Inspector General Horowitz reportedly nears end of probe into FISA abuse

close

Video

Inspector General Horowitz reportedly nears end of probe into FISA abuse

DOJ wrapping up investigation; reaction and analysis from Rep. John Ratcliffe and former congressman Trey Gowdy.

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," July 1, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JASON CHAFFETZ, GUEST HOST: Welcome to "Hannity." I'm Jason Chaffetz, in tonight for Sean.

And as we speak, the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz is nearing the end of its investigation into FISA abuse. In just a few short weeks, the truth will be revealed and deep state corruption will be exposed.

Congressman John Ratcliffe was recently briefed by Michael Horowitz on the progress of his investigation and coming up, the congressman will be here to give us a preview on the upcoming events.

Keep in mind, there are multiple ongoing probes into rampant corruption, misconduct, leaking, political bias, all while James Comey was heading up the FBI. Yet in a recent CNN town hall, James Comey said that he was proud of the way his department conducted business. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I can't believe Republicans would have wanted it any other way, and we acted in a responsible, limited and restrained way. I'm proud of the way we conducted ourselves.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Are you confident you did everything by the book? And that the FBI, every one around you did everything by the book?

COMEY: Yes. That doesn't --

COOPER: No doubt?

COMEY: No doubt in my mind, but that doesn't mean I'm against review of it. That's totally fine.

COOPER: So, do you think the inspector general will find anything inappropriate?

COMEY: I don't think so, at least not that I know of. But if they do, they do, and they should be transparent about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Oh, and I think that they will be.

So, should James Comey be proud of his conduct?

Joining us now with more on the progress of the inspector general report is Texas Congressman John Ratcliffe, and former Fox News contributor Trey Gowdy.

Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us.

I served with both of you in the Congress. Congressman Ratcliffe, you are a former U.S. attorney, Trey Gowdy and I served with you. We both abandoned you, left you there to your lonesome there on the Judiciary Committee.

But my understanding is that you have had a discussion with the inspector general just a few days ago. Tell us what happened and what transpired.

REP. JOHN RATCLIFFE, R-TEXAS: Jason, Trey, good to see both of you. Yes, I did have the opportunity to meet with Inspector General Horowitz last week.  We talked about his report, the timing, not the content. And he revealed that his team's investigative work is complete, and they are now in the process of drafting the report.

So, I would expect that it will be a draft complete in short order. I will tell you, though, Jason, I don't expect that any of us are going to see any time real soon. He did relate to that as much as 20 percent of his report is probably going to include classified information, so that draft report will have to undergo a classification review at the FBI and the Department of Justice.

So, while I am hopeful that we might see it before members of Congress recess for the August recess, I'm not too certain about that.

CHAFFETZ: This is always the frustrating thing that has happened multiple times where we had reports when I was the chairman, when Trey Gowdy was the chairman, the department of justice would review things for weeks on end if not months, but it is encouraging to know that the inspector general is going to be right there around the corner.

Congressman Gowdy, I've got to tell you, you have a very definitive James Comey, who thinks that he did everything by the book and that he did everything that he was supposed to, but you and Congressman Ratcliffe are the two people that I know if that eventually reviewed the FISA unredacted, the FISA reports, is Director Comey right? Is this just all for nothing because he did everything the way that he was supposed to?

TREY GOWDY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Jason, I just want to make sure that we have the right James Comey? Is that the Comey that wrote that he did not leak in a memo that he leaked? Is that the James Comey that said he did not do weasel things when he was memorializing what he said was a private conversation?

Is at the same James Comey that said that the FBI did not get a give a hoot about politics while his senior aides discussed two political candidates that they were supposed to be investigating?

CHAFFETZ: Yes, I think that's --

GOWDY: Is that the same James Comey, the one that you just played? It's just the same one?

CHAFFETZ: Yes, yes.

GOWDY: It is the same one that took advantage of the Trump administration by sending FBI agents to interview Michael Flynn while Hillary Clinton had a small law form while she was interviewed. I just wanted to make sure that was the same James Comey.

I don't know what Horowitz is going to find. I have a lot of confidence in him, he is a straight arrow. He's just looking at the FISA abuse. United States Attorney John Durham is looking into what happened in the late winter and spring of 2016.

So, your viewers have to have a lot of demarcation. Just remember Peter Strzok, if that name sounds familiar, in July 2016 initiates a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign. That is July of 2016.

Horwitz is looking at the FISA process after that. Durham is looking at the investigation prior to that, and am hoping that those two investigations together would shed a lot of light. So America, they can know what can happen, because it has been a divisive two years.

