Reps. Jim Jordan and Andy Biggs on Nancy Pelosi's refusal to submit articles of impeachment to the Senate

After a lightning-fast impeachment proceeding, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is no longer sure that she'll submit the articles of impeachment to the Senate; reaction from Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan and Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs, Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee.

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," December 19, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Jason Chaffetz, host: No hey, great show. I appreciate it and have a Merry Christmas. Well, welcome to "Hannity." I'm Jason Chaffetz in tonight obviously for Sean. After weeks of nonstop hysteria, dramatic hearings and a lightning fast impeachment proceeding, Nancy Pelosi is no longer sure that she'll submit the articles of impeachment to the United States Senate. That's right. Democrats told us that the impeachment charade must move at record speed because the president of the United States is an imminent threat to the upcoming elections. But now, they're in no hurry to make it official. Watch this.

[begin video clip]

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.: Yes, sir.

The Press: -- guarantee that the impeachment articles will be at some point, sent to the Senate --

Nancy Pelosi: I'm not –

The Press: -- guarantee that.

Nancy Pelosi: That would have been our intention, but we'll see what -- what happens over there.

The Press: So, you may not send --

Nancy Pelosi: That is not -- that is not -- you're asking me, are we all going to go out and play in the snow. This -- that has not been part of our conversation. I said we're not sending it tonight because it's difficult to determine who the managers would be until we see the arena in which we will be participating.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Did she say, "Go out and play in the snow"? Speaker Pelosi now has one major problem. She's completely outmatched by her counterpart in the United States Senate. Take a look.

[begin video clip]

Male Speaker: Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid, too afraid to even transmit their shoddy work product to the Senate. Mr. President, it looks like the prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country, and second guessing whether they even want to go to trial. They said impeachment was so urgent that it could not even wait for due process. But now they're content to sit on their hands."

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Clearly, the Democrats' impeachment charade is now backfiring. The Republican party just set a fundraising record, hauling in over $20 million in the month of November. President Trump is gaining in almost every poll. And Speaker Pelosi has been coined "the swamp mistress" on the cover of the New York Post, which is calling last night's impeachment vote her funeral. Today, President Trump was on offense, fighting back against the Democrats disgusting political scam, writing on Twitter, "So after the Democrats gave me no due process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial? Actually, they have zero proof of anything. They will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial." As the president points out, this whole ordinary deal is one big setup. Watch.

[begin video clip]

The Press: What does it feel like to be the third president in U.S. history to be impeached?

President Donald Trump: Well, I don't feel like I'm being impeached because it's a hoax. It's a setup. It's a horrible thing they did. They happen to have a small majority, and they took that small majority, and they forced people, and they said, "Oh --" I watched Pelosi out there saying, "Oh, no, we don't want to talk to anybody." They put the arm on everybody. They tried to get them to do what they had to do. Many of those people were like Jeff, where they didn't want to vote that way. But it doesn't feel -- to me, it doesn't feel like impeachment."

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Tonight, one thing remains true: No matter what the Democrats throw at President Trump, his agenda continues to succeed. Just today, the House finally passed, finally, the president's USMCA trade bill, which will officially replace NAFTA. Joining us now with the reaction to all of today's news is Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan and House Freedom Caucus chairman Andy Biggs of Arizona. Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. I had the honor and privilege of serving with both of you. Congressman Jordan, I want to start with you.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio: Sure.

Jason Chaffetz: What in the -- I guess we forgot to ask, or somebody forgot to ask Speaker Pelosi, if you actually pass at lightning speed in impeachment, are you going to send it over to the Senate? Was that something that you were supposed to ask along the way?

