Legal panel talks Trump, Cohen and attorney-client privilege

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," August 22, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JASON CHAFFETZ, FOX NEWS HOST: Good evening and welcome to "The Ingraham Angle" live from New York City. I am Jason Chaffetz filling in for Laura Ingraham who is on vacation.

Major developments on multiple big stories tonight. You'll want to stay with us for the entire hour. Mollie Tibbetts' alleged killer, an illegal immigrant arraigned in court today. Fox News is the only network fully covering the case, and there are new developments tonight.

Raymond Arroyo is here for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we will dissect some of the wild stories from the far left. A bizarre sex scandal and cage free animal crackers.

And in Texas, a senate candidate -- senate candidate says he has no problem with the NFL players kneeling during the national anthem. We will have the tape to prove it.

Plus, more immigration madness in California. There's a hotline to tip off illegal immigrants about ICE raids. More on this unbelievable story later in the hour.

But first, Democrats and the left are absolutely salivating, absolutely giddy over the legal trouble faced by former Trump associates Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort. Some are even waving the impeachment card.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DON LEMON, CNN SHOW HOST: Jack, are we in the impeachment territory here?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Should the president be more worried about impeachment than before because of what has happened today?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, I think he should and I think he is.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This may very well be a high crime of misdemeanor for impeachment.

LAWRENCE O'DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: The Trump presidency took a giant step towards impeachment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: But the White House maintains President Trump isn't concerned because he hasn't done anything wrong. President Trump spoke to "Fox & Friends" Ainsley Earhardt earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AINSLEY EARHARDT, "FOX & FRIENDS" CO-HOST: Did you know about the payment?

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Later on, I knew. Later on. But you have to understand, Ainsley, what he did and they weren't taken out of campaign finance. That's a big thing. That's a much bigger thing.

Did they come out of the campaign? They didn't come out of the campaign. They came for me and when you look at President Obama, he had a massive campaign violation but he had a different attorney general and they viewed it a lot differently.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: That full interview will air tomorrow on "Fox & Friends." Joining me now with reaction are Dan Bongino, an NRA television contributor, Richard Goodstein, a former advisor to Bill and Hillary Clinton and David Avella, a Republican strategist. Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. You know, as I look at this situation, I see the Democrats saying, aha! We finally got it.

Of course it has nothing to do with Russia or collusion, but Richard, who is joining me here in the studio, I want to ask you first, have you ever heard of a famous, wealthy, you know, public personality who may be made a payment to make sure that something didn't get out in the public or does that just happen to presidential candidates running for office?

RICHARD GOODSTEIN, FORMER ADVISOR TO THE CLINTON: I've never heard about it with a winning presidential candidate was actually caught on tape talking about the very thing that he's now and before denied to the public. And can I just ask one thing?

CHAFFETZ: And as an attorney, does that strike you as concerning? Take away Trump and Cohen, but is that normal for an attorney to tape his clients when they're meeting?

GOODSTEIN: Of course not. But can I just ask one thing? Lock her up? How is it that everybody in Donald Trump's orbit, his campaign manager and his deputy campaign manager, his national security advisor, his lawyer are criminals. Admitted criminals are found by juries. And I think the list is going to go on.

So, look, Donald Trump took a step backwards yesterday in terms of his viability politically. I think Democrats who are pouncing on this are making a huge mistake. And in fact, there's a reason Nancy Pelosi and others have said to candidates running, this is not the card you are playing.

You want to talk about the fact that Republicans will take away pre- existing condition coverage and other issues that Democrats think they can campaign on. Impeachment should absolutely not be one of them.

CHAFFETZ: And I think you're right because I think this is a distraction. I don't see Democratic leadership and I don't see them talking about any issues, but I see a guy like Mike Quigley -- he's actually a respectable member of the Democratic (inaudible) saying yeah, impeachment. And that's what I think is concerning here, but --

GOODSTEIN: He is not alone.

CHAFFETZ: And no doubt it was not necessarily a good day for Donald Trump to have close advisors, but to say it's everybody in his orbit is a little bit much.

GOODSTEIN: Well, a lot of -- we haven't had a president since Richard Nixon who had people -- who now criminals. They are not suspects. They are not people who are under -- these are people that have either pled guilty or been found guilty. That's unusual. Sorry.

CHAFFETZ: Dan, how do you read the situation? I mean, I don't see any Russia here. I don't see any collusion. I see a special prosecutor going a different direction. What's your read on it?

DAN BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Richard, give me 10 minutes and your personnel file, add all your jobs and subpoena power and my prior time as a federal agent and I promise I'll make a criminal out of you too. I can promise you that by the way. Everybody in the United States has probably broken some federal law at some point whether they know it or not.

And what Richard is failing to tell you, as sadly he does often. I like you, Richard, but your ability to spin stuff is almost unmatched. Maybe Chris Hahn, you are a close second. But I tell you, this thing started Jason, as a Russian collusion investigation. What do we have? We have taxicab confessions. We have a couple people accused of fibbing.

And then Richard takes that to mean that everybody in the Trump orbit is a criminal? By the way, here's a guy who supported the Clintons who had Hubbell, Susan McDougall. We had a whole lot of people around the Clintons too. It's amazing how they found this moral clarity just now. Incredible.

CHAFFETZ: David, has there been equal justice under the law or does it seem a little bit lopsided to you?

