This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," December 21, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GREGG JARRET, HOST: Welcome to this special edition of "Hannity": Trump versus the Swamp.

I'm Gregg Jarrett, in tonight for Sean.

And breaking tonight, the government will shut down at midnight tonight as the House and Senate have adjourned without ever reaching a deal. Joining us now with more from our nation's capitol, Peter Doocy -- Peter.

PETER DOOCY, CORRESPONDENT: Gregg, the Senate gave up on trying to avoid a partial government shutdown by adjourning more than three hours ahead of the deadline that they had. The only real action in the Senate today was when lawmakers announced they didn't have the votes to advance the border wall bill that easily passed the House yesterday. That bill has $5 billion dollars for the border, and there's talk about maybe trying to move something with just $1.6 billion instead, but Mark Meadows from the Freedom Caucus said that's not enough and the House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy says he's not going to bring up anything that the president will not sign.

House lawmakers today adjourned very early, and many lawmakers headed straight for the airport because they've been told they will have at least 24 hours notice ahead of any potential vote. The Vice President Mike Pence has been running point for the negotiations here on the Hill, but we don't know a ton about what the White House is willing to give and what the White House might be willing to concede.

The vice president only left just within the last five or 10 minutes and he's been very tight-lipped as he is crisscrossed the Capitol from ceremonial office to ceremonial office. He's been through the rotunda wearing out the tile floor all night, only just now leaving. But there will be a partial government shutdown, Gregg.

JARRETT: All right. Peter Doocy -- Peter, thanks very much.

Today, President Trump unveiled the design of the proposed border wall on Twitter, take a look at that. But will this important project ever be funded?

Joining us now, Freedom Caucus chairman, Congressman Mark Meadows, Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan.

Good to see you both.

Congressman Jordan, what's the answer to that question? Will it ever be funded?

REP. JIM JORDAN, R-OH: Yes. Yes. Remember, Gregg, just last week in the Oval Office, Nancy Pelosi told the president of the United States there aren't the votes in the House to pass a bill with funding for a border security wall. Just last night, 217 Republicans proved her wrong and voted to pass a bill with dollars for a border security wall. This makes good sense.

The only reason we're going to be headed to a shutdown here in a few hours is because Democrats don't want to support something that will actually secure the border, plain and simple.

JARRETT: Congressman Meadows, you know, Trump promised it. He has tried to deliver, the House delivered. But the Senate won't.

So, is this the Chuck Schumer shutdown?

REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C.: Well, indeed, in just a few hours when it shuts down, the only person standing between really getting a deal and not getting a deal is Chuck Schumer. But I can tell you, you mentioned, you know, Peter Doocy was talking about the vice president, it's his entire team that has been working on Capitol Hill all day -- the vice president, Mick Mulvaney, Shahira Knight, Jared Kushner. The president has been on the phone with senators and congressmen throughout the night.

His desire is to not shut it down, but it's also to deliver to the American people a secure border, and we've got to do that. He's made a promise. He's committed to that. I believe we'll get it done.

But right now, there's not a deal primarily because of Chuck Schumer.

JARRETT: Chuck Schumer and a device that was conjured up as a Senate rule called the filibuster, Congressman Jordan, you know this is exactly what the framers didn't want. They argued about having it and they abandoned the idea because they tried it before in the Articles of Confederation and it led to chaos and dysfunction. You know, over the last decade, hundreds of productive bills have been defeated by this artificial device called a filibuster.

Isn't it time to end the filibuster for everything once and for all?

JORDAN: Yes, I think that's where -- that's where I'm at. That's where the American people are, but that's not our call. It's the Senate's call. But you're right, Gregg, it's not in the Constitution. It is a Senate rule.

Imagine if they kept the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees. Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh wouldn't be on the Supreme Court. So, they were able to change the rule for something that important.

It seems to me when you're talking about our nation's security, when you're talking about building a border security wall, which was the fundamental promise we all made the voters in 2016, and certainly the promise that the president made and wants to deliver on, it seems to me this is a paramount importance where we should actually say United States Senate maybe you need to change that so we can get this done. We're going to keep pushing. We're going to get the wall done.

The president's committed to it as Mark said and they've their team, his team has been working hard tonight trying to get members to understand how critical this is and actually deliver for -- deliver for our country.

JARRETT: So, Congressman Meadows, your critics would say, well, wait a minute, Republicans have had control of the House and the Senate for two years and the White House for the better part of two years and yet you have failed to undertake comprehensive immigration reform that would include a border wall. So, doesn't the GOP leadership -- meaning McConnell and Paul Ryan and others -- bear the lion's share of the blame?

