -- Congressman Biggs, I should say.
BIGGS: No, you're good. You're good, Jason.
CHAFFETZ: That's what we always called each other when we were there in the halls of Congress.
Nevertheless, what else can you do in these last few weeks? Is there anything else Congress can actually do to get accountability in the last few weeks?
BIGGS: Well, Matt's exactly right. We have to request, push, everything we've been doing -- Matt and I have been doing to get Rosenstein in there. If we can get Rosenstein and we can start answering some questions and from there, then we have to rely on the Senate. The Senate is going to have to continue. We are going to have to continue by pushing the holes in the Democrats --
CHAFFETZ: Do you believe--
BIGGS: -- yes, it's going to be tough.
CHAFFETZ: Do you believe there should be a second special prosecutor?
GAETZ: Of course, there should be, Jason.
BIGGS: Yes, yes.
CHAFFETZ: All right. You know what. I'll tell you what. Both of these gentlemen are in favor of the second special prosecutor. I need to ask you about a former colleague of ours, the congressman from South Carolina Mick Mulvaney who is the head of the Office of Management and Budget, today being tapped by President Trump to be the deputy chief of staff. Your thoughts on Mick Mulvaney? I'll start with Congressman Gaetz.
GAETZ: I met with Mick Mulvaney actually over at the White House today, we were talking about other budget matters. But look, Mick Mulvaney is a workhorse, he knows the spending issues inside and out. He also understands the intricacies of the oversight process that you previously led, Jason.
So, having Mick Mulvaney by the president's side during these difficult times shows the importance of a wartime consiglieri, Mick is going to do a great job. I think the president made a great choice and I'm excited that we've got a true movement conservative. Someone who really believes in the conservative movement and believes in the president fighting alongside our president for the great agenda of the country.
CHAFFETZ: Your thoughts, Andy Biggs on Mick Mulvaney as deputy chief of staff.
BIGGS: Well, I think he's smart, he's articulate. And one of the things I love about Mick is that he doesn't suffer fools gladly. He's going to tell it like it is and make sure the work gets done. And he's also as Matt said, a movement conservative, he's going to go with the president's line, he's going to help the president achieve his agenda, and we need that.
CHAFFETZ: I got to tell you. My own experience with Mick Mulvaney, he is tenacious. He's this tenacious Irishman. He did serve with me on the oversight government and reform committee, he is an expert in the numbers heading up the Office of Management and Budget. He have the support of the speaker and a lot of others.
He is very close with the whole delegation there for the South Carolina delegation, he ran for the Republican study committee, a committee that was chaired by Jim Jordan, by Mike Pence by others, and he lost to a guy named Bill Florez.
But nevertheless, I think a lot of people have really appreciated Mick and I think we're all excited to see him as the chief of staff to the president. He will, I think bring a lot of conservative voice there to the Congress.
Congressmen, thank you for joining us on this beautiful Friday night.
BIGGS: Thanks, Jason.
CHAFFETZ: The left politicizes a tragedy on the border. You won't believe this one. And later, Sean Hannity's exclusive interview with outgoing U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. We'll be right back.
CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of HANNITY: Trump Versus the Establishment.
Sadly tonight, we are learning more about a 7-year-old girl from Guatemala who died at the border earlier this month after being apprehended with her father and others in the remote desert of New Mexico.
She reportedly was without food and water for days during the treacherous journey. And according to a new report her father did not alert authorities to any health issues until eight hours after they had been apprehended.
Now Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen reacted to the tragedy earlier today. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: Yes, it's heart-wrenching is what it is, and my heart goes out to the family, all of -- all of DHS. You know, this is just a very sad example of the dangers of this journey. This family chose to cross illegally, what happened here was they were about 90 miles away from where we could process them, I cannot stress how dangerous this journey is when migrants choose to come here illegally.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHAFFETZ: Said, no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately, Democrats are rushing to politicize the tragedy. For example, Senator Richard Blumenthal is putting blame on the, quote, "people and practices," and quote, "of the U.S. government."