DAVID AVELLA, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: During the Clinton administration, it was Richard and the Democrats who were screaming that someone's personal matters are not an impeachable offense. And here we are now, 20 years later, and it's a personal matter that the president was handling. It's somehow now a campaign violation because he used personal money.

Well, if that's their new standard then let's start the investigation because did Elizabeth Warren pay lawyers to help her get out of her situation, claiming to be a Native-American to get an advantage at Harvard? Or let's go to Bernie Sanders. Did he pay a lawyer to help his wife get out of trouble in her scandal of trying to raise money at her college? Let's go back to Elizabeth Warren for a second --

CHAFFETZ: Go ahead Richard.

GOODSTEIN: David. David, what the Trump -- here's the difference.

AVELLA: There is a -- Richard, hold on a second. There is the 2020 candidate that is facing a problem today. And that is Elizabeth Warren. After her disgusting comment about Mollie Tibbetts.

CHAFFETZ: David, let Richard respond.

GOODSTEIN: The Trump organization, according to this indictment, said Michael Cohen pled guilty to lied on his record saying that the money it reimbursed Michael Cohen for paying off Stormy Daniels was legal expenses. That's a lie. That's dishonest. That's a violation of law.

CHAFFETZ: But isn't that why you hire an attorney? I mean, you give them the money so that they do it legally and lawfully, right?

GOODSTEIN: No. Then you listed as paying off somebody for their silence, not as legal expenses. That's money that went to here. She is not a lawyer. He is a lawyer. I wasn't paying --

CHAFFETZ: And is that what Mark Elias did and what he did with the dossier money? All those millions of dollar -- did that get fully disclosed? No, those were paid to attorneys and those attorneys is what funded this dirty dossier, right?

GOODSTEIN: Well, they weren't trying to buy anybody's silence? Let me just say one thing.

CHAFFETZ: They were trying to buy a dirty dossier.

GOODSTEIN: Can we be spared the argument that this was done not because Donald Trump was running for president, because he wanted to be spared any embarrassment with his wife something that he did with Stormy Daniels in 2006. And by some coincidence in October 25th of 2016, all of a sudden, that embarrassment was really going to do him in. Please.

CHAFFETZ: You don't think like -- Don, one of the things, sorry, Dan. One of the things I am concerned about is the proximity of Lanny Davis in this situation. I mean, here you have somebody who's from the Clinton orbit. All the attorneys in the world and they go and get Lanny Davis. Is that suspicious to you?

BONGINO: Yes, these are possibly the two dopiest lawyers on the planet, Cohen and Lanny Davis. They actually -- Lanny Davis actually convinced another lawyer to plead guilty to a crime that doesn't exist. This is incredible. No matter what Richard tells you about these FEC violations -- I ran for office. Congressman, you ran too. I lost, you won. Stinks being on the losing side.

But I'm pretty familiar with election law. This is not a crime. This is at worst, at worst a civil violation that I don't even think its bad. Me running for office, I can donate to my campaign unlimited sums. Yes, I would have to report that, but this is debatable if this was even a campaign payment.

Why? Richard is trying to debate it right here. Richard, let's be honest. You have no idea why Donald Trump paid this money. You can speculate. Fair enough, which you're doing. You can say, oh, he didn't want to spare embarrassment --

GOODSTEIN: Can I just say one quick thing?

BONGINO: You don't know that.

GOODSTEIN: Can I just say one quick thing? These same people who would buy the fact that Donald Trump meant to say would or wouldn't to Vladimir Putin, would believe the notion that on October 25th, he paid off Stormy Daniels from something 10 years ago, having nothing to do with the presidential campaign. That same person would believe that, but nobody else in the country would.

BONGINO: Well Richard, listen, I didn't -- all right, I didn't call you up but I let you get it, OK. Is Stormy Daniels Russian or is she Kremlin connected? Do you have information we don't? I'm serious. It's a serious question. Do you have anything?

GOODSTEIN: Look, if you're asking me do I think (inaudible) could come out of the Russia investigation?

BONGINO: OK, thanks.

GOODSTEIN: (Inaudible) we'll see when Mueller's done.

CHAFFETZ: OK, but let's keep all of this -- I got to switch gears here a little bit because Lanny Davis said something that I actually think is pretty important. Listen to him this morning on MSNBC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC SHOW HOST: Can you say definitively whether you know if Michael Cohen ever was in Prague in 2016?

LANNY DAVIS, MICHAEL COHEN'S LAWYER: Never, never in Prague. Di I make that? Never, never in Prague.

TODD: Never in Prague.

DAVIS: Ever. Ever. And the reason just let your viewers know what you're talking about, is that the dossier, so called mentions his name 14 times. One of which is a meeting with Russians in Prague. Fourteen times false.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: That's a pretty strong statement, the 14 times. Again, going back to this core of the dossier, but David, as you look at this, how do you read that? That's a pretty important development.

AVELLA: It is an important development just as Lanny Davis said this morning on "America's Newsroom," the reason he was willing to take Michael Cohen on was because Michael Cohen wanted to take down President Trump. Look, Gloria Allred tried to use personal information during the 2016 campaign to defeat Donald Trump and she wasn't successful.

And what this really means is in 76 days, if you want Congress to spend two years on investigation and on impeachment, you vote Democrat. And if you want the Congress to focus on job creation policies, securing our border, and annoying the media, you vote Republican.

CHAFFETZ: Last word, 10 seconds.

