This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," July 26, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JASON CHAFFETZ, HOST: Welcome to this special edition of “Hannity: The Left's Day of Reckoning.”

I'm Jason Chaffetz, in tonight for Sean.

The conspiracy theorists and the Democratic Party are humiliated. The witch hunt is over. And despite their best efforts, the partisan probe came up totally empty.

Robert Mueller's testimony was an utter disaster. And now, Operation Boomerang is in full effect. John Durham's investigation into the origins of the Russia probe is well underway. And according to a FOX News report, Durham could have smoking gun evidence of serious misconduct at the highest levels of our government.

Meanwhile, Democrats could not care less about the government accountability. Instead, they are on the mission to read personal e-mail and text of Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.

Joining us now with more is Catherine Herridge -- Catherine.

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, CORRESPONDENT: Jason, based on our reporting, the investigation into the investigators led by the U.S. attorney John Durham is considering whether key evidence was withheld from the national security FISA court including transcripts that showed a Trump campaign aide was against working with the Russians. During this week's testimony, former special counsel Robert Mueller was peppered with questions about campaign aide George Papadopoulos, and the May 2016 meeting with the Australian ambassador in Britain. Their conversation about Russia sitting on damaging Clinton e-mails was passed to the FBI through unconventional channels, kickstarting the FBI probe.

This section of the hearing hasn't had a lot of play but it goes to the heart of the matter.


REP. JIM JORDAN, R-OH: With Mr. Papadopoulos, it didn't go to the court. They used human sources. All kinds -- from about the moment Papadopoulos joins the Trump campaign, you've got all these people all around the world starting to swirl around him. Names like Halper, Downer, Mifsud, Thompson, meeting in London, Rome, all kinds of places. In one of these meetings, Mr. Papadopoulos is talking to a foreign diplomat and he tells the diplomat, Russians have dirt on Clinton.


HERRIDGE: Separately, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee's next target is the former White House counsel Don McGahn. Jerry Nadler telling reporters that his team may go to court next week to enforce the subpoena and obtain the Russia report's grand jury material which requires a court order.


REP. JERRY NADLER, D-N.Y.: We will continue to seek testimony from key fact witnesses. As many of you know, the committee authorized several additional subpoenas. Our work will continue into the August recess. And we will use those subpoenas if we must.


HERRIDGE: House Democrats approved subpoenas to obtain private e-mails but the critics say the administration officials, including the president's daughter and son-in-law are cooperating and did not use private accounts exclusively for government business like then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Catherine, thank you.

As Catherine reported, more harassment from House Democrats is on the way. Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler said that his committee is planning to enforce a subpoena against former White House counsel Don McGahn next week.

Joining us now with the reaction is the author of the upcoming book, "Witch Hunt: The Story of the Greatest Mass Delusion in American Political History" and FOX News legal analyst, Gregg Jarrett. And author of "Why We Fight," radio host Sebastian Gorka.

Gentlemen, thank you both for joining us tonight.

Sebastian, I want to start with you, because this boomerang that is now in place with the Mueller report coming up empty, that thing is going to come right back in to the face of the Democrats based on what we can tell that the Department of Justice is pursuing. That is the origins of this case.

SEBASTIAN GORKA, AUTHOR, "WHY WE FIGHT": Exactly right, Jason. It's clear from this disastrous testimony by Bob Mueller who disgraced himself and the FBI that there are ongoing investigations that are looking into the real genesis of Operation Crossfire Hurricane, and how this illegal surveillance against the Trump campaign actually occurred and who was behind it. It's exactly like I have a good friend Chris Platte who has a morning show here in D.C.

He says it's like the last scene from "The Hunt for the Red October." I don't know if you remember that great movie, Jason, where the bad sub captain shoots the torpedoes against Sean Connery's submarine and he makes a mistake and they circle back to sink his own sub.

The Russian collusion hoax which Gregg documented amazingly is now going to sink the DNC and A.G Barr is like a honey badger who is never going to give up. He is going to get to the bottom of who spied on us in the campaign and in the White House illegally, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Gregg, who's joining us here on set in New York. This really is going to be like a boomerang because there is going to be a lot of effort. And a lot if surrounds it, or at least some of it surrounds this exculpatory information that Papadopoulos evidently has, that Trey Gowdy, the former chairman, has referred to.

GREGG JARRETT, LEGAL ANALYST: If the government has exculpatory evidence in an investigation or legal case, they have a legal obligation required by law to turn it over to the court, and to a suspect or a defendant. They didn't do that in this particular case.