Jim Jordan: No. It's -- again, the cliché is true. It's laughable if it wasn't so serious. By the item that Nancy Pelosi is going to try to negotiate with Mitch McConnell and try to tell Mitch McConnell how to run the Senate, that is laughable. Here's what happened, Jason. On September 24th, when Speaker Pelosi announced they were going to go down this crazy impeachment road, she never expected to lose support across the country, and she certainly didn't expect to lose support within her own conference. Remember, yesterday, we had one Democrat vote with us. We had another Democrat vote president. And we had a third Democrat switch parties because everyone sees the facts are on the president's side. So, she did not expect any of that to happen, and now she doesn't know what to do because they've been had, and the American people see through it.

Jason Chaffetz: Congressman Biggs, what are you hearing on the floor when you see these Democrats? I just can't believe we're in a scenario where the speaker is actually contemplating not sending it over to the United States Senate.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.: I think that many of them are as baffled as you and I are. I mean, the very notion that you go through this process, put the squeeze on your members to get enough votes to do it. You violate every historical norm to get an impeachment this way. And then -- and then she says, "I'm not going to send it over to the Senate." Well, I mean, it's outrageous. and I think it's justified to say, "Hey, look, you know, is the ministerial act necessary to complete the act of impeachment?" So transmission necessary to complete the act of impeachment? I'm not sure if that -- if that's a legitimate question. I think it's a legitimate question, but, good grief, they're not happy either.

Jason Chaffetz: Well, Congressman Jordan, you're from Ohio. It's a real important big state, not only politically --

Jim Jordan: Yeah.

Jason Chaffetz: -- but to the farming industry and the benefits of the USMCA. What's -- why did Nancy Pelosi wait? Because she could have done it a year ago? Why did she wait until today to bring up that vote?

Jim Jordan: Well, I think this gives a -- gives some color for the people who voted for impeachment because they know it's not playing -- it's certainly not playing in our state. I mean, Ohio is going to go strong for president -- it went for eight and a half points for President Trump in 2016. It'll be stronger again because -- and you pointed this out -- the president's getting things done, but he's been doing that for three years in spite of this attack from the left and the Democrats and the mainstream press. Taxes cut, regulations reduced, economy growing at unbelievable pace, lowest unemployment in 50 years, Gorsuch, Cavanaugh on the court, out of the Iran deal, embassy, and now is in Jerusalem, hostages home from North Korea. And as you just pointed out, a new NAFTA agreement passed the House today. That is getting things done. And that's what the American people see. And they also see this impeachment sham for what it is, a sham.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, Congressman Biggs, the Nancy Pelosi that I saw close and personal, that I saw, she didn't do anything until she actually ran it through a pollster and maybe did a focus group. Is that what she's doing here? Is she just buying time to try to figure out where they ought to be by putting her -- you know, the finger to the wind and try to figure out where they should be when you reconvene on January 7th?

Andy Biggs: Well, I think that they -- they got off script. I think she's off script right now to be hon with you. And I think that she's -- this is the dog that caught the car. And so she's -- she's there. She wants Mitch McConnell to do things a certain way, and she's not going to get Mitch McConnell to go a certain way. You're right, they poll tested what they should say in their floor speeches, what they should say in the language that they were going to accuse the president of committing. But when you get down to the bottom of it, she's having to do against somebody without being able to poll test it, without being able to script it. And she's run up against a guy in Mitch McConnell who is basically authoritative, and he's made up his mind. And so she's kind of having -- she's rudderless right now. I think they honestly don't know what to do.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, Congressman Jordan, I've got to go real quick here, but, listen, Nancy Pelosi, back in March, sounded reasonable, saying, "Hey, if you're going to move with impeachment, it's got to be bipartisan, it's got to be overwhelming." What changed? Why did she get herself backed into this corner that she is right now?

Jim Jordan: Well, I think Andy is right. No amount of poll testing, no amount of setting the rules, then changing the rules, then not following the rules you changed, and going like -- none of that will ever beat the fact that all the truth and the facts were on the president's side. And when you have the facts, and you can win this debate. And that's exactly what has happened over the last several months. So she said this was going to be bipartisan, that this would have to be overwhelming support, but she's got this hard left base in her party, and it's hard to believe we're saying there's people left of Nancy Pelosi, that I think pushed her to do this. They try to do all the poll testing and say the right things, but the facts beat all that every single time. That's exactly what played out here.