CHAFFETZ: No, it has.

And, Congressman Ratcliffe, again, you have been a U.S. attorney, you and Trey Gowdy have reviewed the FISA reports. It says verified at the top.  And I guess to me if you want to debate what verified means, but you have looked at the unredacted reports.

Comey says he did everything right. You too have looked at it and said it's not wrong -- that it was potentially done poorly and wrong and deceptively, may be exculpatory information was left out. It is Horowitz going to be the definitive word? What is his role in the process?

RATCLIFFE: I think that he's going to be one of the more important voices.  In a lot of folks are looking forward to Bob Mueller's testimony on July 17th, that's coming up, but Bob Mueller is going to talk about collusion that did not exist, about obstruction that the attorney general found didn't exist. You can ask Bob Mueller ten times in ten different languages, and I don't think there will be any new facts. I don't think there are going to be any new conclusions.

But Michael Horowitz and his findings and John Durham and his findings, those are going to be significant. Those relate to not only to Trump misconduct, but to potential Obama misconduct.

Look, you know, Jim Comey says they did everything right, even though as Trey pointed out, you know, you've got the lead investigator who promised to stop Trump, wanted to prevent him from becoming president. He had a deputy director who lied under oath on multiple occasions and was criminally referred. And as Trey pointed out, Director Comey himself leaked private conversations with the president.

You know, he has a different definition of the word proud, when he says he is proud of all of that work. We will find out. Michael Horowitz, I do think that his findings will be significant, Jason, because it presents a real potential problem for the Democrats. Right now, we already know Bob Mueller has told us that a Democratic administration started an investigation into a conspiracy with Russia that did not exist. That's bad enough.

It would be a whole lot worse if it turns out that that same Democratic administration continued that investigation by breaking rules of the FISA court. If that happens, you can pretty much put a pin in any impeachment balloon, because it would be hard for the Democrats to say, well, we started an investigation that we should not have. We continued it by breaking the rules, but we want to impeach a president for trying to obstruct that investigation that never should have started.

CHAFFETZ: So, Congressman Gowdy, let's go back to Director Mueller who is coming to testify. You are no longer on the committees that would be questioning him.

What are the Democrats up to? Why would they do this? If you were on the Republican side of the aisle, what kind of questions are you going to ask Mueller?

GOWDY: Well, first, the easy part, while the Democrats doing it? Because they are never held accountable by the D.C. media. I mean, they brought Michael Cohen and John Dean as either fact witnesses or experts, you would've been excoriated as a chairman if you had brought two witnesses like that, but they've got a safety net.

They are never criticized. You are calling someone who does not want the call, who is not going to deviate from the four corners of his report -- of some of us did not even think that the report should be public. We sure as hell do not think you should be testifying.

But they're going to get a pass. What should Republicans do? They should prepare.

You have the best lawyer as your guess tonight. I'm not worried about John Ratcliffe. He's fantastic. But the other members need to prepare, and they need to think in terms of trenches or buckets.

What did Mueller find? No criminal collusion. What did he not find? An indictable obstruction of justice defense. What did he not bother to look for?

Johnny just mentioned collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. We do know one campaign was getting dirt from Russia. Did Mueller bother to find out whether the Russian government was feeding that dirt through Christopher Steele to Fusion GPS? Did he even ask?

And the legal issue is really important, and Johnny just touched on it, if you can resist on the unlawful arrest, can you really obstruct an unpredicated investigation? Which is why it's important where Mueller began, and I don't think he began by figuring out the origins of the Russia probe as it relates to Trump. But we'll find out.

Prepare, set to low expectations, it's 5 minutes. It is impossible to unlock the mysteries of the world in five minutes. I wish that they were not having the hearing. I'm really glad that we got a good lawyer like Johnny Ratcliffe is on judiciary.

CHAFFETZ: No, a lot of us wish you just pour all of the questions into that bucket, but, gentlemen, it was a pleasure and an honor to serve with all of you. And I thank you for your service.

GOWDY: Thanks, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: And, Congressman Ratcliffe, we wish you the best, and Godspeed in these upcoming hearings.

Again, thank you, gentlemen.

Tonight, we are just 17 days away from one of the most anticipated public testimonies this year. Bob Mueller is set to face questions from members of the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees on Wednesday, July 17th, and while Democrats will be happy to keep the pony Russian collusion narrative alive for a few more weeks, Republicans are planning to demand answers surrounding the political bias inside Mueller's witch hunt.