I suspect the information is a tape-recorded conversation between Papadopoulos and either the confidential informant, Stephan Halper, or the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, because both of them it appeared to Papadopoulos were tape-recording the conversation, when they meet Papadopoulos, they have the cell phone in hand and they are playing around with it here. And then they put it down next to Papadopoulos, obviously recording. And the information contained therein is likely exculpatory.

The government didn't turn it over to Papadopoulos' lawyer. And Papadopoulos' mention in the FISA warrant application to spy on Carter Page. If that is exculpatory, they had a duty to tell the FISA court and they didn't do it.

CHAFFETZ: Yes. Sebastian, when we watched the Mueller hearing based on what Gregg is talking about and what we've been talking about here, Mr. Mueller, Director Mueller, with all due respect, didn't acknowledge many of the things and he said he didn't even look at the genesis of this, which very well may have been the Russians trying to plant information, correct?

GORKA: More than 100 times in just the first session in front of Congress, Bob Mueller, this bent cop, this bad cop said, sorry, I'm not going to answer that. How does that occur, Jason? Either you take the fifth or you are under oath and you have to answer. I couldn't get away with that.

This is clearly because this was an operation using Russian propaganda. Remember, Christopher Steele said, I have very good ties in Moscow. He served in Moscow as an intelligence officer and this man admitted in a British court, Jason, I hate Donald Trump.

His propaganda information from his Russian contacts was used in that falsified dossier to acquire the warrant. And the FBI, Obama's FBI hid the exculpatory evidence that this was opposition research. That is a crime. Gregg nailed it. It's an absolute crime. It's abuse of power.

And this is when the house of cards begins to crumble for the Democrats and Obama's former flunkies, including Clapper and including Brennan.

CHAFFETZ: This is why it's so important what the inspector general is doing and what the Attorney General Barr is doing and certainly what Mr. Durham the prosecutor is doing in this. But, Gregg, I want to talk about the other part of what Catherine Herridge also talked about. And that is this idea that they are going to issue a subpoena on Don McGahn to compel testimony in front of his committee.

Now, I've got to tell you, having been a chairman, if I issued a subpoena on Neil Eggleston, then Obama's general counsel, the media would have laughed me off the planet. There would have been editorials about that.

You don't have the ability to compel testimony from a general counsel to a president to appear before Congress.

JARRETT: You know, some applications of executive privilege are dubious. This ain't.

GORKA: Right.

JARRETT: This is the guy whose job is to provide privileged confidential advice and counsel to the president of the United States. It's clearly covered by executive privilege.

If they think they can litigate this, good luck. I'll be in a nursing home by the time it's resolved. You know this from the Eric Holder case.

But the other -- I mean, their argument seems to be oh the privilege was waived because McGahn talked to the special counsel. That is ludicrous and here is why. He is talking to a member in the same branch of government, the executive branch, the special counsel. This is Congress, where the executive privilege is not waived but it attaches.

CHAFFETZ: I think that is what exactly what the Democrats are doing. I talk about it in the new book coming up "The Power Grab." It's all about creating this illusion, Sebastian. And we've got just a moment left here, but they want to create an illusion that there's not cooperation, that they must be hiding something.

But they know darn well that subpoena will never, ever be enforced. It's why you haven't had any other general counsel come up before, correct?

GORKA: $35 million, 500 warrants, 500 subpoenas, 40 agents working for two and a half years. Jason, this is a farce. This is a joke. This is an abuse of power.

It's OK to do it in Venezuela. Not here in America. But it's great news for the president. It's great news for the Make America Great Again agenda.

If this is all the Democrats have, they are going down in flames, Jason. So, bring it because you will continue to lose and America will see right through you and laugh in your face, Jerry Nadler. Laugh in your face, Adam Schiff.

CHAFFETZ: Last word, very briefly, Gregg Jarrett.

JARRETT: I agree with Sebastian that let's wait to see what the inspector general does. I mean, I can't imagine there won't be criminal referrals made to the Department of Justice. This was an egregious abuse of power.

People were misusing the position for political purposes, weaponizing law enforcement against the president of the United States who now we know has been largely victimized by these corrupt actors.

CHAFFETZ: Gregg Jarrett, Sebastian Gorka, thank you for joining us. We really do appreciate it.

There is no doubt that Robert Mueller's testimony effectively ended the Democrats' impeachment dreams. But some on the left are still in denial. For example, Congressman Ted Lieu of California is now pushing conspiracy theory, that Mueller was manipulated or controlled by some higher authority in the hearing.

Watch this.