MEADOWS: Well, there's certainly enough blame to go around in putting something on the president's desk is what Congress should have done.

I will say this, though, Gregg, is the president actually made a four pillar option and it was Chuck Schumer who said no to that option. I mean, he's been more than reasonable. Gregg, think about this we spend more money on sugar subsidies than we do on building a wall on to secure our nation. I find that just incomprehensible.

I mean -- and so, as we look at this the president has made offer after offer after offer and has been very reasonable. It is time that we put something on his desk. I know Jim Jordan and I are committed. But more importantly, the American people are committed to doing it.

JARRETT: You know, Jason Chaffetz, your former colleague and friend, penned a column today on and he said, wait, a minute isn't there another way? We have a $4.4 trillion annual budget, $1 trillion of which is discretionary. Congress doesn't authorize every penny. Surely, the president can grab $5 billion of that and use it without specific authorization to start construction.


MEADOWS: Well, he can. But here's the interesting thing and sorry, Jim, to jump in here.


MEADOWS: He can, but I know all your viewers know that he gets sued over every thing. In the minute that he does that, he's going to get sued, they're going to get some liberal judge in California to say that it won't work. And so, listen, we would certainly support some of those unobligated funds going that way.

But it's really incumbent on Congress to do their job. That's why Jim and I are still here in D.C. We're committed to getting it done.

JARRETT: Congressman Jordan, so you've got four days really because, you know, government workers aren't going to work Saturday, Sunday, Monday, they have the holiday -- the day off of course the holiday on. So, you've got four days. What can be done?

JORDAN: Well, we got to just keep pushing and making the argument. Mark is exactly right. We need to appropriate dollars so this doesn't get tied up in court and we never get the wall. And $1.6 billion is not going to cut it. It's got to be more money than that so we can actually get this done for the American people.

The big thing I think we have to get through is Democrats have to be less focused on stopping the president and more focused on helping the country. They're so concerned about stopping President Trump from accomplishing things, let's just focus on what's good for the country. Everyone knows we'll have a less of a drug problem, less gang violence, less human trafficking problem if we secure the border and build the border security wall.

We just got to keep making that case, keep pushing, because we know when it comes down to it, the American people are with us. This is why they put Donald Trump in the White House. We have to deliver.

And I think that message will get through. We're going to get something.

JARRETT: Congressman Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, two important members of Congress -- thank you for taking the time to speak with us.

Over the past week, prominent Democrats from all over the country have vowed to fight President Trump tooth and nail over any plan to secure our southern border. Watch this.


REP. JIM CLYBURN, D-S.C.: If you build a ten-foot wall, somebody's going to have an 11-foot ladder to go over it and that's not securing the border and we ought to stop that foolishness.

SEN. MAZIE HIRONO, D-HI: It is very true that he will bring on this shutdown and he has to take responsibility for it. Any effort on his part to blame the Democrats will be such (EXPLETIVE DELETED) as I said before I would hardly be able to stand it.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y.: President Trump is throwing a temper tantrum and creating the Trump shutdown of the government.

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN, D-N.H.: The president's campaign promise was for Mexico to pay for the wall. It wasn't for America taxpayers to pay for it. So, if he's really going to stick to his promise, he should make Mexico pay.

REP. LUIS GUTIERREZ, D-ILL.: Jesus Christ who had to flee for his life with Mary and Joseph. Thank god there wasn't a wall that stopped him from seeking refuge in Egypt. Thank god that wall wasn't there and thank god there was an administration like this or he would have to have perished.


JARRETT: Oh how times have changed. Remember it wasn't that long ago that these same people were pretty much in agreement with President Trump. Take a look at this.


HILLARY CLINTON, DEMOCRAT, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in, and I do think you have to control your borders.

SCHUMER: People who entered the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the U.S. legally. The American people will never accept immigration reform unless they truly believe that their government is committed to ending future illegal immigration.

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: Those who enter our country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law, and because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we cannot allow people to pour into the U.S. undetected, undocumented and unchecked.


JARRETT: Joining us now is author of "Hold Texas, Hold the Nation: Victory or Death", FOX News contributor, Lieutenant Colonel Allen West, former congressman, FOX News contributor Tammy Bruce joins us, and attorney Danielle McLaughlin.

Good to have you all.

Congressman, let me begin with you. Five years ago, the entire Democratic Senate Caucus voted for a barrier. Back in 2006, they voted for the Secure Fence Act that included Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, the whole gang. Now, all of a sudden, they're against it. That's only because Trump is for it, right?