Joining me now for reaction, Go PAC chairman David Avella and Fox News contributor Richard Fowler who is here with me in studio in New York. And thank you so much for being here.
RICHARD FOWLER, CONTRIBUTOR: Good to be here, Jason.
CHAFFETZ: I've been fairly critical of Democrats and their messaging to those that would be applying for asylum and making the march from Central America here. What do you tell those people who maybe do want seek a better way of life? Do you encourage them to come north as they're doing or do you stay say put? What's your message to them?
FOWLER: Listen, I think we have to come up with some sort of compromise. Because here's what we do know, right. We know that Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras are three of the most dangerous countries on earth, right, and we know those people are, they are fleeing poverty, they're fleeing death and all they want to do is come here and taste the American dream just as generations did at Ellis Island not so long ago.
And so, I think we've got to find a balanced approach to solve this. Yes. we need to increase our border security but at the same time we've got to work with these governments to make their countries safer so the people can stay there or we have got to have -- we have to hire some more immigration judges to go through these asylum claims a little bit quicker.
CHAFFETZ: And just quite frankly, I think the message should be no. Stay there. Stay in your country of origin, go to the embassy, apply for the 90 different visas.
FOWLER: But they're not going to do that.
CHAFFETZ: Don't march north. But that's the moral message that should be there. And that's the problem. I get the sense that Democrats are saying yes, come on up and apply. David, how do you see this situation?
DAVID AVELLA, CHAIRMAN, GOPAC: Never forget the Democrats nominee for president in 2016 said in Brazil she couldn't wait until there was no border. And you have Democrat after Democrat who have co-sponsored legislation that ultimately encourage sanctuary cities that want an open border. And so, what they focus on is a U.S. that has no border and they're not really focusing on a few things that Richard said which were spot on.
It's that we've got to look at the problems in the origin countries and what we can do to put pressure on them to improve their economic conditions and quit bellying up with foreign entities that ultimately want to do damage to the U.S. When we heard just this week--
CHAFFETZ: So, let me give Richard a chance.
FOWLER: So, David, I will give you the fact that we can work to solve -- we can solve the international problem. But with that being said, I think this idea to think that Democrats want open borders is just not true. And the fence -- the Border and Fencing Act we passed in 2006 when Speaker Pelosi--
CHAFFETZ: But do you think -- do you think -- Pelosi said she thought the wall was immoral. Do you think the wall is immoral?
FOWLER: No, I think the wall is ineffective. I think there's other ways we live--
CHAFFETZ: So, would you tear it down?
FOWLER: Well, there isn't a wall there currently.
CHAFFETZ: There is -- there is a lot of wall there.
FOWLER: There is fencing but it's not the wall that Donald Trump is saying.
CHAFFETZ: Would you tear down the wall if you think it's ineffective?
FOWLER: I think the fencing that we currently have there is fine, but I think, so we live in 2016. We can buy, we have drones, we can hire more border patrol. There's other things we can do to secure our border besides building a wall.
Because this is what's going to happen when you build a wall. People are just going to get a higher fence, get a higher ladder. And cross over it again. So, I think it's ineffective that they were just going to have a wall and it's going to solve all of our problems.
CHAFFETZ: We have only seconds remaining, David. What do you think the message should be and what is going to happen with a shutdown that's pending?
AVELLA: The message is, we need to know who is entering this country. The president and Congress need to focus on the fact that Americans want border security. It's as simple as this. It is a winning message for Republicans--
FOWLER: That's not.
AVELLA: It's the right path for America, and to the last point that I was making is that, look, we have these foreign dictators down in South America who are cozying up to Russia allowing jet fires to come in there and if we don't think this is a major national security issue--
FOWLER: The president in choosing--
CHAFFETZ: Gentlemen, thank you. Look, the sad reality is we have a 7-year- old girl who has died and she should have never, ever made that journey. And that should be the message, don't make this journey, it will kill you. And that should be the message.