REP. TED LIEU, D-CALIF.: Robert Mueller agreed that the OLC opinion prevented a sitting president from being indicted and then the Republican member after me asked him a series of questions to try to get him to walk it back. And he did not do that. And then it wasn't until there was a recess and the Intel Committee he started to walk some of that back. I don't know who got to him or who talked to him. But that was very odd what he did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What are you suggesting? He said he misspoke. He didn't understand it or whatever it was. That is why he wanted to clarify and walk by his response to your question. Are you saying he only did that because of pressure from someone?

LIEU: I don't know.


CHAFFETZ: After the three-year long Russia hoax, conspiracy theories are nothing new for House Democrats. In the end, there was no collusion, no conspiracy. And according to Robert Mueller himself, no obstruction. In fact, that determination was made without accounting for the office of legal counsel's opinion on charging a sitting president.

Still, Chairman Nadler continued to spread this lie. Take a look.


NADLER: He told use in a remarkable exchange with Mr. Lieu that but for the Department of the Justice policy from prohibiting him from doing, so he would have indicted President Trump.


CHAFFETZ: He knows better. He knows better!

Now with the Democratic Party effectively divided on impeachment, interparty tension is growing. Speaker Pelosi is reportedly trying to stop members of her party from attacking each other. This as Pelosi and Nadler blamed each other for dropping the ball on the Russia witch hunt.

Joining us now with more, Capitol Hill senior producer Chad Pergram -- Chad.


The House is now on the August recess for more than 46 days. And as a former lawmaker, you know the importance of establishing a narrative for the August recess.

But Democrats aren't quite sure where they stand on impeachment. Democrats on the Judiciary Committee made things muddier with a puzzling press conference.

I tried to get clarity from the Democratic Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin and the California Democrat Eric Swalwell.

REP. JAMIE RASKIN, D-MD: I think we are in an impeachment investigation.


PERGRAM: I mean, are you saying -- someone said it's not binary. How is it not? We are in it or we are not, right?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF.: When you look at different congresses and the way they address it, they have done it in different ways. Nixon was done different than with President Clinton. And what we are suggesting here is this court filing is the first time that you are seeing us telegraph to the court that one of the remedies we have is impeachment, and to consider whether that should be used.

PERGRAM: Impeachment confusion could be a problem for moderate Democrats from battleground districts. Also today, Democratic New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had an audience with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Ocasio-Cortez accused Pelosi a few weeks ago being biased against members of "The Squad" and women of color.

I asked Pelosi to describe the differences but Pelosi said she wouldn't get into that. When asked if they buried the hatchet, Pelosi said there was no hatchet -- Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Chad, thank you. You can see by some of us who served in Congress beat our heads against the wall dealing with Swalwell and Raskin and anyway, breaking today. Big news from the southern border: the Supreme Court ruled this evening that the Trump administration can proceed with wall construction plan amid the legal fight over its funding.

Speaker Pelosi is not happy. Earlier tonight, she tweeted: This evening's Supreme Court ruling allowing @RealDonaldTrump to steal military funds to spend on wasteful ineffective border wall rejected by Congress is deeply flawed. Our founders designed a democracy governed by the people, not a monarchy.

Now, I've got to tell you, having served in Congress, the trading of funds within accounts happens by the billions of dollars and it does every year and Nancy Pelosi has been complicit in that for decades. For her to put out the tweet is totally irresponsible and it's not right, because she knows and she has been complicit trading funds herself.

Here with more reaction are some congressmen who I served with in previous life when I was in Congress, Congressman Andy Biggs of Arizona, Congressman Tom McClintock of California, and Congressman Michael Waltz who I didn't serve with but a great guy from Florida and I appreciate all three of the congressmen here are joining us tonight.

I want to talk about the Supreme Court ruling, because it really will have an impact; particularly, on your state, all of your states. But really let's start with you, Congressman Biggs. Arizona needs this wall. The president has been fighting for it. I think you have been supportive and fighting for it.

Tell us what the ruling means in Arizona.

REP. ANDY BIGGS, R-ARIZ.: Well, it means probably 100 miles offense in southern Arizona. That is really important for us. As w you say, we have been advocating for that for some time. What that means since you have the vast majority of illegal drugs that are coming across are coming across our border, that's going to help slow that down and that's good for the entire country.

So, I was so pleased with that. I did get a hoot from Nancy Pelosi, when basically it's her allies and circus that took this up and sued the president in the first place to prevent this. Then when he appeals to the court and wins, all of a sudden, you have a judicial monarchy, you know? That is kind of humorous.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, it starts with her and then it ends up in Trump's favor. Congressman McClintock, you're from California. You are a one of the great experts on the budget. That is another topic. Tell us from your vantage point what the Supreme Court ruling means.