In 2017, despite conducting an extremely sensitive high-profile investigation into the Trump campaign, Mueller filled his staff with big time Democratic donors, Hillary Clinton's former lawyer, and two of the biggest Trump haters in the FBI, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

The question tonight, how could anyone in the right mind think that's appropriate?

Joining us now with analysis is FOX News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, and Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz. Both congressman will get to question Mueller later this month, because Congressman Turner being on the Intelligence Committee, and Matt Gaetz, congressman, being on the Judiciary Committee.

So, gentlemen, thank you here.

I want to set this up, though, first, by going to Gregg Jarrett.

Gregg, you have done as good of a job as anybody I've seen documenting and laying out the conflicts of interest that lots of us from day one were concerned about with the Director Mueller. But kind of run through these conflicts in the team that he assembled.

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the most egregious conflict of interest is that Mueller was meeting with President Trump the day before he took the job as special counsel. They were in the Oval Office.

I talked to the president about it when I was in the Oval Office last week.  And so, I would ask this question, is it true, Mr. Mueller, that the president explained his reasons for firing James Comey that day? And the answer I know is yes, which means that Mueller was a witness in his own prosecution case. You cannot be a prosecution and a witness simultaneously. It's against the rules. It's also against ethical rules.

(CROSSTALK)

CHAFFETZ: And never slowed him down before, didn't slow --

(CROSSTALK)

JARRETT: No, but he ignored it. The other major conflict of interest is the key witness in any obstruction case is James Comey. And James Comey and Robert Mueller, a long time friends, colleagues, and allies, Mueller was Comey's mentor. How is that fair to the president, because Mueller has got to decide, am I going to believe Comey or the guy who fired my friend Comey. That's a major conflict of interest, he should have disqualified himself.

CHAFFETZ: Congressman Gaetz, I want to go to you. You're on the Judiciary Committee, what kind of questions and what can you get out?

Mueller is a reluctant witness. He does not want to come. He was issued a subpoena. And he said that he is going to confine his report to what was issued in his report.

So what do you think you can draw out from?

REP. MATT GAETZ, R-FLA.: Well, when Robert Mueller leaves Capitol Hill, I think the American people will see that there was no collusion, and there was oceans of bias. I think bias will be the word of the day from the assembly of the Mueller team to his handling's and dealings with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

Let's remember that Robert Mueller had a fire those people from his team.  But when I question Peter Strzok about interactions when he was fired, I was shocked at the lack of curiosity of Robert Mueller. Robert Mueller never asked what Peter Strzok meant by the insurance policy. He never delved into these secret meetings in Andrew McCabe's office where a lot of the actors that you lay out in your book, "The Deep State", where assembling and engaging in their discourse and planning. And you also don't see any questions from Mueller to Strzok, about what Peter Strzok meant when he said there was no way that they would lead to Donald Trump be president.

So if Mueller did not have those questions for Strzok, we will certainly have those questions for Mueller.

CHAFFETZ: So, Congressman, you are exactly right, because at one point presented information by the inspector general, Mueller dismisses these people because of bias. So, where is that line of bias? He obviously thought there was some line at some point, but all of the other examples are just as egregious if not even more egregious.

Now, Congressman Turner, one of the big questions I think I hear a lot when I am out in the heartland talking to people is when did Bob Mueller know -- when did he actually find out and determined that there was no collusion?  And why did he not inform at least the intelligence committee if not the public?

REP. MIKE TURNER, R-OHIO: You know, Jason, you are hot on the trail of this when you were chairman of the Oversight Committee. And it goes really to the beginning of this investigation. Because all of those -- Brennan, Comey, Clapper, all testified, even at the inception of this, that they had no evidence of collusion.

Certainly, our committee, Intelligence Committee, issuing its report prior to the Mueller report, reviewed the evidence and also came to the same conclusion that there was no evidence of conclusion, and obviously, Mueller's report does not conclude that the president committed a crime.

But I think that Mueller weakens his overall credibility when you read the report. When he includes statements as we do not exonerate the president, Mueller only gets its authority from that delegate in the attorney general and the Department of Justice. And no one in the attorney general's office or the Department of Justice has the ability to exonerate anyone. It is just ingenuous. It does it just shows his bias, because he wants to leave the impression that his report impugns the president, even though he can find nothing that the president has done.

CHAFFETZ: You bring up a good point.

And, Gregg, I want to ask you -- there are a lot of things that Mueller did not look at. If you look at the instructions on what he was supposed to do, how did he exclude so many things?