I've got to move on. Thank you, gentlemen, both. Sean Hannity's revealing interview with outgoing U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley is coming up next, don't miss it.
CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to the special edition of HANNITY.
In October, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, announced she would be resigning her position at the United States at the end of the year. Yesterday, Ambassador Haley spoke with Sean about her time at the U.N., her working relationship with President Trump and much, much more. Take a look.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST: All right, joining us now as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., former Governor, Nikki Haley is with us. Ambassador, good to see you. Congratulations.
You know, I look over at the last two years, a little less than two years, what do I see? We saw what happened in North Korea, Jerusalem is now the capital of Israel, it's now been moved to its proper home. We watched ISIS being shut down, the Iranian sanctions have been put in place and seem effective. American strength abroad I would argue has never been stronger but you have the front row seat, so, am I right in my perceptions?
NIKKI HALEY, AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: I mean, America has found her voice back again, it is a good time for America and the world. Now for some countries that's a good thing and for some countries that's a bad thing. For Americans that's a great thing.
Because I think what we have basically seen is that it was time for us to start talking about what we believed in and what we didn't. When I came in, they had just had a Cuban sponsored resolution that was anti-American that basically blamed America for everything. And the United States abstained on that, though.
I came in after they did the anti-Israel bias, and instead of standing up for our friends in Israel, we again abstain on our vote.
This is a new day and a new time where we don't abstain, you know exactly where the United States stands, you know what we're for, you know what we're against and you know where we're going. And so, I think there's a lot of moral clarity for the United States now and I think countries appreciate that we're now very straightforward.
HANNITY: I've watched an interview and you talked about your relationship with the president. It sounds to me, correct me if I'm wrong, like, it was a good cop bad cop routine. Like you would use whatever the issue was, you would use his strength, that he would go out and be combative -- it seems like the world leaders believed him when he said something and that you would use that in your negotiation. Explain how the dynamic work.
HALEY: Well, I think the only thing is I didn't him out to be the bad cop. What I said was this is where the president is, unless we get this done, I can't promise you where he's going to go because he's upset and we need to move forward.
I have -- the president and I have a great relationship. It was a great partnership, we respected each other, I let him be him. I turn around and just used his unpredictability as an advantage because it is. For many who say people don't know what to expect from the United States, that's not a bad thing.
And so, I use that as leverage. I use that as ways of getting us what we needed and he was always great in making sure he never let anybody get comfortable. And so, I always saw it as a great working relationship. I'm very grateful--
HANNITY: Did you can find that, though. May be good cop, bad cop was a bad phrase, may be the way to say it though is he likes to keep everybody on his toes and he knows exactly what he is doing. That's what I have discovered. Do you agree with that statement?
HALEY: Absolutely. Absolutely. And every way whatsoever. I mean, you know, his strong point really is communicating to leaders around the world and I would always tell the president and strongly believe you get him in front of any world leader, he wins them. He completely wins them.
And if any world leader threatens the United States he puts the absolute fear of God into them. And you know, for me, it is the reason our foreign policy is so strong, it's the reason why we have been so effective. It's because the president has very clearly what he will do, what he won't do. But most importantly, he stood by it.
When he said if they used chemical weapons there would be a price to pay and then he followed through with it, that said a lot to the international community that you can't take this president for granted.
HANNITY: You know, what's funny to me is, if NATO doesn't believe that we might pull back on some of our -- we pay what, $0.72 of every dollar.
CHAFFETZ: And the president is challenging them to pay more. If Mexico and Canada and China and our European allies, if they don't believe the president is really going to be consequences as it relates to trade deals, they'll never negotiate.
So, I think there's a force in the wisdom sort of like the art of the deal and I know everybody gets panic. Like I think there's a lot of panic over little rocket man, my button is bigger than yours, and you know, fire and fury. But look where at where -- we now have an opportunity of having the entire Korean peninsula nuclear free. How -- that's a good thing.