REP. TOM MCCLINTOCK, R-CALIF.: It's a great big "duh." The president has explicit statutory authority to do precisely what he did. It was held up by a left wing activist judge, but ultimately, this is a power that has been used by the presidents going back to mid 1970s, dozens of times. And now, it means we can actually use the funds to defend our own border.

I was with the president when he was explicit in his instructions to the commander of the Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for the project. He wants 400 miles of new or replaced fencing by the end of next year. I think now, he's going to get it.

CHAFFETZ: Congressman Waltz, we still don't hear Democrats put forth any legislation. You hear Congressman Collins complained about the fact that the Judiciary Committee doesn't even take up legislation. What do you see about the Supreme Court ruling and what do you see moving forward on the immigration issue in general and the Supreme Court ruling?

REP. MICHAEL WALTZ, R-FLA.: Well, yes, I'm on the Armed Services Committee, 23 years in the Army. The National Guard and the military have supported our border forces for decades down there. It's perfectly reasonable. It's perfectly legal what, you know, befuddles me is that Democrats have said now for months if not years this is not a crisis. We shouldn't be shifting funds.

Congress after Congress has kicked the can. I don't like that we have to use defense funding to do this but nobody else is solving the problem. And so, for the president to shift funds, which the Supreme Court now upheld, when we have over 1 million people -- we are on track to have over 1 million people flood over the border from 60 different countries, it's a humanitarian crisis, a national security crisis. We know terrorist groups, any pathway that will move drugs and people will also move weapons and individuals.

And I think this is absolutely appropriate and within his authority as commander-in-chief, which we have now upheld despite what Speaker Pelosi may tweet by the Supreme Court, and their interpretation of the law.

CHAFFETZ: Yes. I totally agree with you. Now, I want to switch gears and I want to go to infatuation on Democrats on impeachment. Congressman Biggs, the Democrats cannot figure out what are we going to do? Because Mueller produced nothing. In fact, I think it is now proving the point more and more what Donald Trump always said there was no collusion and there was no obstruction. But they are just so focused on impeachment. They are essentially doing impeachment, aren't they?

BIGGS: Yes. That is exactly right. They have been doing this since they came back and took over the House. I like to think of it as the impeachment cul-de-sac. That is where they are. That is where the Democrats all are. They are in the cul-de-sac. The rest of the country has gone forward.

As soon as Mueller let out the report the rest of the country went forward and said so what? That is what happened this week with the Mueller hearing. We're on a track with the president and his policies, the economy is growing and doing well. We've got to take care of the immigration stuff.

But the Democrats are over there in the cul-de-sac; particularly, Nadler, Schiff and Cummings and the various groups that want to just keep investigating the committees in Congress that want to keep investigating. It's a problem. Yes.

CHAFFETZ: Congressman, McClintock what is your take on it?

MCCLINTOCK: Well, they don't call it "Trump derangement syndrome" for nothing. It requires a certain amount of derangement. That is what we are seeing Democrats.

The Air Force calls it target fixation. That's when a pilot gets so fixated on the target, he forgets to fly his airplane and ends up crashing into a mountain. Now, we need to remember, the first calls by the Democrats for the Trump impeachment came within days after his election in 2016.

The very day after the 2018 election made Jerry Nadler judiciary chairman, he was overheard by a reporter on a train already plotting out their impeachment strategy. The only problem they have is there is no "there" there. And but that is not going to stop them from doing everything they can from now until the 2020 election to perpetuate this monstrous lie that has been now so thoroughly debunked.

CHAFFETZ: Congressman Waltz, we have just a few seconds left, but what's your take on it?

WALTZ: Well, you know, I shake my head watching the narrative progress from collusion, to obstruction to now it's the Republicans and the president don't care about the Russians and election security. It's absolute garbage. If you look at DHS, DNI, the director of national intelligence.

I was just up at NSA and with the Cyber Com, they have new authorities to go after this. I coauthored legislation with Democrats on a public notification protocol that if voters lose data through being hacked, through voter data bases, they have to be informed. Legislation just went through the Intel Committee.

CHAFFETZ: Well, listen, Congressman --

WALTZ: That's just a bunch of garbage. We are taking it seriously and we are moving forward on it.

CHAFFETZ: Congressmen, I thank all three of you for your service and thank you for joining us tonight. We do appreciate it.