JARRETT: How is it possible that you can investigate Russian interference in our election without examining the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC paying for Russian disinformation to then peddle to the media and the FBI to influence the campaign? And yet, there is no mention in there of Christopher Steele's dossier or Hillary Clinton or Fusion GPS, or Glenn Simpson, or the actions of Comey and Clapper spreading and peddling the information to influence the election.

So, you know, this was an entire whitewash of what should have been investigated by Robert Mueller.

CHAFFETZ: Yes.

Now, Congressman Gaetz, I was talking to Trey Gowdy earlier before we were on the air.

You know, one of his observations was that the one person that they went out and got a FISA warrant against was Carter Page. And he is the one person that was not indicted at all.

So, how do you get into, and it is hard with just 5 minutes to Mueller and being able to look at what they did and did not do?

GAETZ: Well, it's important to remember that there was an FBI investigation of President Trump's interactions or his campaign's alleged interactions with Russia that predated Mueller, and even in that investigation Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text to one another that there is no "there" there. There is no evidence.

And so, I think it is entirely appropriate to open those doors by asking about what evidence Robert Mueller and the special counsel reviewed that might've been tainted or miscast as a result of its development by people who had a known bias against President Trump.

And so, I think that looking at the work Mueller did in his report, we'll have to look at what were the inputs and what were the potential pollutants to those inputs regarding political bias. And, frankly, I think that a lot of this was miscast and developed by people in the Obama White House like Clapper, like Brendan, that's why the work of the inspector general as well as the work of Attorney General Barr are so important to make sure that we find out who was responsible for the terrible lie told to the American people for two years.

So I will be spending my Fourth of July weekend rereading the Russia hoax so that I am ready to use my 5 minutes well.

CHAFFETZ: Very good.

Now, Congressman Turner, I don't expect you to lay out the questions you're going to ask in advance, but you have a very important role. You have dedicated a big part of your career and time there in D.C. on the national intelligence front and on their military side. A little bit off-topic but very much related, there is an opportunity cost when the Intel Committee is so focused as Adam Schiff does on Russia, Russia, Russia, but focusing on Donald, Donald, Donald.

And explain to people the opportunity cost because you have limited time and resources there at the committee. But what are the Congress not doing that they should be doing in the meantime?

TURNER: Exactly, Adam Schiff obviously will be in nirvana during all of this, because he has been pursuing at the entire time when he should be pursuing instead of Donald Trump and his obsession with Donald Trump is China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, real threats that we have two our country and how they are evolving and what is China doing in hacking? What are the threats to our infrastructure? What is our intelligence community doing with respect to assessing what Iran is doing with their nuclear weapons program? What are we seeing with Russia and their attempts to undermine democracies in Eastern Europe?

All of these are areas that our staff should be spending time on. Adam Schiff should be spending time on, and our committee should be spending time on. It makes us less safe.

CHAFFETZ: It is absolutely a point that I hope everybody digests and understands when Adam Schiff and the Democrats do this, it really is a distraction, because what they are doing as they are trying to distract from some other things that they should be working on.

So, to Gregg Jarrett, Congressman Gaetz, Congressman Turner, thank you very much for your expertise tonight. Thank you for joining us.

Directly ahead, the 2020 Democrats open borders agenda is on full display.  Ari Fleischer, Tammy Bruce, and Matt Schlapp will be here to tell you what that means for the President Trump reelection chances. We'll be right back.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: The Democrats want to treat the illegals with health care and other things better than they treat their citizens of our country. If you look at a coal miner that has black lung disease, you are talking about people they can treat it better than the coal miner.

Congress and the Democrats have to step forward to provide solutions to put child smugglers out of business, you have child smugglers by the hundreds, and actually probably by the thousands. And they are becoming very rich because our laws are so bad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Now, while President Trump urges Democrats to work on real solutions to solve our border crisis, the radical 2020 candidates continue to push a dangerous open borders agenda that includes decriminalizing border crossings and even health care for illegal aliens.

Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS ANCHOR: I know you reject the rhetoric about open borders, but isn't that effectively open borders not limiting how the immigration in any real way?

JULIAN CASTRO, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There is no way that we can call that open borders, because we have 654 miles of fencing, we have thousands of personnel at the border. We have planes, we have helicopters, boats, security cameras, guns. So, open borders is just a right wing talking point. It always has been.

MARGARET BRENNAN, CBS NEWS HOST: One question too many of your colleagues and competitors was whether their health care plan would cover undocumented immigrants. Would your plan do that?

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR, D-MINN., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: As part of comprehensive immigration reform, we must move forward on making sure that people have health care.

BRENNAN: So that was a "yes"? That your healthcare plan would cover that?