RET. LT. COL. ALLEN WEST, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, without a doubt and when you hear Senator Schumer saying President Trump is not going to get his wall, this is not about President Trump or his personality, this is about the constitutional duty and responsibility of the United States elected officials there in the House and the Senate. And that constitutional responsibility is to protect the sovereignty of the United States of America and make sure that the American citizens are secure, Article 4 Section 4 talks about this, the Founding Fathers put it in there.

Now, when you talk about a border security wall, no one is talking about 17,000 miles of a continuous wall.

JARRETT: Of course.

WEST: But we're talking about a place where you can have an obstacle and obstruction along some of these routinely use infiltration corridors that the drug cartels and others are using, to include Islamic jihadists, to come in to the United States of America.

JARRETT: But, Tammy, it's all about Trump they just -- you know, he could say Christmas presents for all and the Democrats would oppose it because it's Donald Trump.

TAMMY BRUCE, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, yes, but in this particular instance, it's worth opposing because he'll actually get it done. We have Congress voting for these kinds of things all the time and it never happens. It was promised to President Reagan. They thought they were going to have a wall and serious border security back, of course, in the ‘80s and even prior to that.

And this is a president who actually can't be controlled in that he can't be stopped from getting things done, and this is I think his primary threat. What we do know, of course, is, is that what we've seen in the last two years is the Democrats became a party of bullies, chasing around the GOP women, harassing people in public.

And now, we're seeing this happen -- this kind of approaches I think you're going to be seeing in office as well. We saw it with Representative Gutierrez attacking Secretary Nielson for six minutes at a hearing.

JARRETT: And then he walked out.

BRUCE: And then when she's about to respond, he walked out.


BRUCE: So, look, this is what the American people -- I want them to see it for the next two years, but we also know that this can't be a game. It's been a game for too long for Washington. The president -- this is I think in some ways what the founders wanted, a man of action or person of action in the White House to move Congress into getting things done.

And at this point, I think the Congress should remember what their job is, why the president was elected in that. Harvard Harris poll saying 80 percent of Americans want a secure border and, of course, a barrier is going to have to be a part of it.

JARRETT: You know, Danielle, I think most Americans -- frankly, they care about the wall many do, but I don't think they care the government shuts down because it doesn't affect them. There have been government shutdowns since 1976. TSA continues on, the Post Office, your Social Security checks, Medicare, Medicaid, all unaffected. You know, you're still going to get frisked at the airport and the V.A., you know, hospital isn't going to pull the plug.

So it doesn't affect most Americans when the government shuts down at midnight tonight.

DANIELLE MCLAUGHLIN, ATTORNEY: No, it doesn't. It does affect about 800,000 federal employees who are there going to be furloughed or not going to be --

JARRETT: Yes, but a non-essential employees which invites the question, why does the government employing non-essential workers?

MCLAUGHLIN: Well, one example is the Department of Justice, you keep the criminal folks on and you take the civil people off. But I would still argue that enforcing civil laws and making sure that penalties are paid is still an important function of government.


BRUCE: But at the same time, most Americans of course, if not all of them, won't notice that it shut down. But what strikes me is this obsession by the government about itself. That is the scariest thing for them that people will have a few days off during the holiday, they will still get paid a few days late, it's not like they won't get paid, because Americans know what it's like to be furloughed for years and to never get a paycheck because of what Washington, D.C. has done with policies, what the Obama administration did to the economy of this country.

But when it comes down to this, it's like the scary monster of a government shutdown, it really isn't scary at all. As a matter of fact, also the markets respond well when the government shuts down.


Congressman, what about that? I mean I think that -- but for the hair on fire media hysteria, oh, you know the earth will stop spinning on its axis if the government shuts down at midnight, most Americans would yawn.

WEST: Well, they're really as you say, Gregg, there really is no effect on the everyday average American. As a matter of fact, you brought up an incredible point. Why does the federal government hire people that it has in non-essential positions? So, this -- and of course, when this quote- unquote shutdown is over, they will be given the back pay.

So, this is a very important thing to look at the effectiveness and the efficiency of the federal government. I think another thing that is very disingenuous is that you're here you have people talking about Medicare- for-all, which has a $32 trillion price tag, but yet in a four $4.4 trillion dollar budget, we can't find $5.7 billion to ensure that we have security along our southern border.


WEST: To me, that's truly disingenuous.

JARRETT: Yes, I mean, it really is absurd when you think about it. In the competitive marketplace, no small business or corporation, Danielle, would hire somebody who is not essential. They hire only vital workers because their goal is to increase profits and yet the government, the most inefficient disorganization in the world hires a load of non-essential workers.