Directly ahead, there is a major development in the feud between the so- called "Squad" and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Austan Goolsbee and former governor, one of our favorites, Mike Huckabee, will be here with more. You'll be right back. Don't want to miss it.


CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity.”

Now with Nancy Pelosi losing control of her caucus, she is desperately trying to deflect from the deep rifts within the Democratic Party. Meeting with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez today in an apparent effort to ease the ongoing feud claiming the two discussed, quote, working together to meet the needs of our districts and our country, written as only a staffer can write.

Now, the speaker was asked about the meeting earlier today and tried to downplay the whole thing. Take a look.


REPORTER: Do you think you were able to bury the hatchet with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in your meeting?

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: I don't think there was any hatchet.

REPORTER: She called you downright disrespectful.

PELOSI: We are a political arena. So, I feel -- I always felt, again, this is like you're in a family. A family, you have your differences but you're still a family. Does it happen in your family? Does your family agree on everything?

REPORTER: Yes, but sometimes we have meetings to clear they air.

PELOSI: You do? You have meetings in your family?


REPORTER: Do you she better understands the challenge of your job to unify the caucus after this meeting today?

PELOSI: You'd have to ask her.


CHAFFETZ: Joining me now for reaction is Fox News contributor, Governor Mike Huckabee, and former Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee.

Gentlemen, thank you both for joining us.

Governor, I want your take on it. You have held leadership roles at the highest of levels. What's your take on this feud between the two, Nancy Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez?

HUCKABEE: Congressman, I have often said the most dangerous person in the room is the person who doesn't know what they don't know. The problem with these tigers that Nancy Pelosi can't tame is they don't know what they don't know. And their inexperience is showing. It's the best thing the Republicans could have.

This is going to surprise Austan and perhaps you. I've got a lot of respect for Nancy Pelosi. I may not agree with her, hope she is not the speaker next time, but she is a very capable, experienced and a very able legislator. She likes to say that herself but it is true. Let's give her credit for it.

But this is something she is not used to, and that's mutiny within her own ranks.

CHAFFETZ: Austan, what's your take on it? As you see this two play it out, this idea that there is no hatchet is kind of laughable. But, come on, they have been feuding and it has been serious, and Ocasio-Cortez has an awful lot of power because she's got an awful lot of microphone time.

AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, FORMER OBAMA ECONOMIC ADVISER: Yes, look, I think two things. The first is Governor Huckabee better watch out because that was recorded. We have that on tape. Now we are going to keep it.


GOOLSBEE: Look, I think that this is the mature way to approach disagreements on policy is to have a meeting behind the scenes and work out your differences. I think they learned the lesson that the Republicans followed throughout the 2000s when Obama was there of how not to do it, which is you get ideologically safe districts. Those people challenging in the primaries, the incumbents or the moderates you end up putting in extremists in totally red states like Missouri, Indiana, now Alabama, West Virginia, the Democrats start winning and the Republican Party as a whole suffered because they had ideologically pure component. I think they are trying to avoid that.

CHAFFETZ: I don't know. I kind -- I know you'll be shocked awesome but I kind of disagree with you. I think this is a made for television event. I don't think it's a coincidence that it's seven month into their term and that it's the last day before they go on to recess and you have every camera sitting outside their office. Why it took seven months? I don't get that but nevertheless.

Let me move to a slightly different part of this topic here, Governor. On the one hand, Nancy Pelosi will routinely say she believes that Donald Trump is essentially under the control of the Russians. But she is not in favor of impeachment. I have heard -- I mean you've heard this argument time and time again. But they were not willing to do impeachment. What is your take on it?

MIKE HUCKABEE, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, she is trying to ride both sides of the seesaw, which is impossible. She has all these very radical leftists' loons in her party that are taking the party away from her. But she also has got reasonable Democrats across the country who will never go that far.

If the party nominates somebody as far left as most of the people on that stage, if they continue to let people like Ocasio-Cortez be the voice of the party, and she is going to be because nobody can stop her, then I think the Democrats, they got a real problem on their hands.

CHAFFETZ: And Austan, you have got to admit that the so-called "Squad" is pushing the party further and further to the left. You have basically every Presidential Candidate is jumping to get in front of them and say we support what they support. And Nancy Pelosi even admitting that they are not very far apart as far as the policy, but it's a socialist agenda that they are pushing for.

GOOLSBEE: I mean the socialist agenda like Social Security and Medicare? I mean if you look--

CHAFFETZ: No, I talk about the New Green Deal and -- no, c'mon. C'mon, Austan. You know what they have been - has been but is radical. It's so far out there even Bernie Sanders has a hard time swallowing it.