KLOBUCHAR: That was a "yes" for health care needs, but as far as other benefits, I think we need to -- that has got to be a part of the discussion of comprehensive immigration reform.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Now, Robert Beto O'Rourke took it a step further, claiming that Central Americans have no choice but to come here because of climate change.

Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BETO O'ROURKE, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Compounded by drought, that was caused not by God, not by Mother Nature, but by us, man-made climate change -- our emissions, our excesses, our inaction in the face of the facts and the science. When it is that deadly and you are unable to grow your own food to feed yourself, you have no choice but come here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Joining me now for a reaction, our Fox News contributors Tammy Bruce and Ari Fleischer, along with American Conservative Union Chairman Matt Schlapp.

Thank you all for joining us here tonight.

Ari, I want to start with you, because the projection that the Democrats are putting out, now, they are now granted they're going after Democratic voters right now. But the message that they are sending out to America about what's really important, how do you see that?

ARI FLEISCHER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: They are planting the seeds of destruction for the party and the general election, because they're going so far in this primary. But somebody said this morning, I wish I could remember who it was to credit them, that if you cheat trying to get into college, you go to jail. But if you cheat trying to get into America, you get free college.

I mean, this is where we are going as a country. We are doing fundamentally, the Democrats are, spouts of fundamentally wrong things, because that thing that matters to them most is the appeal of ethnic politics, the appeal of racial politics. And its identity, its racial identity that divides instead of unites, and therefore they parcel it out.

It's the wrong thing for them in the general.

CHAFFETZ: Tammy, you've been watching this for a long time. What's your read on what's happening?

TAMMY BRUCE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think that -- certainly it is not going to play well. Again, we are dealing with the primary, but this is going not just to every American, but it's also going around the world.  They are proposing something that on its face would collapse the system, and the individuals coming here now are looking for, where they are coming from, generally systems are not delivering.

And what they are proposing is to have these individuals come to another system that won't deliver. Not just for the individuals who are trying to migrate here, but for Americans in general. Medicaid and Medi-Cal in California, you can get an appointment now. What happens if a million more people are trying to get the same block of appointments?

There are no additional doctors coming up to add in and make up for the difference. So, we are effectively abandoning those people, the Democrats are appealing to the individuals asking them saying, come here, especially if they are ill, and then they are going to get here in the system itself that they are going to rely on won't be able to handle them. So if when the Democrats talk about, as Beto O'Rourke, did on his little venture across the border that it should awake the consciousness of the American people, that we've got to become better, while he's been recommending that people come here and destroy the system effectively with his own policies, abandoning everyone in the process.

CHAFFETZ: Matt, I -- one of my favorite people on the planet is Rob O'Neill from Seal Team Six.

MATT SCHLAPP, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION CHAIRMAN: Right.

CHAFFETZ: And he sent out a tweet, I'm just -- giving a synopsis of it, but he basically said, I think you misspelled homeless veteran. He didn't --

SCHLAPP: Right.

CHAFFETZ: There is no talk from them about veterans and our military and Americans who are doing it right, they are doing everything they can, the Democrats, to put out a projection that we are going to fight for you that are here illegally. How do you see it?

SCHLAPP: Well, the first step is when AOC goes to the border and screams at and has a tirade to law enforcement officials who are trying to bring some modicum of order to the border, shows you what they really think about law enforcement. Nobody in the Democratic Party has criticized AOC for the way that she treated federal employees who are law enforcement officials.  That's the first point.

The second point that Rob makes, Jason, that you're underscoring is that Americans are hurting. Millions of Americans lost their plan and lost their doctors because of Obamacare. Obamacare insurance premiums are too expensive for many middle-class Americans. So they can't afford to buy insurance.

How does a guy or a woman in late 50s, early 60s, getting ready to retire, they had middle-class wages, then they have to read that they're going to have Medicare for all, which they thought just met all Americans which was bad enough for people who were able-bodied, now it is for anyone. Literally anybody who can get here from Central America, from Mexico from South America, you get to get their Medicare benefits. This is insanity. I agree with Ari, they're sowing the seeds of their own demise in the general election.

CHAFFETZ: Now Ari, one of the tragic things that happened I thought during the Obama administration is that there were 80,000 times that somebody was here illegally, got caught committing a crime, convicted of the crime, and did not deport them. They stayed in the United States, many of which went on to commit more crimes, how in the world can the Democrats with a straight face say that they care about to law enforcement and law and order going into 2020?