MCLAUGHLIN: I mean, you're not suggesting that the civil division of the Department of Justice is non-essential.

JARRETT: I'm not a fan of the Department of Justice, so I would disassemble the Department of Justice.

MCLAUGHLIN: I think that there are many important things that the DOJ does from a civil perspective, not least of which is consumer protection, making sure that student loans, people don't get ripped off. There's all sorts of things that we have lawyers and other people doing really important things for the American.


JARRETT: They seize assets and levy penalties is one of the things they do, why not use the $14 billion they seized from El Chapo, the Mexican drug cartel kingpin, and use just a portion of that to pay for the wall?

BRUCE: This is, remember, we think about money and who were hiring and what we're paying for. Remember the billions that were lost in the State Department when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. The $700 million, maybe it's billion, in the Pentagon that can't be found.


BRUCE: The amount of money because it's -- the government is so large it becomes like water.


BRUCE: And just -- we just -- you just lose it.

JARRETT: Hundred-dollar toilets, you know, that's really -- I mean like who has it --

MCLAUGHLIN: So why we spend five billion on a wall, when we could do this with drones, we could do this for personnel? Actually create employment on the southern border with new technology.

Democrats are not about open borders. They care about sovereignty. They care about using money wisely. So, if we're concerned about 800,000 people and whether that's government waste or not, then why aren't we thinking that whether this is really actually a big white elephant that's going to get might --


MCLAUGHLIN: -- for years, cost the money -- the government far more money as it relates to --


BRUCE: Danielle, we do know where there is walls. We do already have sections of walls across the border since the '90s, and where those walls exist, at least 95 percent of illegal traffic ended, and that includes illegal aliens and drug traffic.

So, we have the proof in the history along our own border where the segments of walls exist and again starting in the ‘90s. So it's been consistent historically.

JARRETT: Congressman West, let me come back full circle to my original question. Democrats have long argued for a barrier on the southern border and yet now they're flip-flopping. Would you agree that the only reason is they don't want to give Donald Trump a political victory because he promised the wall.

WEST: Yes, you're absolutely right. This is not about President Trump, although Senator Schumer says that.

Ask the Israelis who built the wall what did that do for stemming terrorism when they had those first and second intifadas. When you look at proven as Tammy has talked about, there are direct results from having a border obstacle down there along our southern border.

And I know that Danielle talked about drones and other things. You can use the drones, you can use people on the ground. But the purpose of a wall is to canalize or channel people into areas where you do have those additional resources.

We just found out this past week that we had an infiltration tunnel that was being built and almost completed along our southern border. We have a very serious problem and we have to rectify it.

JARRETT: All right. Congressman West, always great to see you. Tammy, Danielle, thanks for being here. Merry Christmas, happy holidays.

Coming up next, members of the mainstream media continue repeating the same old talking point on the Trump administration. We'll show you the tape. You don't want to miss that.

And then, former FBI Director James Comey is continuing to downplay deep state corruption and efforts to undermine President Trump.

Stick around for that. We'll be right back.


JARRETT: Welcome back to this special edition of "Hannity". I'm Gregg Jarrett, filling in for Sean.

Trump versus the Swamp.

With all the news this week on the Trump administration, Newsbuster's pointed out the mainstream media had only one rather ridiculous conclusion, all in unison now -- the walls are closing in on President Trump. Take a look at this collection we compiled.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With every organization he's ever run as a "Washington Post" said seemingly under investigation now, that this is a president who really does feel the walls coming closing in on him very quick.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: While Donald Trump is no stranger to legal troubles, the walls may be closing in now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So many investigations and clearly the investigative walls are closing in on Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The walls are closing in. It seems every day now, a new facet of President Trump's life both personal and public is being scrutinized.


JARRETT: You know, it's like an echo chamber. They only hear themselves.

Joining us now with reaction from "The Hill", Joe Concha, Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, FOX News contributor, former Clinton pollster, Doug Schoen.

So, Joe, let me start with you. You know, you've pointed out that Trump's ratings are fairly static. Does that mean that the media has lost its mojo or Americans are just wise to their act?

JOE CONCHA, MEDIA REPORTER FOR THE HILL: Well, that's quite a montage you just played, Gregg. I mean, it says if a memo went out and everybody got the same exact talking point.

Yes, look, it's like the boy who cried wolf right the old saying, except now it's the boys and girls who cried Trump. And it's not just the walls are closing in. And by the way, you talk about impact, yes, his poll numbers are stubbornly in the 40s and that tells you that all this negative coverage isn't really having any effect because nobody trusts the messenger and the messenger has become redundant.