Jason Chaffetz: And I want you to both just comment quickly. I left Congress, got a better balance in my life. But now we hear today that Mark Meadows is going to retire. What's the impact going to have on the Congress as a whole? Let's start with you, Congressman Jordan, then to Congressman Biggs.

Jim Jordan: Well, Mark is, you know, probably my best friend in this -- this whole place. And Mark and Deb Meadows are wonderful people. He is the kind of individual that you want in public service. And he has fought for the principles that make our country special. The folks in North Carolina are going to miss him tremendously, as are folks all across this great country. The president's going to miss his great work, but I hate to see him go, but we wish him and Debbie the best because Mark Meadows is the kind of guy you want fighting in the U.S. Congress for the things that make America the greatest place ever.

Jason Chaffetz: Congressman Biggs.

Andy Biggs: Yeah, a true gentleman, a great leader. I think he has actually changed with Jim and the Freedom Caucus, kind of changed the institution. I think it's going to be a generational change. I'm happy I've been able to call him my friend and a mentor. And I think he's got great things ahead of him, both he and Debbie, and I -- I wish them the very best and God speed because I think they -- they are just heroes to this country, true patriots.

Jason Chaffetz: Yes, Congressman Jordan, Congressman Biggs, thank you. The two of you and Congressman Meadows, all chairman of the Freedom Caucus, and you've done amazing work. Merry Christmas to you all. Well, now we want to get some reaction out of the White House. And we have with us former Florida attorney general and special advisor to the -- to President Trump, Pam Bondi. Pam, thank you for joining us here tonight.

Pam Bond, White House impeachment adviser: Hey, Jace.

Jason Chaffetz: Unbelievable the velocity and changes in positions that Nancy Pelosi has taken us. But what's the latest thinking from the White House?

Pam Bondi: Well, here's the latest thinking. It's always been our thinking. We are ready to go. We're going to be heard in the Senate. We want to be heard in the Senate. And if you heard what Professor Feldman said, who was their expert in the House Judiciary, that this doesn’t even qualify as impeachment until it’s sent over to the Senate. So, I think she’s trying to be cute and have gimmicks, and it’s backfired on her, because the only thing bipartisan about this was against the Democrats. And you know, this sham has been going on from day one, but you know what? If they want to start tomorrow, we’re ready. If they want to start next week, we’re ready. We have the truth, the facts, and the law on our side, and all they have are these silly games that are unprecedented, Jason, because you know it’s never been done before

Jason Chaffetz: Now, Pam, you’ve spent time with the president. What’s his feeling? What’s his attitude? We see him on camera, but behind the scenes, what’s he thinking about?

Pam Bondi: The president is doing great. I was with him today. You know, the president is going nonstop, working for our country. I watch him do it on a daily basis, and it’s truly amazing. And you know, it’s like at the rally last night, he goes, “Wow, it sure doesn’t look like I just got impeached.” Thousands of people who couldn’t even get in, and he is just continuing the work nonstop of the people. USMCA; the China trade deal. Look at the Dow, look at unemployment, everything President Trump is doing nonstop, and he’s not going to stop. And he’s not going to stop for the next five years, because he is a phenomenal president. And you know who sees it? The American people. And so, Nancy Pelosi’s little game -- it’s going to backfire on her, and President Trump is doing great, Jason.

Jason Chaffetz: Pam Bondi from the White House, thank you very much. The House Democrats’ impeachment stunt has been a political sham from the start to finish, or Congressman Ratcliffe called it, a house of cards. Watch.