GOODSTEIN: And I think mostly, David, what the public wants is a check on Donald Trump. I mean, rightly or wrongly, I think that's what the polling is telling us. And the fact that again, the first two people in Congress who endorsed his campaign are now criminal defendants, I just think there's a sense of corruption that the public wants to kind of at least put some breaks on if possible. We will see.

CHAFFETZ: Bob Menendez.

GOODSTEIN: We'll see.

CHAFFETZ: Gentlemen, thank you. I appreciate all three of you for joining us tonight.

So let me get this straight, while Cohen and Manafort are facing serious prison sentences, everyone in Hillary Clinton's orbit is getting off scot- free. And what about the surveillance of members of the Trump campaign? No charges filed on that and no evidence that the special prosecutor is pursuing that. This all sounds like a two-tiered system of justice to me. Raising questions is the second special counsel needed.

Joining me now for reaction are two lawyers, former U.S. attorney Kendall Coffey and Bryan Rotella, CEO and senior partner of GenCo Legal. I appreciate you both being here. I want to get your perspective as attorneys. This whole issue of attorney-client privilege, if you would go out and hire an attorney to do something, I presume that you do it to make sure that it's done legally and lawfully.

And you have some protections in being able to give that information and make those things move forward. So, as you look at this situation, Kendall, isn't that a plausible story or scenario? How did that just only fall apart in the Cohen situation?

KENDALL COFFEY, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Sure, and that's why we can charge the big bucks. Clients trust us. They trust us with confidentiality. They trust us with figuring all this out. Campaign finance laws are especially complicated, especially federal campaign finance laws. So, I strongly suspect not only did the president have no idea that somebody might put this on a prosecution radar screen someday, but I doubt Michael Cohen did.

Because what is being talked about is a federal crime, was unsuccessfully raised against John Edwards. You remember that years ago --

CHAFFETZ: Right.

COFFEY: -- discredited as a theory. And most people think if he use personal money that goes to some private person in order to deal with personal issues, that's not a campaign contribution.

CHAFFETZ: Bryan, are we supposed to believe that every conversation now that Donald Trump has had with his attorney is somehow part of what the special counsel gets to look at? I think there is some sort of limitation because that attorney-client privilege isn't just waived on all of these issues, correct?

BRYAN ROTELLA, CEO AND SENIOR PARTNER, GENCO LEGAL: Yes, Jason. I mean, look, for your audience, anyone who heard this allocution that Michael Cohen gave yesterday, and an allocution might sound like something from "The Sopranos." You know, I'm Italian-American and the folks would get up in front of the court and they would attest that there was a thing called the mafia in the United States.

I'm not sure if the president should nickname Michael Cohen either better- not-call-Saul or Captain Obvious. I mean, that's pretty obvious when he got up and said yesterday, which is that the president, there are women that he was having relationships with outside of his marriage and that he thought that that might impact his view -- the folks' view on the election.

To me there is nothing criminal about that, and getting to your question, as a lawyer, attorney-client privilege is the one sacred thing we have. Lawyers have terrible reputations so I think Kendall would even agree, unfortunately we have it for a reason a lot of times. And it looks like to me that Donald Trump has found himself in the Jurassic Park of lawyers.

I mean, I'm waiting for the next raptor lawyer to come out of this thing between Lanny Davis -- and I was listening to your last segment who, you know, the stuff that he did back in the ‘90s, some of the things that we are seeing now with Cohen.

And then also let's not forget that Jim Comey is an attorney. And you know very well Jason, look with that attorney did in his findings back on July 5th of 2016 when he found that Hillary Clinton was "extremely careless with her e-mails."

CHAFFETZ: Yes.

ROTELLA: -- of which by the way was a standard change by our favorite FBI character, Peter Strzok.

CHAFFETZ: Believer me, that's a whole another set of subjects we can talk about there. What is highly suspicious to me is that Donald Trump's former attorney is suddenly represented by somebody from the Clinton orbit, Lanny Davis. And Lanny has a duty and responsibility under the law to protect his client.

But I want to play a clip from Lanny Davis here and I want you to ask yourselves at home, is Lanny Davis working in the best interests of his client, Mr. Cohen or is he working in the best interest of his own personal political beliefs. Watch this clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST: Will Michael Cohen seek a pardon from the president of the United States for any of this?

DAVIS: The answer is definitively no under no circumstances since he came to the judgment after Mr. Trump's election to the president of the United States, that his suitability is a serious risk to our country. And certainly after Helsinki, creates serious questions about his loyalty to our country. His answer would be no, I do not want a pardon from this man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Are you kidding me? If you are an attorney for somebody who is now pleading guilty to a felony, you wouldn't accept a pardon from the president of the United States? How in the world can you make a case that that's in the best interests of his client, Mr. Cohen? Kendall, what are your thoughts?

COFFEY: Well, I think it sounds like positioning. I am sure Lanny Davis had some conversation with his client as well as his co-counsel before he launched into that. I think anybody would accept a pardon from about anybody who was president. It is so much better than the alternatives.

CHAFFETZ: Well, and I think he is doing it for some political posturing. But Bryan, what is your take on it?

ROTELLA: Jason, I think it is comical that Lanny Davis is Michael Cohen's lawyer. I mean, for folks that may not remember, Lanny Davis was as entrenched in the 90s with the Clintons as episodes of Friends in blockbuster video. I mean, he was part of a culture. He is one of their best friends and that's who's the attorney for Michael Cohen. So the fact that one of your previous guests said that he got up and said what he said in couyrt, which I don't believe is a crime.