But it's not just the walls are closing in. It's the noose is tightening and then we hear about all the moments, the pivotal moment, the dangerous moment, the defining moment. Then we hear about the beginning of the end. The bombshell revelation, the bombshell report, constitutional crisis, worse than Watergate, this is a turning point in the Trump presidency, Trump weaponizes, and then one I'm going for as my new year's resolution at the end of the day.

The point is, you keep saying these things over and over again, and it gets a bit tedious after a while, Gregg.

JARRETT: It really does.

You know, Doug, I spent in a chapter in my book going through the outrageous statements in which they said this is a bombshell, this is the end of Trump, they're going to be taking him away in handcuffs any minute now and, of course, most of those stories had to be retracted and corrected. They were wrong.

They have written his political obituary as far back as two years ago and it hasn't happened yet.

DOUG SCHOEN, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, look, you're absolutely right the media has gone over the top. But I would say the narrative of this week which is a problem for them, Gregg, is not that the walls are coming in but the walls not getting built.

And with a Democratic House coming in, I'll say this to the president and any of his supporters listening, you have to do what Bill Clinton did when he had a Republican Congress.


SCHOEN: Compromise. The president cannot govern only to build the wall and get his agenda. Compromise requires conciliation, compromised -- and if he doesn't seek consensus, he'll be the loser.

JARRETT: Yes. But that was 1994 and you're the guy who told him to compromise.

SCHOEN: But the political arithmetic is the same and I remind Joe Concha, 46 is less than 50. You need 50.

JARRETT: Charlie, let me go to you because, you know, the imminent demise of Donald Trump has been written now for two years as I pointed out before. And yet it hasn't happened. Is it simply because the media has such unabashed scorn and visceral hatred for Donald Trump, the man and his politics, that they cannot contain themselves?

CHARLIE KIRK, TURNING POINT USA FOUNDER: That's exactly right. I want to address the reference back to Bill Clinton. We must remember that Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton, they fought, you know, endlessly and actually, there was a government shutdown over Christmas during one of those negotiations.

And on the front page of a magazine, it was the Newt that stole Christmas. Never forget that Republicans fought in the ‘90s to get these reforms to balance the budget, welfare reform so on and so forth, and Donald Trump right now is doing the correct thing -- taking a hard-line fulfill a campaign promise that will make our country stronger and safer and protect our national sovereignty.

And, finally, Republicans are like oh wait we can fight again. We don't have to just pass these endless continuing resolutions without progress to go back to the American people. This is a core campaign promise and I'm so glad to see the president fulfilling it the best that he can and pressing the legislative branch to do that.

JARRETT: You know, Joe, when he actually does compromise and achieve something and he did, you know, most recently the Criminal Justice Reform Act that was passed into law once he signs it, you know, it's sort of buried in most newspapers. "The New York Times" actually gave it fairly minor playing, grudgingly said, OK, he actually did something good. I know it broke their heart to have to print that.

CONCHA: Well, it steps on the narrative, Gregg, right, that if we've been hearing about and we're now days into the presidency. We've been hearing about that this president is a racist, then how could he possibly work with Senate Democrats, House Democrats, everybody came together to put forth a criminal justice reform bill? I mean, that's one the least racist things you could do because it will help out primarily minorities. So, yes, that that part got buried this week certainly.

But, again, we go back to all these sayings being said over and over again, and the impact that it has. And the bottom line is, that all these pundits and a lot of them are anchors too, they're at least disguised as anchors, but they're giving opinions, they're sharing their feelings. They're not just seeking facts. The goal isn't to win an Emmy or to get a Pulitzer. The goal is to get on Stephen Colbert Show or Jimmy Kimmel's or Bill Maher, because that's when they feel like they've arrived.

And one last point, Doug by the way. I know you said you got to get to 50. The President won with 46.1 percent of the vote and he still won the presidency, so maybe you don't have to get the --

JARRETT: So rejoinder?

SCHOEN: Yes, I mean, the rejoinder is, to govern with less than a majority, to govern with a narrow constituency is a recipe for failure. Sure, Joe, sometimes you can draw to an inside straight, but that's not how I would advise a President who's got to represent all the people and wants to represent everyone in a way of producing consensus and conciliation should govern, especially when the Democrats control the House.

JARRETT: Do you think Charlie that -- most Americans when they tune in and tune out, because they hear the same thing, the echo chamber that we played, all of them saying that 50 times on MSNBC and CNN saying, "That wall is closing", they were just parroting a Democratic talking point. Do you think Americans are just wise to that?