[begin video clip]

Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas: You know who doesn’t think the Democrats have presented enough testimony or evidence to impeach President Trump today? It’s the Democrats. Sure, here in the House, Democrats running this inquiry have declared they’ve done everything needed; they have all the testimony and evidence necessary to impeach right now. But right now, down the hall, Democrats in the Senate are saying the exact opposite. They’re complaining they need more evidence and more testimony, because Senate Democrats know that House Democrats have built them a house of cards impeachment.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: John Ratcliffe, one of the smartest people in the United States Congress. Now, Nancy Pelosi can do whatever she wants with her partisan proceeding, but the United States Senate is not going to play her little game. That includes Senate Judiciary chairman Lindsey Graham, who tweeted, quote, “Nancy Pelosi’s threat to refuse to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate for disposition is an incredibly dumb and dangerous idea. There is a reason one person can’t be the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader at the same time.” Senator Ted Cruz is also speaking out, claiming that Democrats are now in panic mode. Watch.

[begin video clip]

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas: I think the Democrats are in a total panic. Yesterday was a very, very bad day for Democrats, and it was a bad day for the House of Representatives and for the country. When it comes to Pelosi, her threat is really quite remarkable. Her threat to the Senate is, “Do exactly what I want, or I’m not going to impeach the president. I'm not going not send over the impeachment articles.” My attitude is, “Okay, throw us in that briar patch. Don’t send them. “ That’s all right. We actually have work to do.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Good point. So, what will ultimately happen to -- in the United States Senate? Joining us now with more is Senator Mike Lee from the great state of Utah. He’s also a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Lee, what do you see the proceedings that happened, what was passed in the House, but what happens if they don’t send over the articles to the United States Senate?

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah: What happens is nothing. It lands with a thud. It’s like a tree that falls in the forest with no one there to hear it. Look, there’s a land called Passive Aggressivia, and Nancy Pelosi is their queen. I don't understand why she did what she did, but it makes no sense. In any event, I’m with Ted Cruz on this. I say bring it on; throw us in that briar patch. It’s just fine if she doesn’t want to do it. It’s obvious to me, Jason, that Nancy Pelosi is doing this because she’s scared to death. This thing is a gigantic hobgoblin for her. She’s freaked out by it, and she doesn’t want to entrust us with conducting a trial. Why? Well because she knows that it will end very badly for her.

Jason Chaffetz: I mean, the argument that John Ratcliffe makes is that at the same time that the Democrats in the House and Nancy Pelosi are saying, “It’s overwhelming; it’s obvious to anybody who looks at it,” that the people that you sit next to in the United States Senate are saying, “We don’t have anything to work with over here.” Is that the right read of this?

Mike Lee: Well, yeah. Look, we don’t have anything to work with in the sense that there’s just nothing there. There’s no “there” there. They haven’t made a case for impeachment. They realize that they screwed this up. They realize that they -- in an effort to ram this thing through, they did a shoddy job of putting it together. That, by the way, is also the excuse they used for denying the president of his due process rights. So, they ram it over to us, and just before it leaves the House, she says, “Oh, shoot. Well, we didn’t do a very good job of this,” and then she tries to extort us and use this as a tool for extortion, this idea that, well, you know, if you don’t eat your vegetables, you’re not getting your dessert, as if impeachment here were somehow a reward for us. It’s strange. In any event, it’s not going to work. It’s going to backfire badly.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, you also hear from the Democrats that, oh, there are going to be some people in the Senate that defect here, but I haven’t heard word one that has any legitimacy behind it that there’s any sort of defections, but that there might actually be some Democrats that come over and join Republicans.

Mike Lee: Yeah, I think that’s right. As between the two, between the idea of Republican defections and Democratic defections, I will be far more surprised if I see a single Republican defection than I will be if we see multiple Democratic defections voting against removal. Why? Because he hasn’t done anything impeachable; he hasn’t done anything criminal. He hasn’t even done anything wrong. President Trump succeeded where President Obama tried and failed for years to get Ukraine to investigate Burisma. That’s not impeachable; it’s not wrong.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, Mitch McConnell -- you haven’t always been in lockstep with Mitch McConnell. How do you think he’s handling this in the position that he’s taken on how the House -- how the Senate Republicans would deal with this if it eventually makes its way over to the Senate?