GOOLSBEE: You say radical I would just like to explore that Medicare Choice Plan is supported by more 70% of the country including the majority of the Republicans.

CHAFFETZ: That's also unknown.

GOOLSBEE: Yes, it is. That is no radical view that that's going to be a radical agenda.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, I think it's a radical agenda.

GOOLSBEE: Joe Biden our Former Vice President is currently leading and he is leading against President Trump by 10 points. He has a far higher proven rating than President.

CHAFFETZ: I don't buy that even. Governor, how do you see it?

HUCKABEE: Well, just to remind Austan, that all the polls show Donald Trump couldn't win, wouldn't win, Hillary had it in the bag. Keep believing it, Austan because 2020, there is going to be a lot of Democrat balloons sitting in the warehouse and nobody is going to be there to take them down.

GOOLSBEE: Well, I hope you are wrong.

HUCKABEE: I'm convinced you're going see a re-election for the President.


CHAFFETZ: Austan, last word you have a ten seconds.

GOOLSBEE: Look, in this, this is the mature way as I say to have two different wings of the party come together not do it in public the way the tea party did when they took down their own Speaker of the House.

CHAFFETZ: I give it about six or seven days and they will be at each other's throat yet again. Austan, Goolsbee, Governor Huckabee, thank you for joining us on this beautiful Friday night. Coming up, the media is in a complete meltdown mode after Mueller's disastrous testimony. Charlie Hurt, Joe Concha and Doug Schoen will be here to tell you why the "Hate Trump Media" is at their all-time worst we'll be right back as this special edition of “Hannity” continues.


CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity” the left's day of reckoning. Robert Mueller's testimony on Wednesday was a disaster for the Democrats but it was also a crushing blow to the mainstream media who had been pushing the ridiculous Russia collusion narrative for years. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We may not have won the battle of impeachment, but we are going to win the war of putting him in jail whatever we have to do. And we're not going to necessarily play.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, his appearance on Capitol Hill yesterday was not what Democrats were hoping for and did not make impeachment anymore likely.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's fair to say that Democrats did not have the day they wanted that Bob Mueller was not the witness they were hoping for. That there wasn't some new evidence presented or some new context given that would perhaps convince the American public that the President had to be impeached.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Where does this move the ball now on impeachment does it goes anywhere? I think if you were a Democrat who was looking for today to be the moment where you sum that crystallized. I think that the Democrats are probably disappointed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because of the performance from Mueller, I think that lights a fire under the need to speak to the people on his team who actually did the work.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lot of Democrats in particular used the "D" word and branded this a "Disaster".

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On optics this was a disaster.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You look who is winning now it certainly seems like Donald Trump is winning.


CHAFFETZ: Yes, because he is. Joining us now is Fox News Contributor Charlie Hurt, Media Reporter for "The Hill," Joe Concho and Fox News Contributor Doug Schoen. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us here.

Joe, I want to start with you because you are an expert in looking at the media. I really think the media was "A," disappointed and just so frustrated they didn't get what they wanted. And when I saw Nadler and Pelosi do their press conferences they were really playing to the media to try to say "Oops, sorry we didn't produce what we said we were going to produce".

JOE CONCHA, MEDIA REPORTER, THE HILL: I think Bob Mueller was a victim of his own hype by the media by Democrats supposed to be the unflappable statesman with the gravitas, a command of the facts. And instead as you saw Jason, he was confused, he didn't know many of the contents in the report that he wrote.

And as far as disappointment, you are right about that because this has been the fuel for the media over the last two and a half years. Let me give you some stats 8,500 stories on the Russia probe just by "The New York Times," "Washington Post," CNN and MSNBC. 530,000 web articles on Russia, Trump, and Mueller. 245 million interactions including likes and comments shares on the social media giant such as Twitter and Facebook.

So not only were people disappointed in the media because they wanted this to be the next Watergate, they knew that this was very good for business. And now the business is going away because after what we saw on Wednesday that is the final chapter as far as impeachment, Mueller and Russia, Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Those are stunning statistics I mean those numbers are unbelievable. Now, Charlie, I would love to go back and take an analysis of the Pulitzer prizes that were won along the way and do an analysis. Do you think we're going to get many apologies from the media along the way, Charlie?

CHARLES HURT, STILL WINNING AUTHOR: There won't be any number of apologies anywhere near the number of the stories that Joe just listed out. And it is astonishing because all of those stories were based on fundamental lies peddled by Democrats.