It's Captain Obvious of something about President Trump. And if that's all that evidence that we've seen today about anything that has to do with President Trump in this investigation, I think it raises a lot of questions to folks out in America who are wondering what's all the billable hours going on in the Mueller investigation? That's all on the taxpayer's dime and I think they're probably pretty sick of it.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, and I would love to find out who is funding Lanny Davis in this and what his political motivations are. Gentlemen, thank you so much.

You wouldn't know it by watching MSNBC but there were new developments in the Mollie Tibbetts case today. Ed Henry will be here next with the report.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: A tragic story. You know what, as a parent, I can't even imagine what went on in Iowa and what the family is going through, but a tragic story out of Iowa. College student, Mollie Tibbetts, found dead yesterday after a 34-day search and we had a lot of hope that they would actually find her, but they didn't. And her alleged killer, an illegal immigrant was in court for the first time today. Ed Henry is here with the latest on this terrible, tragic story.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It really is a terrible story, Jason. Good to talk to you tonight. New tonight, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren is saying she knows it's hard for the family of Mollie Tibbetts to deal with this tragedy, but the nation, she says, should focus instead on what she called real problems like illegal aliens being separated at the border from their kids.

Now, the president is firing back tonight with a video on twitter that says it's Mollie Tibbetts who is now personally, permanently separated from her family. Cristhian Rivera today, we got a glimpse of him, the illegal alien charged with first-degree murder in the death of Mollie Tibbetts, appeared in striped prison garb and shackles in the county court in Iowa.

ICE agents say he's from Mexico and has been in the United States illegally for up to seven years. Police say Rivera confessed that on July 18th, he followed Mollie Tibbetts during her nightly jog. She pleaded with him to knock it off, stop trailing her, warning that she would call the police on her cellphone.

Rivera claims at that point he blacked out and when he woke up, Tibbetts was in his trunk with a bloody skull. Police say the suspect led them to a corn field where they found what they believed to be Tibbets' body. Rivera worked at Yarrabee Farms not far from there.

An official at the farm initially claimed they had put him through the federal e-verify system but then clarified that had not happened. As the president, as I mentioned a moment ago, tweeted out a video expressing his sympathy to the Tibbets family and saying this case shows that massive reforms of the nation's immigration laws is simply long-overdue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANE LANG, YARRABEE FARMS CO-OWNER AND MANAGER: We screen every applicant through the social security administration's social security number verification service. In addition, we ran that information to the verification service and the information came back verified. Our employee was not who he said he was.

TRUMP: Nobody has laws like the United States. They are strictly pathetic. We need new immigration laws. We need new border laws. The Democrats will never give them, and the wall is being built. We have started it. But we also need the funding for this year's building of the wall. So, to the family of Mollie Tibbetts, all I can say is god bless you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: With that video as well as the president's mention of Tibbetts at the political rally last night in West Virginia, a defense attorney said in court today given all those comments, quote, "at the highest level of government, the media should be blocked from the courtroom to ensure a fair trial." The judge denied that move, meaning this is going to get a lot of media attention, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Well, good decision from the court. And Ed, thanks. I appreciate you joining us.

HENRY: Good to see you.

CHAFFETZ: Very upsetting. And I would like to note, Fox News is the only cable news outlet to air the arraignment of Mollie's alleged killer today. Joining me now with the reaction is Francisco Fernandez, he's an immigration attorney and Art Arthur, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies.

In full disclosure, when I was chairman of the House Oversight Government Reform Committee, Art Arthur was an employee there for some time, and a good one, at that. Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Francisco, I want to ask you, do you think it's legitimate that news outlets cover this story?

FRANCISCO FERNANDEZ, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: I think news outlets ought to cover what they want to cover. I don't think we can blame 11 million people for a murder of one person.

CHAFFETZ: Nobody did that. Wait, wait, wait.

FERNANDEZ: -- name one person.

CHAFFETZ: I've never done that. Who blamed 11 million people?

FERNANDEZ: You just did. Well, you just did and the president just said that immigration reform is long overdue.

CHAFFETZ: And do you agree with that? Do you agree that immigration reform is due?

FERNANDEZ: I do agree with that. We have been saying that for 18 years.

CHAFFETZ: OK, so what's the problem? Why are we even here politicizing the death of a young lady?

FERNANDEZ: You are making money. You are getting ratings of a death of a young lady and trying to blame 11 million people in this country for the murder of one murder (ph) and who --

CHAFFETZ: So you don't think it's relevant -- you don't think it's relevant that this person is here illegally?

FERNANDEZ: It is relevant that the person committed a murder. (Inaudible) effects 11 million people. Who the president agrees we ought to have an immigration form? Why are we mixing the two?

CHAFFETZ: And do you agree that if this person wasn't in this country, this murder would not have occurred?

FERNANDEZ: We don't know whether that would have happened.

CHAFFETZ: No, we wouldn't. The answer is simple. It would have never happened. If he was not in this country, he would've never murdered that young lady.

FERNANDEZ: OK. All right, so I will give you that so let's reform the law. Is that going to stop the murder? It's not. So stop politicizing it.

CHAFFETZ: Now, how is that politicizing? Look, let me show you this poll.