KIRK: Well, without a doubt. And look the only reference to the wall that really should be talked about is that Donald Trump can do everything he can to actually build the wall.

But, again, it's just so funny to see them parroting the same thing over and over again. If you want evidence of collusion, that's collusion. You know the media, they're obviously -- they're getting some memo or something in the morning. I mean they're all getting on the same page about.

But to the previous point that I really want to mention is that. You can't govern or you don't have a mandate to governor unless you have 50 percent or more approval ratings. First of all I never heard that when Obama was President.

Secondly, these approval ratings -- I mean, look we have become such a bifurcated country where you have Manhattan and Malibu and then Middle America, that's -- it's essentially those are the two buckets. And the approval rating for Donald Trump in Middle America is still very, very strong and you saw that with the strong Senate performances in states like Missouri, Indiana and North Dakota.

SCHOEN: Did you see the House (results) in the mid, Charlie, they weren't so good.

KIRK: So, while there was some --

SCHOEN: No so good.

KIRK: Well, there were some hiccups. There was some losses.

SCHOEN: Lot of losses, Charlie, a lot of losses.

KIRK: Well, look, that we gained in the Senate and Trump did a lot better than people thought. There was no Blue Wave whatsoever despite being outspent and despite all the pundits saying this is going to be the best election ever, and he outperformed Obama in his first midterm. So, look, Donald Trump's going to get convincingly reelected. I reject the premise that he somehow doesn't have a mandate to govern, because people in Manhattan and Malibu don't like him.

SCHOEN: He is vitiating his mandate, but not -- by not seeking consensus.

JARRETT: The guy from Harvard had to get in the last word. They teach you that at the Harvard by the way --

SCHOEN: They do and I'm happy and proud of that. Thank you, Gregg.

JARRETT: Yes, well your basketball team ain't so great.

SCHOEN: That is sadly true.

JARRETT: All right, Joe, thank you very much. Doug Schoen, and Charlie Kirk. Coming up the Mueller witch hunt could be wrapping up very soon. We'll have analysis coming up next.


JARRETT: Welcome back to this Special Edition of Hannity, Trump versus The Swamp. Former FBI Director, James Comey is continuing to downplay deep state corruption and the efforts to undermine President Trump telling House lawmakers this week "Who cares" when asked about the source of the phony Trump dossier that was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

Also developing tonight, we're learning that any government shutdown will not effect, of course, Robert Mueller's probes operations, and that the special counsel might actually wrap up the investigation as soon as mid- February, yes we've heard that before.

Joining me now for reaction is author of the terrific book, Licensed to Lie, former federal prosecutor, Sidney Powell along with Trump Campaign Advisory Board member and attorney Madison Gesiotto.

MADISON GESIOTTO, ATTORNEY: Good to be with you.

JARRETT: So Sidney, I have, in fact, a copy of the 173 pages of Comey's testimony on Monday and I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw him say what difference does it make. It was like the Hillary Clinton thing, what difference does it -- "who cares" that Hillary Clinton paid for it and it was composed by a guy who admitted he'd do anything to stop Trump, meaning he'd lie, which is what the dossier was.

SIDNEY POWELL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes, that's a familiar line, isn't it Gregg? It has quite the ring to it since Mrs. Clinton herself used it. Unbelievable, of course, the leaking line, Comey only cares about James Comey and whatever narrative it is he wants to promote, including his primary job of covering up for Mrs. Clinton. So he's going to say whatever it is that promotes his own agenda and her cover up, absolutely appalling.

JARRETT: And Madison that's not only appalling, but he lied to the FISA Court using exclusively the dossier which he admits he hadn't verified. He just seemed the FISA Judges by concealing the fact that it was paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. I'm willing to bet that the FISA judges would have wanted to know that vital tidbit of information that Comey concealed.

GESIOTTO: You know, it's disingenuous and lazy at the very least going back to Comey saying that the motivations or the origination of the dossier doesn't matter that it wasn't worthy of more investigation. Of course, he knows better than that. We know better than that.

When we look at this dossier being used to obtain court permission to spy on an American citizen, it's absolutely appalling. He's an embarrassment to the FBI. He's an embarrassment to the American people. And quite frankly, people are sick of him. He loves to listen to himself talk. He's out for himself and only himself. He didn't do a good job at the FBI, and he's doing a terrible job right now, and I don't think he's very credible or trustworthy in the hearings.