Mike Lee: Look, I think Mitch McConnell is handling this exactly right. I love his strategy on impeachment. I think he’s got it exactly right, which is that we need to hear arguments. If and when they ever present the articles of impeachment to us, and if they don’t, that’s fine. We’ll move on; we’ll do other stuff. It’ll be better for the country if that happens. But if they do ever bother to send those articles to us, we’re going to hear arguments, and we’ll figure out where to go from there. We don't' have to write the whole story at the outset. Let’s let this unfold, and let’s let them present their arguments to us.

Jason Chaffetz: Senator Lee, thank you. We appreciate you joining us. Merry Christmas to you and your family. Up next, the reckoning for deep-state abuses during the Russia probe is just getting started. Attorney General Barr spoke to Fox’s Martha MacCallum about the possible criminal consequences for corrupt deep-state actors. We’ll be right back with the tape.

[commercial break]

Jason Chaffetz: Now more developments tonight in the quest for equal justice, as Attorney General Bill Barr sat down with our own Martha MacCallum and made one thing clear: The boomerang of justice is in full swing. Take a look.

[begin video clip]

Attorney Genearl Bill Barr: I think there's some of them very hard to square with the idea that these were just mistakes and sloppiness. Horowitz himself, in his testimony, I think pretty well summed it up, which is this could be, on the one hand, at the very least, gross incompetence. On the other hand, it could also be improper motive. And he was not in a position to make that call, and that's why we have the U.S. attorney John Durham looking into this. One of the things that I object to is the tack being taken by Comey, which is to suggest that people who are criticizing or trying to get to the bottom of the misconduct are somehow attacking the FBI. I think that's nonsense. We're criticizing and concerned about misconduct by a few actors at the top of the FBI, and they should be criticized if they engaged in serious misconduct.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: And just breaking tonight, from the New York Times, Durham is scrutinizing ex-CIA director Brennan's role in Russian interference findings as he continues to investigate the real origins of the Russia probe and the deep state's abuse of power. Joining me now for a reaction is author of the book, "Witch Hunt," a great book on the topic, Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, along with Fox News contributors Tammy Bruce and Sara Carter. Thank you, all three of you, for joining us tonight. I want to get your reaction because Martha did a wonderful interview. There's more of the interview that'll air tomorrow night on Fox. But when this part we heard from the attorney general himself, what was one of your big takeaways or thoughts that you had, Sara, when you heard the attorney general give that interview?

Sara Carter, Fox News contributor: Well, the attorney general, William Barr, has been given such a significant tax. I mean, a historic tax. And we haven't seen this in modern history, modern presidential history. And what he -- what -- what I took away from it was when he said, "Look, this isn't about criticizing the FBI." We know there are remarkable agents doing their best to protect us. But when you have a culture of corruption at the top of the FBI, when there's been obvious malfeasance in the FBI, they need to shed light on it, they need to root it out, and they need to hold people accountable, because this isn't a two-tiered system of justice, and it shouldn't be. And another quick point, Jason, people all over the world are looking to us now to see how we are handle this and how our system handles this. And we have a great system if it's allowed to work.

Jason Chaffetz: Yes.

Gregg Jarrett: And I believe that Durham and Barr are going to make it work, and it's going to be significant, and it's going to reflect who we are as a nation.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, that's what makes the United States different from every other country on the planet, is we are self-critical, and do go back and look at these things. Now, Gregg, I was struck with some of the specificity and things that he brought up specific in that interview that they are looking at.