FERNANDEZ: You're putting it on primetime, that's politicizing.

CHAFFETZ: Francisco. Hold on. Francisco, look at this poll that was done by Gallup. It's a survey of over 1,000 Americans. Put this poll up on the screen. The number one issue that Americans view is the top problem facing the United States of America --

FERNANDEZ: Yes.

CHAFFETZ: -- immigration.

FERNANDEZ: And what happened to the wall?

CHAFFETZ: The number one issue. And so it is legitimate. Francisco.

FERNANDEZ: What happened to the wall? And what happened to Mexico paying for the wall?

CHAFFETZ: And you know what happens? Hey Francisco, you build that wall, families don't get separated. They don't get separated. And they don't come here illegally.

FRANCISCO: You build that wall and this murder would not have happened? Are you saying this murder would not have happened if you build that wall? What happened building the wall?

CHAFFETZ: Yes, because he wouldn't be here illegally?

FRANCISCO: What happened -- he had been here long before Trump came along. He doesn't even have a dollar to build one brick of the wall.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, because we got it open, porous (ph) border. Art Arthur, what's your take on this?

FRANCISCO: I think not.

CHAFFETZ: Art was a judge in the immigration system. He's well aware of the situation. Please weigh in on this.

ART ARTHUR, FELLOW, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: If he hadn't been in the United States, this murder never would've occurred. The fact is every murder is senseless. This one was needless. The president's 100 percent correct. Not all immigrants are criminals. In fact, the vast majority aren't. But the ones who are, are.

They need to be removed from the United States. We need to do away with sanctuary laws who protect criminal aliens. We need to enforce immigration laws so we can keep people who have no right to be in the United States out of the United States. This is a murder that could've been prevented.

CHAFFETZ: And Art, one of my deep concerns here is that look, if you have these other networks that aren't covering it, I wonder why they are not. This is one of the most high-profile murders that was out there and they don't cover it. It strikes me because it doesn't fit their political narrative. They don't want that story out there. You think I'm going too far?

ARTHURE: This was a case that was covered for an entire month, as people were looking for this young woman. Her father was desperate trying to find her. Every network covered it. As soon as the narrative changed, the story got dropped because it didn't fit the narrative that the networks wanted to carry. It's that simple.

CHAFFETZ: And Francisco, do you believe that it's right to abolish Immigration Customs Enforcement? Are you one that says yes, we should abolish ICE?

FERNANDEZ: No, I've never said that.

CHAFFETZ: I'm asking you. Do you believe that?

FERNANDEZ: No, absolutely not. ICE only does what Congress tells them to do. Now, let me bring you back to the immigration reform. Republicans are in the majority. Why don't we pass immigration reform now? We could've passed one President Trump first took office and we are still stuck in the mud.

CHAFFETZ: It's because you can't get to 60 votes in the Senate. That's the number one issue. Donald Trump went way --

FERNANDEZ: -- filibuster.

CHAFFETZ: No, Francisco, Donald Trump went way above and beyond and even offered to take care of the dreamers, and the Democrats wouldn't even come to the table and have the discussion. That's exactly what happened.

FERNANDEZ: (Inaudible) what happened. We have not had a single vote. Let's have a vote and let the Democrats --

CHAFFETZ: Yes, I also -- I also sat there. I was on the immigration subcommittee when the Democrats have the House and Senate and the president --

FERNANDEZ: No, we are talking about now. We are talking about now. We are talking about the majority --

CHAFFETZ: I am also telling you that you're trying to make a case. No --

FERNANDEZ: -- immigration reforms. Put a up a bill. Put up a bill for immigration reform now, put it up to vote and see what happens.

CHAFFETZ: Francisco, do you believe they should build a wall? Wait, let me ask you -- what do you think is the Republican motivation in building the wall?

FRANCISCO: Build it. We're going to have to legalize 100,000 Mexicans to build it right anyway and that's a darn good start. Let's get going with immigration reform. Let's stop talking about it.

CHAFFETZ: OK, good. Build the wall. Art, do you think we should build a wall and why?

ARTHUR: I think that we should build a wall, we should erect barriers to prevent individuals from coming into the United States illegally, to stop contraband from coming into the United States illegally. You and I both investigated instances where there were drugs, were there were dangerous materials that came over the border. We need to stop that. The fact is, that border is porous, it's wide open and it need to be closed.

CHAFFETZ: Gentlemen, thank you. Thank you, both. Remember, at the end of this, you still have this horrific murder that should have never, ever happened. That doesn't mean that everybody that's here illegally is responsible. It means that person killed that person, but we want to prevent those things. And those things should be at the top of our agenda in dealing with this, it's what the American people wants Congress to address, and it should.

Raymond Arroyo will be here next with more on the Me Too hypocrisy, plus a report on why animal crackers are on the loose. "Seen and Unseen" is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: It is time now for our "Seen and Unseen" where we expose what's behind the big cultural stories of the day.

There are some major hypocrisy coming from one of Harvey Weinstein's most vocal accusers. Fox News contributor, and author of the "Will Wilder" series, Raymond Arroyo is here with the latest. Raymond, what's going on with this Asia Argento situation?

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Jason, Asia Argento is this actress who was on the forefront of the Me Too movement. She called out Harvey Weinstein, claimed he abused her. Now a 22-year-old man came forward, Jimmy Bennett, to say she abused him when he was 17. She denies those allegations, and she released a statement. I'll read it to you. She said "I am deeply shocked and hurt by having read news that is absently false. I have never had any sexual relationship with Bennett."