Remember Adam Schiff telling us again and again, he had this evidence. There is evidence that the public doesn't know yet. But they all knew. All of that turned out to be lies. You know when I got in to the news business 20, 25 years ago, I got into it because I believed in the truth and I believed in exposing people who are doing things that were wrong.

There is something going on here where you have an alarming number of reporters in the national political media who have no interest whatsoever in exposing the truth. They are willing to take the direction of Democrats, they are so blinded by the hatred of Donald Trump, they will take -- they will take any bogus story hook, line and sinker and they will absolutely run with it to the ends of earth in order to destroy this President.

And even a few years ago, you know, places like "The Washington Post," and "The New York Times," you know, you know you knew that they leaned left. But you also had enough respect for them that you knew that they were usually telling the truth or doing their best to tell the truth. They have forsaken any pretense whatsoever that they give a damn about the truth a tall.

CHAFFETZ: Doug, Jerry Nadler produced and Adam Schiff produced no new witnesses and no new facts. Mueller said he was going to talk within the four corners of the report. And it didn't turn out the way they wanted to.


CHAFFETZ: And yet, they still can't decide as to whether or not they are going to pursue impeachment.

SCHOEN: It sounded to me, Jason, like they wanted to move forward today. Now I had two reactions. First, they should move on. Get off this. I want Democrats to win. I'm different from most of the people on this show tonight.

I'd like Joe Biden to beat Donald Trump but the only way to do it is give this up, give up the prosecuting, investigating, turn to issues like climate, jobs, and healthcare. There is the possibility to win there. And the polls out, the Fox News poll very encouraging. But it's not going to stay encouraging unless the Democrats talk about what the American people care about. Not what the main stream media is doing or the left wing politicians?

CHAFFETZ: Joe, what do you see moving the needle? What will actually move the American people?

CONCHA: In terms of going toward or against impeachment?

CHAFFETZ: Yes. At this point they seem to be in a meltdown, the Democrats. They don't know to which direction they are going in and what they are going to do? And the media also can't figure out what direction to take this story because they had invested so heavily over the last two and a half years?

CONCHA: Right. Yesterday, you follow boxing? That was a TKO that we saw on this story. The problem that Democrats have is that most polls show that 80-85% of Democrats want impeachment now but independents, which Doug knows is very important, when it comes to elections--

SCHOEN: Swing vote.

CONCHA: --right, exactly. And obviously, the Republicans are not on board if you don't have the bipartisan buy-in, and you can't do it. But they don't know how to tell that to the base, to the AOC's, "The Squads" and everybody who watches MSNBC and CNN that this thing is over because it can't be done.

CHAFFETZ: Charlie, we've got just a few seconds left. What is going to be the message for the Democrats, over the six weeks the hot summer that's ahead of us?

HURT: I don't think it matters, quite frankly. I think that this whole impeachment thing has become sort of like a zombie that Nancy Pelosi can't kill. It's going to haunt all of them. You watch. People like Jerry Nadler are going to get opponents, Democratic primary opponents from the left accusing them of not pushing hard enough for impeachment. It's going to be a slow, ongoing disaster.

CHAFFETZ: I got to give Doug, the last ten seconds.

SCHOEN: Democrats if you are listening move away from impeachment. Forget it. It's a stone cold loser.

CHAFFETZ: Charlie, Joe, Doug, thank you for joining us tonight. Coming up, police officers in New York City are under assault. And almost nothing is being done about it. Trace Gallagher has the latest. And then we'll get reaction from Larry Elder and Manny Gomez. Stay with us.


CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this “Hannity” special. The left's day of reckoning. New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio is polling at just1% in his ridiculous bid the Democratic Presidential nomination. Maybe that is because he is completely lost control of his city. The latest example is a slew of water dousing assaults against the police taking place across New York a number of videos showing flagrantly disrespectful of views putting officers in danger.

Joining us now is Chief Breaking News Correspondent Trace Gallagher who has the latest on these disturbing attacks. Trace?

TRACE GALLAGHER, CHIEF BREAKING NEWS CORRESPONDENT: And Jason, there are now four videos of the New York police officers being doused with water. And critics say you can expect to see a lot more because people apparently believe its fine to soak the cops.

President Trump calls it tragic and says when he first saw an officer get hit in the head with a bucket he had to watch it again because he didn't believe it. The President then went after New York Democratic Mayor Bill De Blasio watch.


TRUMP: Probably the worst Mayor in the history of New York City. The policemen and women cannot stand him. They don't respect him. They don't like him.