JARRETT: So Sidney, Comey is the guy who launched the Trump-Russia investigation, without any evidence and spied on the Trump campaign by deceiving the court. So on Monday he says, and he said this in his previous testimony, he can't recall who drafted the document that launched the investigation, never knew that Clinton paid for it. How could he not know? Bruce Ohr's roll, "Gee I don't know anything about that". Christopher Steele, "I don't know anything about his involvement", the guy who wrote the dossier that Comey used.

He is either the most clueless and incompetent FBI Director in modern history or he's lying, which do you think?

POWELL: I think it's actually both Gregg. He made material false statements to the FISA Court when he signed that affidavit saying it was a verified application to the FISA Court, when he didn't do anything to verify any of it. Why he has not yet been prosecuted, I don't know, other than the entire Department of Justice and FBI are corrupt. I mean, somebody needs to be opening a Grand Jury investigation into Mr. Comey and all the FISA abuses right now. It's got to be done.

JARRETT: Madison, he still is dodgy about whether or not among the seven government documents he stole and leaked for the purpose of triggering his longtime friend Robert Mueller as the special counsel, he's still not really giving genuine straight answers as to whether any among those seven documents was classified, and therefore leaking illegally classified information. It's really pretty astonishing.

GESIOTTO: Exactly. He claims to care about truth. He claims to want to share this truth with the American people. He's a leaker, he's a liar. And when we look at the FISA Court abuse, this isn't something that just started with him. If we look back all the way to the early 2000s, there was I think over 75 FISA Court Judges that said they were misled by the FBI. This is an issue that has been needed to be addressed for almost two decades now, and this is just a prime example of why.

JARRETT: Among it -- the first time he testified December 7th, most recent testimony, 245 times he said, "I don't remember, I don't recall". Now in the most recent 173 page document, in addition to those I don't recall, I don't remember, it's "I don't know", "I can't tell you", " I won't tell you", "that's classified.

And beyond all of that what struck me was he was so snarky and sarcastic or as my grandmother used to say smart alec, toward the members of Congress who were asking legitimate questions, Sid, what do you make of that?

POWELL: That's his absolute hubris at its worst. He like, Mr. Mueller, hold themselves above all else and above the rule of law. They alone deem themselves fit to decide who is guilty, who is innocent, who has benefiting from a cover-up, who is entitled to their protection, it's beyond the pale.

JARRETT: He's a guy, Madison, who -- it's almost nauseous, his inflated sense of rectitude and self-righteousness. He pretends to be this noble and heroic figure. The truth is, he's anything, but. Would you agree?

GESIOTTO: I 100 percent agree with you on that. He's extremely self- righteous. And when we look at the front of our Supreme Court, "Equal Justice Under Law", this is something that him, Hillary Clinton and so many others don't seem to want to respect anymore. It's a pivot part of our country and they should not be held above the law, and they certainly shouldn't look at themselves that way.

And I think when we look at them, and the way they're behaving it shows, that many of these people have been in corrupt D.C. for way too long and that's another thing that needs to be changed that our President has been addressing for over two years.

JARRETT: Now he cleared Hillary Clinton by twisting the law and contorting of fact, Sidney, and then he deceives a court to wiretap the Trump campaign. Then he steals government documents and conveys them to somebody unauthorized to trigger the special counsel. And he continuously gives false and misleading and evasive statements. Do you think he'll ever be held accountable?

POWELL: He must be Gregg, if we're going to have any -- if Americans can ever have any faith in the Department of Justice or the FBI again. He must be held to account.

JARRETT: Will Bill Maher do it?

POWELL: He better. And don't forget, he agreed to destroy the evidence on Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson's laptop and Mr. Mueller has destroyed evidence on Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's cell phones. All of that is obstruction of justice and affects the Flynn and Manafort prosecutions. They destroyed Brady evidence on those cell phones and laptops. That has got to be held to account for that.

JARRETT: Yes, and he gave immunity to five of Clinton aides in exchange for nothing. I've never heard of that before.

POWELL: Exactly.

JARRETT: You don't give immunity --

POWELL: While innocent people have been crossed --

JARRETT: -- in exchange took his zip. Unbelievable. All right. Madison Gesiotto, Sidney Powell, thank you both.

Coming up, Kristin Fisher gives us the latest on out of Washington D.C. and a miraculous story about our vets. You're not going to want to miss this one. Stick around.


JARRETT: And welcome to this Special Edition of Hannity, Trump versus The Swamp. Let's turn now to our nation's capital where this swamp resides. But also Kristin Fisher is there standing by with the latest on the looming government shutdown and the health scare surrounding Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Kristin?