Today TMZ released images of the two of them together in 2013 when Jimmy Bennett was 17 and Ms. Argento was 37. Also they released a text message exchange where she tells a friend of hers, and we'll put it on the screen. "I had sex with him. It felt weird. I didn't know he was a minor until the shakedown letter."

She paid him $380,000, working this out with Anthony Bourdain with whom she was involved. Now the Los Angeles police are investigating this, and she has been bumped off the "X Factor" in Italy which is a show she's a part of.

When I look at this, Jason, and I look at the Catholic Church going through its own passion of sorts on these types of issues, everybody's got to be held to the same standard, no matter your gender, no matter what you believe. People need to -- if you are a victim of this abuse, you have to come forward. And the authorities should get involved. But the broad brushing we have been seeing of men or people of a certain religious persuasion should be put on the backburner and every one of these cases should be evaluated on their merits. And I hope that's what happens both in Hollywood and in the Catholic Church and elsewhere.

CHAFFETZ: No, it's a sad story all around. There are victims, men and women. And Harvey Weinstein certainly, I hope it doesn't hurt the case against him because it sounds like one of the most horrific out there.

But I've got to transition something that's a little closer to my personal heart, and that is the box for those of Barnum animal crackers. You don't get a belly like mine by passing up on those Barnum crackers. But what gives with this change?

ARROYO: We all grew up on Barnum animals crackers. I bit the heads off of those suckers my whole life. Now they are changing the design of the box, Jason. Remember it used to be the boxcar which you're seeing with all the little animals on it.

CHAFFETZ: I felt safe. They were locked up.

ARROYO: This is the new design. The animals are free. And I will tell you where this came from, PETA. PETA, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, petitioned Nabisco. They said we've got to loose these animals. Here's what they said. Given the egregious cruelty inherent in circuses that use animals and the public swelling opposition to the exploitation of animals used for entertainment, we urge Nabisco to update its packaging.

Remember, PETA is the same organization, Jason, that put the Barnum and Bailey Circus out of business because they were upset with the treatment of animals and featuring animals. And all of this brought to mind for me what other mascots or major spokesman might need revision, given the political correct times we are in.

CHAFFETZ: What do you think?

ARROYO: The first one I thought was the Pillsbury doughboy. This poor little fella has been poked and assaulted his entire existence. It is time to reimagine. Maybe not poke at the little guy anymore. Then I thought of the peanut, Mr. Peanut. Remember Mr. Peanut. You see him on all those packaging and commercials. He has got the cane and a top hat and a monocle. He is very socially elitist, I think. It's time to put him in a baseball cap and maybe sneakers. Get him down with the peeps. That's what we need.

And then I thought about Tony the Tiger. Everybody grew up with Tony the Tiger. But where are the pants on Tony the Tiger? In the Me Too generation, he really should have trousers, I think. And that goes for the Pillsbury doughboy.

CHAFFETZ: I've never thought of that, and I'm sad that you brought that up because next time I eat my Frosted Flakes. And I've got to tell you that that camel does not get enough credit in those Barnum crackers, either, not even on the cover. There's a lot of wild camels running around in Utah. Finally, a Wisconsin tech company making some strange offers. What in the world is this?

ARROYO: It's a company called Three Square Market. They are a tech company. And they want to make it easier for their employees to open doors, access their computers, get into the parking lot. So they have implanted microchips, and 80 employees have taken them up on the deal. They've implanted microchips between the index finger and the thumb for their employees. Here's the CEO. He says they love it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD WESTBY, CEO, THREE SQUARE MARKET: The vast majority of our employees absolutely love the conveniences that having this chip in their hand really brings to them.

We did this, honestly, initially just for fun because that's what a technology company does. And now it has evolved into a whole other business which we are in development right now of an actual chip that will be powered by the human body.

What we have really done a sort of made it acceptable or brought in the forefront where people are now talking about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: They are talking about it, all right. This is not something I want to try out. I don't know about you, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: How fat and lazy is America that they can't lift their badge up and put it up against -- they think it's fun to embed in your body a chip?

ARROYO: It raises privacy issues, tracking issues. If they can take your credit card information by swiping you in a crowd with a scanner, imagine what they can do with a microchip in your hand.

The other thing is, what happens when you quit? Do they take the hand off? What do you do with the hand?

CHAFFETZ: If you ever change a job, you're exactly right. I hadn't thought about that. Hey, PETA, what do you think of that when I put a chip and my dog so he doesn't get lost?

ARROYO: I think that would be cruelty, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: I am saving the dog's life so I can actually find her and bring her home.

(LAUGHTER)

ARROYO: Well, don't do that.

CHAFFETZ: Raymond, thank you, thank you.

ARROYO: Great to see you.

CHAFFETZ: I really do appreciate it. Fun stuff.