FLEISCHER: The Democrats have given up something that is part and parcel of what makes us a great country. That is the moral distinction of being able to say we welcome legal immigrants, we do not welcome illegal. To the democrats are one in the same, there is no behavior when it comes to immigration that makes you legal or illegal, it is all one, all should be welcome.

I want immigrates to come to this country. We are the greatest country on earth. Immigrants make us better, they make us a richer country, my mother is an immigrant, but you have to come here legally. You cannot come here illegally.

CHAFFETZ: We have a just a moment but I want to get Tammy and Matt.

BRUCE: Just a reminder that when AOC or others talk about getting rid of ICE and wanting to cut money for ICE internal enforcement, it is the Hispanic community that is affected first. These criminals live in those communities. It is both legal and illegal it's the Hispanic community and neighborhoods that they are condemning to live with MS-13, other individuals who are convicted of crimes, never deported. That's where they are living. I'm not sure how they can say that they speak and represent Hispanics in the best life for Hispanics when their main focus will maintain criminality and terror effectively, gang terror in those very communities.

CHAFFETZ: And Matt real quickly it does seem like President Trump's rising in terms of popularity even in the Hispanic community.

SCHLAPP: Yeah, because basically Americans are very practical people. When they see their incomes going up, when they see their economic opportunity increasing, and when they see this really scary radicalized Democratic Party where poll after poll shows 50% of Democrats are embracing the term socialism.

As Tammy said, a lot of these Hispanic-Americans left socialism. They left communism. They left dictatorships. It did not work out. They know socialism fails each and every time. And it will fail in America, that's why we have to prevent it from ever getting implemented.

CHAFFETZ: Think you all three of you, Tammy, Ari and Matt we appreciate it. When we come right back, President Trump is trying to avert nuclear war, and the media is mad about it. We will explain with Dan Hoffman and Charles Hurt when we come right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to "Hannity." On Sunday President Trump made history when he became the first sitting U.S. President to step across the Demilitarized Zone in North Korea where he shook hands with dictator Kim Jong-un. Trump and Kim then met behind closed doors for about an hour. President Trump later said that the two leaders had agreed to revive talks on North Korea's nuclear program. Of course many in the mainstream media were not happy with President Trump's diplomacy, have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELISE JORDON, FORMER AIDE TO THE GEORGE W. BUSH WHITE HOUSE: It makes me want to puke. Just my visceral reaction as an American who cares about democracy and human rights, the fact that Donald Trump is going out of his way to kiss up, just to this monster --

FRANK BRUNI, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: He said something else that I wish he wouldn't like go by. It is an honor to be here with you. It is not an honor to be there with a brutal murderous dictator. The United States President meeting with the leader of North Korea was regarded as a plum prize that no administration had granted but President gave that away. The United States President visiting North Korea was regarded as a great prize that was going away for pretty much nothing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This was the dramatic headline, the dramatic photo that President Trump wanted. He is a great gentleman he pulled it off today. There is just no question about that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is hard to anticipate anything more than this being a photo op that leads to more talks that may not lead to anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Earlier today President Trump tweeted that he had a "great meeting with Chairman Kim and that he look forward to meeting with him again soon" expressing confidence that they can eventually reach a deal. Joining us now with reaction our Fox News Contributor and Former CIA Station Chief Dan Hoffman and Fox New Contributor and Washington Times Opinion Editor Charles Hurt.

Charles just got back to the United States after interviewing Secretary Steve Pompeo in South Korea following the historic Trump-Kim meeting. And I want to start with you, Charles did the President do the right thing? Are not do the right thing because you where there you talked to the Secretary of State and the media here is just flipping out?

CHARLES HURT, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well I can tell you one thing, when you talk to people in South Korea and Japan today, they will tell you that they feel a very, very different vibe in their country today than they did say a year or two years ago certainly before Donald Trump became President when they had muscle streaming overhead on a routine basis. Missile tests, military tests going on all the time.

All that stuff has stopped. In the media does not remind people that there has been some concrete things that we have gotten out of this already. But the larger thing here is, and it is so hard to take any of these people in the press seriously. They are just not serious, ridiculous people. And the President will be the first to tell you that he has no idea if this will ultimately work.

But the bottom line remains we could be looking back at this ten years down the line, and this is that moment where Ronald Reagan said to Gorbachev, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall. This could be that sort of moment where our President reaches out find some common ground with the desperate that runs North Korea and convinces them to disarm. If that happens, that will be an enormous, enormous victory for not only Donald Trump, but for America, for South Korea, for North Koreans, and for all of humanity.