KRISTIN FISHER, CORRESPONDENT: That's right. Well, let's start with the shutdown, because this partial government shutdown, it is going to happen. Both the House and Senate have adjourned for the night with no deal in sight. The sticking point is of course funding for the President's border wall. He wants $5 billion. Democrats won't come anywhere close to that number. So they're at a stalemate, though negotiations behind the scenes are still ongoing.

Vice President Mike Pence has been the point man for the administration tonight on Capitol Hill. In fact, he only left an hour ago after spending most of the afternoon and evening trying to cut a deal with Democrats. But so far those efforts have been unsuccessful. So now funding for about 25 percent of the federal government will run out in just over two hours.

Now the other big news that everyone in Washington is watching tonight the health of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she had two cancerous nodules removed from one of her lungs today. But a spokesman for the court says there is no evidence of any remaining cancer cells nor is there any evidence that the disease has spread. And tonight President Trump is wishing her a full and speedy recovery, Gregg.

JARRETT: And we do as well Kristin, thanks very much. More to come on our Hannity Special, Trump versus The Swamp. But first we want to tell you about a touching story that embodies the Christmas spirit. This is a great story.

An Army veteran donating his kidney to a fellow vet and it all begins with a conversation at a Washington State Starbucks. Joining us now to share their incredible story these two fine gentlemen, Justin McNeil and fellow Army veteran, Vince Villano, so guys thanks for being with us to share your story.

So Vince it begins with you. You walk into your usual Starbucks. You see your barista who prepares your coffee, and as I understand it, you sit down and it was noticeable to her. Her name is Nicole. That you were kind of down, what happened then?

VINCE VILLANO, ARMY VETERAN SET TO RECEIVE KIDNEY TRANSPLANT: Well, it was -- she kind of actually observed me from an angle dealing with another cashier and could just see that I wasn't having at that morning. I'm not really a morning person, begin with, and was having some pain that was consistent with my condition and she just asked me what was going on. Said, "Hey, look like something's up". And I told her this long story and when she had more time let's talk about it and she said well coincidence, I'm off in five minutes let's talk.

So I let her know that I had this polycystic kidney disease and the ramifications of what was going on with it, and that I was going to need to have a transplant eventually. And it just kind of snowballed from there. She suggested that I meet with Justin and we did and that here we are.

JARRETT: So Justin, your wonderful, thoughtful caring wife Nicole comes home and tells you the story, right, what happened?

JUSTIN MCNEIL, ARMY VETERAN & KIDNEY TRANSPLANT DONOR: She came home that night. We were lying in bed and getting ready to sleep. At that point she relayed Vince's story to me. It sounds like a pretty rough time he was having. So my response was, I have a kidney, let's do this. So she connected us and we went from there.

JARRETT: Did you say, "Hey, I have a kidney, let's look into helping him, because he's a vet -- a fellow vet or just because he's a fellow human being"?

MCNEIL: She mentioned that he was a vet. But I think regardless of who he was, it would have been the same reaction. It makes it a little bit easier for us to get along as friends and the fact that we're both vets, we got a baseline of understanding. We come from a similar background. So that helps us today to kind of remain friends. But I think I would have the same reaction regardless of who it was.

JARRETT: And I think the surgery is coming up pretty shortly. But have you guys become friends and kind of close with the families?

MCNEIL: Yes, yes. Vince's gotten up part of the family now. He's around quite often, Christmas, Thanksgiving, any holidays or just any random day of the week where were happened dinner, Vince is always welcome in her home and I know I'm always welcome in his. He's a good friend a half.

JARRETT: Hey, Vince how do you feel about Justin and Nicole. That guy sitting right next to you how do you feel about him?

VILLANO: As close as you can feel about somebody without them being your biological relative or sibling. It's really amazing for me. I didn't know exactly how I was going to get through this. And when they arrived, it was -- there was no question.

JARRETT: Yes, it's a gift from heaven --

VILLANO: Whether it's divine intervention or whatever it --

JARRETT: The perfect time around Christmas. Guys thank you very much. Vince, Justin good luck on the surgery. We'll be right back with some closing thoughts.


JARRETT: And back now with the special edition of Special Edition of Hannity, Trump versus The Swamp. Breaking just now President Trump is saying that he is hopeful that the looming Government shutdown will last a short time.

That's all the time we have for this evening. Before we go, Christmas is a few days away if you looking for the perfect last-minute gift, make sure to check out my book, The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump. As always, thank you for being with us. Have a great holiday weekend. Laura Ingraham is coming up next. Bye-bye.

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