Gregg Jarrett, Fox News contributor: Yeah, first of all, from the clip, you could tell he's not buying the BS being peddled by James Comey, none of it. And what struck me most of all was he wondered allowed to Martha, why didn't the FBI end its investigation before Trump ever took office when they learned that the dossier was junk, and their investigation of Trump was, "Falling apart"? He also said he's not really buying the Papadopoulos bar talk as the trigger for the Trump-Russia investigation. He suspects that is a pretext to investigate Trump, which is exactly the argument I made in my book. Look, tonight, if I, having heard that interview, were John Brennan or Glen Simpson of Fusion GPS, or Christopher Steele, or any of the other actors in the intelligence agencies, I'd have my criminal lawyers on speed dial because he made it pretty much clear he's going after not just the intel agencies, but private actors.

Jason Chaffetz: And this is one of the points, Tammy, that I think the attorney general is making, is Horowitz can only look at the FBI --

Tammy Bruce: That's right.

Jason Chaffetz: But it really -- there -- and the FBI insists that these probes started in July of 2016. But, really, they're going to be looking at what was the precursor in the predicate? That is a much bigger, broader question that there seem to be a lot of indications is above and beyond just the FBI.

Tammy Bruce, Fox News contributor: Right. And this is -- I think one of the things that's so valuable about this interview with Martha is that for years now, we've only been hearing from one side. We have been literally swamped with the negativity, the one-sidedness, the arguments from the media carrying the Democratic arguments. And the government has to worry about legitimacy at this point, about justice, the rule of law, if it applies to people in the government. Finally, this interview gives us a little bit of insight that Barr may be the person -- we finally have an attorney general who is serious about this, that they're looking beyond the one agent who changed a FISA warrant to get it -- you know, to get it passed, that this is much broader than that. And I was particularly struck with his -- when Martha asked him about, why, if we were worried about the interference during an election, why wasn't candidate and then President-Elect Trump given a defensive briefing about the nature of what Russia was supposed to be doing to the selection? And he said he was interested in fact in that kind of choice to not give him a briefing, that he may have been a target, or the Russians were trying to do this, which tells you the level of corruption involved in this house of cards that they built up.

Jason Chaffetz: And, Sara, that comes out in spades when you go and read through Inspector General Horowitz's report. But the question that Martha threw to the attorney general he does talk about this idea that the defensive briefing is a real question mark.

Sara Carter: Well, the defensive briefing is so significant of I've written about this. Before I've written about this over a year ago. If they offered a defensive briefing to Hillary Clinton, a detailed defensive briefing, why wouldn't they offer the same type of detailed defensive briefing to President Trump? There can only be one answer if you really think this through, with all the evidence that we know, and it's because they wanted to spy on members of the Trump campaign.

Jason Chaffetz: True.

Sara Carter: And if they gave them a detailed defensive briefing, they wouldn't be able to do that.

Jason Chaffetz: Gregg, we've talked offline here about this -- the lack of a defensive briefing.

Gregg Jarrett: Sure.

Jason Chaffetz: Where is this going?

Gregg Jarrett: Well, it's on page 76, as you reminded me earlier tonight. And I reread it again. Sally Yates, deputy attorney general, as well as Obama and the Attorney General Loretta Lynch all recommended a defensive briefing. Comey didn't do that. Why? It's obvious. Driven by bias, he wanted to spy on the Trump campaign and frame him for a collusion hoax that never existed. If you're looking for bias, and Horowitz couldn't find it, it's right there in plain sight.

Tammy Bruce: And it better be more than Brennan. You can't have just one sacrificial lamb, if you will, that you can't focus just on Brennan --

Sara Carter: That's right.

Tammy Bruce: -- or even at Glen Simpson. We've got to show the American people that they can trust their government. And we will take these people out if they need to be dealt with within the justice system itself, because it's got to be equal justice for everyone, regardless of who you are.

Gregg Jarrett: Let me just say, it's really stupid of Comey to criticize the attorney general who holds in his hands the ability to indict and prosecute James Comey. I mean, that is stupid.