CHAFFETZ: Now Dan, you are a CIA Station Chief, you're taught to think differently and analyze things differently, Donald Trump is approaching this in an unconventional way, what the media leads would not have him do. But from your perspective, your vantage point. What is important to Kim Jong-un? I have to tell you, you cannot just look at it through the lens as you would do on your couch stay in Florida. This dictator is a brutal guy. What is important to him?

DANIEL HOFFMAN, RETIERD CIA SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER: First, it is important to see the world through Kim Jong-un's twisted eyes. During the Second World War, Prime Minister Churchill used to say that if he could have dinner with Stalin once a week, he could solve any problem. There is no question that Kim Jong-un's minions would never even take the most innocuous step let alone begin to have negotiations to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula without approval from the supreme leader.

So the President used a little bit of his political capital that he has painstakingly built up over the last year to get that key deliverable to jump-start those negotiations. It may strain credulity for some that Kim Jong-un is willing to barter away his ICBM in nuclear capability for food, energy, and immigration in the world economy, but one thing I learned for many years at CIA is that there is nothing certain in intelligence or foreign policy.

The President has framed the debate. The onus is on Kim Jong-un to walk through the doors as John Bolton likes to say and start negotiations. If Kim Jong-un does not do that, he will face more sanctions. And we will have the backing from others in the Security Council at the UN to do so.

CHAFFETZ: Dan, I have got just seconds left here, and I want to get both of you in. But Dan, can anything happen without China?

HOFFMAN: We need China we need Russia to help us enforce those sanctions. Kim Jong-un is exporting coal and cheap labor and a lot of arms. So that is why again, this visit shows that we are as serious as we can be about negotiations I think that strengthens our hand.

CHAFFETZ: China is going to have to be a part this and Russia as well. Really quickly, Charles, number one thing you learned from Secretary Pompeo?

HURT: It was so interesting to hear him talk about the way Donald Trump approaches this as you say in an unconventional way as Dan pointed out. This is a President who is willing to spend political capital in order to achieve a huge victory. And you do not see that in most politicians. Most politicians the only political capital they spend is to get themselves reelected. This is a guy who is willing to spend it to accomplish big things.

CHAFFETZ: And if you want different results, you're going to have to do things differently. And I think that's why the President is being successful. Dan, Charles, thank you for your expertise. We appreciate you joining us. Chaos in the streets of Portland, Oregon, with Antifa attacking yet another conservative. Trace Gallagher will be here with the report. And then Tomi Lahren and Pam Bondi will be here to discuss the alarming trend of conservatives facing the threat of violence from Anti-Trump resistance. We will be right back. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to "Hannity," journalist Andy Ngo was brutally assaulted by the far left Antifa in Portland this weekend for attempting to videotape the group while they were out at a rally. Fox News Correspondent Trace Gallagher joins us live from our West Coast Newsroom with the latest. Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: And Jason these were dueling protests of very different sides as hundreds of liberal protesters but only a few dozen conservatives. When conservative journalists Andy Ngo went to the liberal demonstration he was attacked by a group of masked individuals who kicked him, punched him, and peppered him with milk shakes that police say contain quick drying cement.

Police officers where there in force, but during the attack on Andy Ngo they failed to intervene. And know himself says that his reports to police went unanswered. Portland's Liberal Mayor Ted Wheeler has said that he does not police various protests on the basis of political content, and there is no evidence that he ordered police to stand back and allow people to be attacked.

But remember last year the Mayor was accused by immigration and customs enforcement or ICE of allowing protesters in the left-wing radical group Antifa to harass ICE employees. And now U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell who is a friend of Andy Ngo's wants the Department of Justice to investigate this weekend's attack, and Texas Senator Ted Cruz called it a sickening criminal assault. Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Trace, thank you very much. What you just heard in this report is only the latest example of political violence by far left radical elements, not just in Portland, but other places as well. As police and the Mayor allow Antifa to overtake the city with impunity. This video was captured in October when the group took over a Portland street and began barraging passerby's and directing traffic, blocking streets, streets, vandalizing cars and screaming at motorists.

Joining with me for now to discuss this and the alarming trend of conservatives facing harassment and threats of violence from the far left forces, Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and Author of the new book "Never Play Dead" it's now out. I got a copy of it right here, it's a great book, there it is Tomi Lahren, she is a host at Fox Nation. And I'm going to go first to you, your timing of this book is classic, but you have dealt with this pretty much your whole life as a conservative.