You won't believe what a rising star in the Democratic Party said about NFL players kneeling during the National Anthem. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: You are not going to believe this one. Beto O'Rourke is a rising star in the Democratic Party and polls show him surprisingly close in a race against Ted Cruz for one of Texas' seats in the Senate. On the campaign trail he was recently asked if he thought it was disrespectful for NFL players to kneel during the National Anthem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BETO O'ROURKE, D-TEXAS, SENATE CANDIDATE: My short answer is no, I don't think it's disrespectful. Peaceful, nonviolent protests, including taking a knee at a football game to point out that black men, unarmed black teenagers, unarmed, and black children, unarmed, are being killed at a frightening level right now, including by members of law enforcement, without accountability and without justice. They take a knee to bring our attention and our focus of this problem to ensure that we fix it. That is why they are doing it, and I can think of nothing more American than to peacefully stand up or take a knee for your right anytime, anywhere, anyplace.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Nothing more patriotic. The left is praising Congressman O'Rourke on social media for those comments, but I'm not sure that's going to play well with the voters of the lone star state. We are talking about Texas. Joining me now to discuss is FOX News contributor Kevin Jackson and civil rights attorney Brian Watkins. Brian, I want to start with you. Why do you think Americans go and watch football? Why do they watch the NFL?

BRIAN WATKINS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE AND CIVIL ATTORNEY: They enjoy it. It's a game. It's entertainment. It's enjoyable to watch.

CHAFFETZ: Entertainment, right?

WATKINS: Yes, absolutely.

CHAFFETZ: And you do it as an escape, right? Do you think you want to start and kick off the game by having political statements? How does that strike you?

WATKINS: I don't think you would be saying the same thing if, for example, if network executives and movie executives said to their employees, actors and actresses, hey, I don't want you talking about that Me Too movement type stuff. We don't want to bring that issue up. We are about entertainment here, so don't talk about it. I think people would have a problem with that.

So I don't understand why people have a problem with young black African- American men who have the spotlight simply taking a knee. They're not asking for a soapbox to placed on the 50-yard line and give a speech and disrupt the game. You're talking about not participating in the anthem by simply silently, quietly taking a knee.

CHAFFETZ: But do you understand how offensive that is to the men and women who have served this country? It's the two minutes that we take out in a bipartisan way, and we're honoring the flag, we're honoring our country, we're honoring our troops, we're trying to come together. Remember when Barack Obama said we're not the red states, we're not the blue states. We are the United States. That was a very patriotic thing to do. Even a Republican like me thought, hey, you know what, that is a great statement. We do need to become united.

So the one chance that we have to come united, no matter where you are on the field or political side of the aisle, that's the thing you do is try to disturb that and distract from that? Kevin, give me your --

KEVIN JACKSON, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: So let's coverage from the Beto O'Rourke point of view. First of all, it's an insult, because what they didn't talk about was all the references he made to blacks and the oppression that blacks faced many, many years ago, decades ago, at the hands of his own party, the Democrats. And oh, by the way, what O'Rourke also failed to mention is that all the things that he's talking about with the reason why blacks are kneeling in the NFL has to do with what? It has to do with the so-called lack of civil rights by police in big cities who are run by Democrats throughout the entire political process.

So what's interesting is that this is a problem for Democrats from the past and it's a problem for Democrats right now that has been created by Democrats. So he wants to talk about the kneelers. If these guys really believed in kneeling, why didn't Colin Kaepernick kneel during the Barack Obama administration? It was happening then. And when did Colin Kaepernick help any black in any city, Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, name the city, what has he done prior to that kneeling to help any of the blacks that are being killed in crazy numbers every weekend by other blacks? It is a disingenuous movement. For O'Rourke to hearken back to the days of civil rights as if these self-indulgent multimillionaires --

CHAFFETZ: Let me get Brian back in here.

JACKSON: Let me say this, for these self-indulgent multimillionaires to want to kneel and act as if blacks are facing these issues every single day is patently ridiculous.

CHAFFETZ: Brian, I see not only the protest and kneeling before the National Anthem, which I think is disrespectful to the flag, our country, and certainly to our troops. That's my take on it. I think the majority of the polling would show that. I also see people and player saying, hey, I'm not going to go to the White House. I'm not going to interact, where I think the opposite should be true. They should be saying I would actually like to meet with Donald Trump. I would actually like to meet with Republicans. Don't you think that would be more productive?

WATKINS: It could be productive. And that's what America is all about is the debate. And highlighting and --

CHAFFETZ: But why during a football game? Why do you do it during the football game for goodness sakes?

WATKINS: Because thousand and hundreds of thousands of people watch. And when you have the spotlight on you.

JACKSON: Not anymore.

WATKINS: It's their responsibility --

CHAFFETZ: Why do you think the ratings are going down? You are offending more people than you are actually gaining to your cause. And I can tell you what, NFL players when I was in Congress came and met with me and Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe, and we listened for them for hours and talked about the need for criminal justice reform. It was actually productive. And what you are setting back and offending people by kneeling and disrespecting the flag.

JACKSON: Jason, let me say one thing. Many NFL players --

CHAFFETZ: Brian. Kevin, I will give you the last word, but you've got to go fast.

WATKINS: You should not be offended by someone doing a silent protest. This is a nonviolent, silent protest that really offends and hurts no one to highlight an issue --

JACKSON: It's hurting people. It's hurting the league.

CHAFFETZ: Kevin, how does it hurt people? How does it hurt somebody who is trying to watch? Why not let them just do it?

JACKSON: They can do whatever they want, and the public has responded, and I think let the chips fall where they may. But I also want to give a shout out to the players who are standing for the flag and the anthem because they are unheralded. Unfortunately, it's a very small minority of young players who don't want to stand for the flag. The majority of football players get it because they understand that this is a game.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, that's right, and there's a time in a place for it, and those couple minutes when we honor the flag is not the time to do it. I want to be part of that solution. When I was in Congress, I was working on criminal justice reform. And it is a legitimate issue, but it's done at the wrong time in the wrong way. That's my take on it.