HALEY: Well, and you know, I'll tell you. First of all, look at NATO. Now all the countries are paying more so what he did work. When you look at North Korea, it was that rhetoric combined with General McMaster the NSC at that time, calling different countries telling them to, you know, expel diplomats, not to allow them to have embassies -- and then all of that worked and allowed us to get those sanctions done at the United Nations.
And so, I will tell you, while people didn't like what he was saying or how he was saying it, what it allowed me to do was say he's being honest. He's very truthful, we need to pass these sanctions or I can promise you if there is a threat he will respond.
HANNITY: I agree with you about the Saudi Arabia situation. I find people have been far too simplistic in their analysis, I mean, it's far more complicated than that. I believe he is responsible, in my heart I think the evidence will show eventually if it has not already, obviously I don't have access to that kind of intelligence -- but there's also other things.
And we got to look contextually through history. We had to align with Stalin in World War II to defeat Hitler. A mass murderer. But we did. I look at the emerging alliance of United States, Israel, the Saudis, the Jordanians, Egyptians. Emirates, against Iranian hegemony as may be a once- in-a-lifetime opportunity to thread a needle.
It is frustrating that they did this. I've been probably the loudest critic against Saudi Arabia for years. Treatment of women, gays and lesbians, persecution of Christians and Jews. I don't know the answer but I think it's far more complicated especially believing that they did this to Khashoggi. What are your thoughts?
HALEY: It's a very complicated situation but it is one that can be handled and can be solved. First of all, if you have Saudi officials going into a Saudi consulate, the Saudi government is responsible which makes MBS responsible. Period. That's just what we know.
Secondly, our United States principled values will not allow us to give them a pass and we shouldn't. And I think the president made a good first step when he sanctioned the 17 individuals. I think we need to continue to have harsh conversations with the Saudis about how this doesn't fit the means of international norms, it's not accepted by the United States and we can't continue to partner with someone that continues to brutalize people in this way.
And I think we have to decide what accountability is going to look like for them. But at the same time when we talk about the Houthis in Yemen, when we talk about Hezbollah in Lebanon, when we talk about Iran and their role in Syria, we cannot look at Saudi Arabia and not see that they've been such a good partner with us on that.
And so, there are two different avenues we need think and both can be done.
HANNITY: And sharing intelligence.
HALEY: And so, you know, this is a fine line we have to walk, we just have to do both.
HALEY: They have to know where they stand on where we stand on what they did but we also have to be able to go and say, OK, how are we going to continue to push Iran back from all of this terrorist activity?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHAFFETZ: We'll show you part two of that interview on Monday, she'll talk about Russia and what's next for her. Next, perhaps the most outrageous thing Joy Behar has ever said, that's a high bar. We'll show you the tape, it's up next.
CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to the special edition of “Hannity”: Trump Versus the Establishment.
The View's Joy Behar is back with another one of her well-informed hot takes on politics. This time, she's proposing sending Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, public servant of 42 years to jail because he supports President Trump and doesn't believe he should be impeached. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOY BEHAR, HOST, ABC: I don't know if you saw this clip of Orrin Hatch, the esteemed so-called senator from Utah. What he said to the reporter. The reporter said, well, the president, Michael Cohen, the president they might have committed crimes, you know. I don't care, he said, the president is doing a good job.
When the senator from Utah is saying I don't care if he committed a crime, it's nothing to lose by speaking against truth to power about Trump. Even if he commits a crime.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think there's more going on behind the scenes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She follows his Twitter.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think favors have been done.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have no idea.
BEHAR: So maybe he needs to go.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But he also want to--
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHAFFETZ: Wow. Unfortunately, that is all the time we have left this evening. The Christmas season is here. If you're looking for that perfect gift to give the political junkie in your life, may I suggest my book "The Deep State: How an Army of Bureaucrats Protected Barack Obama and is Working to Destroy the Trump Agenda."
My thanks to Sean Hannity for allowing me to sit on his seat.
Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.