TOMI LAHREN, "NEVER PLAY DEAD" AUTHOR: Great. I have not had milk shakes thrown at me, but I've had water thrown at me. And again I don't like to paint myself in this victimhood narrative. But the thing that bothers is me is that young conservatives are seeing this, and they are thinking I don't want to speak out. I don't want to be conservative I don't want to be proud of who I voted for, because I'm going to be physically attacked. And the left does not care. They think it is their moral right to attack conservatives. That's what Maxine Waters wanted of course she told us that last year.

CHAFFETZ: Well, and Pam Bondi, as the Attorney General of Florida, you had your own experience of this having to deal with the abuse that you took along the way. How should conservatives approach this?

PAM BONDI, FORMER FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Conservatives should approach it the way that Eric Trump approached did, a woman spit in his face, and Eric said, I wish you well, and you know how hard it is to do that because someone spit on me. It was horrible. I was at the movies with my boyfriend and it was a horrible, horrible situation.

But you know what, I walked out the door that I came in and I would not leave, I would not be bullied. And that's what we have to continue to do. Here in Oregon, what is happening, that is a crime what happened to Eric is a crime. Those people, first of all, those police officers were not doing their job at all. It is their job to protect people. We all believe in peaceful protest. Of course we do, all of us.

But the second to that baseball bat was pulled out, the second one person was touched, those police officers had a legal duty and obligation to move in and stop it. I don't care if it is a Republican, a Democrat, anyone. They had a duty to do it. And Jason we have the Republican National Convention in my hometown of Tampa in 2011, and let me tell you, we had a Democrat Police Chief, we had a Democrat Mayor, and that thing went off flawlessly. I was Attorney General, they worked with us. We all work together as a team. There was a show of Police Force there were protesters at zero violence because politics were taken out of it.

CHAFFETZ: know and when you have a strong police force out there, guess what, the other side knows that, they are not going to get as violent. But in Portland, it is off the rails and they got to deal with something.

BONDI: It is horrible.

CHAFFETZ: It is. Tomi, you communicate - your presence on social media, you're communicating with millions a lot of young people, people that don't want to necessarily a step forward, because they want to avoid all of this. They don't want confrontation what is your message to them?

LAHREN: First of all I agree with Pam that we need to make sure that our law enforcement and then the Mayor and the elected officials are keeping people safe especially when you protest. I'm always quick to blame or not quick to blame law enforcement, because I feel like a lot of this falls on the Mayor, I don't know what he told law enforcement I would hope that he did not tell them to stand down, but that would not be the first time a scenario like that has happened.

But what I tell young people is stand your ground, be proud of your beliefs. Don't be afraid to express yourself, but when you are in a situation like this when you are in a protest, you have to be careful because your safety is first and foremost. Don't stop being vocal don't stop being kind of what you believe in but don't put yourself in a situation where you're going to be physically attacked and assaulted.

CHAFFETZ: And Attorney General, what would you say to people of all ages who are finding themselves in these difficult situations?

BONDI: And Tomi just gave them great advice, you have the right to be there. You have the right to protest, both sides do. But the second it gets violent, you need to get out of there, or you need to yell for the police to come help you. And here, sadly they did not do their job. And when Antifa was going to protest, this was not an impromptu protest, by the way. As law enforcement officers, you know it's coming. We all have intelligence. You know it is coming.

CHAFFETZ: Attorney General I got that. I hate to cut you off, I want to thank you. But I also have to give a shout out to Tomi who just got engaged. So congratulations. We will be right back with some final thoughts and special announcements from yours truly.

(COMMERCIAL BREA)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to "Hannity." Tonight's villain is former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick. You know him from his controversial protest of the national anthem. And now he is back at it again and something that's just as bad. This time speaking out against Nike's release of a patriot Air Max 1 Sneaker featuring the Betsy Ross Flag. According to the "Wall Street Journal," Nike is pulling the shoes from the stores after Kaepernick voiced concerns get this that the Betsy Ross Flag is an offensive symbol of racism.

Betsy Ross. Seriously this guy is an idiot. And Nike is an idiot for following his league. Unfortunately that's all the time we have left this evening. I want you to thank you for joining us. Thanks for Sean for allowing me to sit in and host yet again. I do have an announcement unveiling tonight. I have a new book that I spent the better part of a year writing. It's called "Power Grab" the liberal scheme to undermine Trump the GOP and our Republic.

If you want to know what the Democrats are doing? How they do it? Stories you've never heard before, "Power Grab" you can order it now. It's available for presale. Just go online and then you'll get a discounted price it will be available. "Power Grab", have a look at it. I think you'll like it. Thanks again for allowing me to host today. Jesse Watters is in the chair for Laura. "The Ingraham Angle" is up next. Jesse?

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 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.