GALLAGHER: We should note Mayor De Blasio also called the dousing of cops unacceptable and said it wouldn't be tolerated. Meantime in the wake of the fourth video the union representing New York police sergeants says the dousing could become dangerous and is now demanding that the New York Police Commissioner James P. O'Neill step down. O'Neill has not yet responded.

Finally, our corporate in "The New York Post" is reporting that the suspects arrested for attacking police with the water buckets are already out of jail and back on the streets. And that includes a well-known member of the Krispy Streetgang. Jason.

CHAFFETZ: Great. Trace, thank you very much. Joining us now for reactions Salem Nationally Syndicated Radio Host Larry Elder and Former FBI Special Agent Manny Gomez who I also would report is also a Former NYPD. I appreciate the service that you have given our country.

Gentlemen, thank you for joining us here tonight. Manny, I want to go to you when I see these videos, it is disgusting. It makes me so mad that these punks are allowed to get away with this, they are cheered on within the community, and the Mayor has lost control of them. The police chief is not doing enough. These police officers, I mean, they should not have to put up with this?

MANNY GOMEZ, FORMER FBI SPECIAL AGENT: Absolutely, unequivocally, the Police Department is the first line and the last line of defense. If they don't feel confident enough that they could defend themselves how could they feel confident enough to defend the rest of us?

So this is appalling. As somebody who has served in the NYPD for many years, years ago, this was not an action that would have been condoned. It would absolutely, unequivocally never have escalated to where it did.

So we need to really revisit the progressive views of City Hall and other administrations. Not only in this city but throughout the country and try to curtail the violence that is going on against police officers which obviously if it's going on against law enforcement, it is going to happen to the citizens we in home.

CHAFFETZ: Now Larry, obviously, this is a result of the Mayor's position and his progressive views as Manny was saying. When you watch this, what should happen? What should be the reaction from police?

LARRY ELDER, SALEM RADIO NATIONALLY SYNDICATED HOST: Well, I tell you, Jason, when I watch this, my reaction is young men who are raised with fathers in the home do not act like this. This is about the breakdown of the nuclear family the fact that the welfare state has incentivized women to marry the government and so many of our kids, especially people of color are raised without fathers. You're raised with a responsible father and responsible mother in the home, you don't engage in that kind of behavior.

The other part of course is the anti-cop rhetoric on the people on the left. Obama said that the Cambridge police acted stupidly. They did not. He accused the Ferguson Police Department being institutionally racist, it is not. The NYPD for crying out loud, majority of the officers are people of color. So knock it off. These are people that are trying to keep us safe and you treat them like this. This is outrageous it's all starts in the home.

CHAFFETZ: Manny, I have got to tell you, I watched these videos and I can't believe these police officers actually have the discipline to just sit there and take it. We don't pay them enough. They shouldn't have to put up with this humiliation. They got to be able to do their job and to protect themselves. Who knows what they could be dousing them with? It may be water today may be something else later.

GOMEZ: Absolutely. Today is water. Then it's exacerbated perhaps, explosive devices, Pneumonia, Clorox, Firearm. We had numerous police officers assassinated in their own vehicles and cold blood in the last couple of years.

CHAFFETZ: That's right.

GOMEZ: Why does this stop from this violence against police officers to happen? They were doing nothing but their jobs, protecting the citizenry of New York City. Yet, they were disrespected and assaulted accordingly. Like the way -- like the way they were. This needs to stop and we need to protect our police officers and our citizens.

CHAFFETZ: Larry, I hear your message about making sure that there is responsibility and respect within the home. But from a Police Department, Police Chief a Mayor, what should be that message?

ELDER: Well, the message is we are here to help you. We are not the villain we're not the enemy for crying out loud. There was just a study published in the official journal of The National Academy of Sciences, researcher looked at every single police shooting that took place in 2015 and the race of the officer had nothing whatever to do with the shooting.

Everything had to do with the criminal behavior of the suspect. Knock it off. We are here to help and we are the thin line between you and the bad guys. Give us little respect over here. We are not asking for too much.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, these police officers do work. Thank you, Manny, for your service. Larry, Manny, thank you. We'll be right back with some final thoughts on this special edition of “Hannity.”


CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity.” the left's day of reckoning. Unfortunately that's all the time we have left this evening. And if you liked tonight's show, I hope you'll love my new book, "Power Grab" the liberal scheme to under mind Trump, the GOP and our republic. It's available for pre-order now and I hope you get it. As always thank you for joining us.

Sean will be back in the chair on Monday. "The Ingraham Angle" is up next. Thanks for joining us.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.