WATKINS: The only time and place is when the spotlight is on you.

CHAFFETZ: People have plenty of spotlight. They have millions of dollars. They can have the spotlight any time. And when they are invited to the White House and they disrespect the presidency of the United States. You know how many times I got invited the White House or on the floor of the House? I didn't want to go there because Barack Obama was the president. I did out of respect. And I did it because I wanted to engage in the dialogue. That's what you do. You don't run away. Given the opportunity to go to the White House and then you don't go, and I think that's wrong.

I have gone over time here. I have to leave it here. We have to talk about what's going on in San Francisco because leave it to San Francisco to trailblaze a new way to undermine ICE. Details after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Apparently being a sanctuary state isn't enough for California. The New York Times has a new piece out about the San Francisco rapid response network, a group that maintains a 24-hour hotline to tip off illegal immigrants about ICE patrols and raids. Wow, there's being soft on illegal immigration and then there's San Francisco.

Joining me now for reaction is Eric Beach, a Republican strategist and co- chair of Great American Alliance, and Saman Nasseri, I hope I pronounced your name properly, an immigration attorney in San Diego. Saman, I want to ask you, do you think that this puts law enforcement, ICE officers, in danger?

SAMAN NASSERI, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: I don't think this puts law enforcement or ICE officers in danger. I think it's good to have some community oversight. What would be nice to see his body cameras on the ICE officers, but this is a step to that direction. This might force them to do that because there's going to be people filming, documenting what's going on, and hopefully it stays peaceful, hopefully it stays --

CHAFFETZ: Yes, but if you know in advance that ICE is forming -- I've been on these raids, OK? I've been out there and actually done it. And they usually form in a parking lot, and then they will walk in on an area and surround the house, do some surveillance. So there is time to give them a heads up. Don't you think that that is going to put law enforcement in harm's way?

NASSERI: Any time you're chasing after a fugitive, you are in harm's way.

CHAFFETZ: OK, but does this make it worse or better?

NASSERI: It depends of those people --

CHAFFETZ: Come on, there is only one answer.

NASSERI: You can't say they're going to get tipped off, though. You have to --

CHAFFETZ: There's a hot live. There's a 24-hour hotline. That's the point.

NASSERI: Right, but that's for people to show up there and make sure that they are doing their job right, not necessarily to tip the people off.

CHAFFETZ: It's a tip line. That's what it's called. It's a tip line. Eric, what's your take on this?

ERIC BEACH, GREAT AMERICAN ALLIANCE CO-CHAIRMAN: Not only does it put law enforcement in danger, it puts American citizens in danger. It puts the people of San Francisco in danger. If you have a hotline or a snitch line and you see law enforcement coming, what you're doing are two things. You're encouraging people to break the law, and you're also intimidating the people that you're supposed to serve, because now they are going to feel compelled to come forward if they see something and try to tell on law enforcement coming to their community. It sets a bad precedent.

And again, this is something that as a political practitioner I would love for them to keep doing this. This will help us around the country. But as an American citizen, it's appalling, and I think they should remove it. If they want to do a hotline for something, try to do a hotline for the millions of feces that are around San Francisco and pick those up.

CHAFFETZ: Saman, really, do you think this is going to move the situation forward? And what do you tell the spouse of an ICE officer, how do you look her or him in the eye and say your loved one is going on this raid tonight, by the way, the target of who they are going after is going to be tipped off. What do you say that person?

NASSERI: You can't guarantee that the target is going to be tipped off. The community might be, but that doesn't mean the target is going to be tipped off. But I think what this comes down to is the frustration in the immigration community in general of nothing moving forward. Nothing is happening. Whether you are on the side of pro undocumented, or you want immigration reform, your anti-illegal immigrant --

CHAFFETZ: Donald Trump has an offer on the table that Chuck Schumer and the Democrats are never responded to in terms of -- he went further than I would have ever gone in of dealing with the DACA kids and all that. Eric, I'll leave you the last words here.

BEACH: So they are frustrated so they get to break the law? The only thing I disagree with --

CHAFFETZ: And by the way, I don't think it's necessarily breaking the law. I think they have a First Amendment right to do this.

NASSERI: It's not breaking the law.

BEACH: It is breaking the law. If you are informing and telling on law enforcement agents because you're breaking the law by being here as an illegal citizen, so you are already breaking the law. But again, they talk about immigration reform and say we're going to do something about it and then snitch on law enforcement officials puts them in danger and puts Americans in danger. And I'll say this --

CHAFFETZ: Gentlemen, thank you. I've got to cut it off. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: That's all the time we have tonight. Be sure to follow me on Twitter. I'm @JasonintheHouse, @JasonintheHouse. And a reminder, check out my new book. It's an upcoming book. You can order it now. It will ship in September. It's called "The Deep State, How an Army of Bureaucrats Protected Barack Obama and is Working to Destroy the Trump Agenda." I spent eight and a half years in Congress and eight and a half months writing it. If you want to know what it's about, that's the book, "The Deep State." Please go order it now. I'd appreciate it.

But up next, as you know, one of my favorite people, Shannon Bream. She's got an amazing interview coming up tonight. Shannon?

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.