[cross talk]

Jason Chaffetz: Oh, come on. He put out his op-ed in the Washington Post, printed it and put it out online before they even had read the Horowitz report.

Gregg Jarrett: [unintelligible]

Jason Chaffetz: And I’m glad to see the New York Times, by the way -- they’re about a year behind Hannity, but they’re -- at least they’re trying to catch up. So, you know, they’ll get there someday maybe. Maybe. Sara, Gregg, and Tammy, thank you so much for joining us tonight. Up next, more bad news for Hunter Biden. Trace Gallagher will have a report. You’re going to want to hear about this. And later, members of the media caught celebrating Trump’s impeachment. You can’t make this stuff up. We’ll be right back with more.

[commercial break]

Jason Chaffetz: Welcome back to Hannity. Hunter Biden’s sketchy finances are coming under increased scrutiny in his ongoing paternity suit, and he is doing his best to keep his income under wraps. FOX News chief breaking news correspondent Trace Gallagher joins us live with the latest. Trace?

Trace Gallagher, Fox News correspondent: Jason, the mother of Hunter Biden’s 16-month-old lovechild filed some additional court papers this week, saying that Biden is refusing to answer even basic questions about his finances. Lunden Roberts is suing Biden for child support as well as for the cost of the DNA test which proved the child was, in fact, Biden’s. She alleges Biden, quoting here, “has provided no support for this child for over a year. The court should not let the defendant continue to avoid his natural and legal duty to support his child by failing to provide basic information about his income, finances, and lifestyle.” So far, Biden’s team has allegedly failed to cooperate with the list of requests, like information on bank accounts, financial assets, and all sources of income over the past five years, including his time on the board of Burisma, where Biden reportedly earned $50,000 a month, and money from his various investment firms gained in China. A judge has already scolded Biden for not complying. And by the way, we should mention Hunter Biden’s new wife is reportedly expecting his fifth child. Jason?

Jason Chaffetz: Wow, I didn’t know that. Trace, thank you. Following last night’s hyper-partisan vote, the Hate Trump media is reveling in the impeachment frenzy. The Washington Post is under fire after one of their reporters posted a photo to Twitter of the staff celebrating “Impeachmas” with -- which she later deleted. This, after self-proclaimed unbiased reporters spent the day on cable news gushing over the events unfolding. Take a look.

[begin video clip]

Male Speaker: You can put lipstick on a pig. At the end of the day, you’re still an impeached president.

Female Speaker: As negative as it gets when it comes to the kind of stain that could be on a president’s record.

Male Speaker: It’s an extraordinary rebuke.

Male Speaker: He’s wounded.

Male Speaker: What we’re seeing in Nancy Pelosi is somebody who understands that today was -- reflected the strength of the republic, the greatness of the republic in some ways.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Joining me now with reaction, author of the children’s book Paloma Wants to be Lady Freedom, Fox News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy -- our favorite Duffy, by the way -- the Hill’s Joe Concha, and nationally syndicated Salem Radio host Larry Elder. Thank you all three for being here. I love to joke with Rachel because her husband -- I served with him in Congress. He’s a great guy, too, but we love Rachel all the more. So, Rachel, I want to go to you first. Pick your story, but, you know, the media doesn’t seem to get the idea that they need to give a fair and balanced perspective out here.

Rachel Campos-Duffy, Fox News contributor: Well, I love what you just read before the intro, because it shows what a bubble these journalists are living in that they think that the news of the day is that this is a stain on Donald Trump. The news of the day is that he was impeached, and he’s having all these wins, and he’s -- and the rest of the country isn’t paying attention to it, and he’s still going on and having success and winning for America. What you see with the tweet from Rachel Bade is -- from the Washington Post who tweeted out, “Merry Impeachment,” and then she takes the tweet down and says, “No, that’s not what I meant.” We all know what she meant, and all this is, is just the latest example of Trump Derangement Syndrome with the media, how biased they are, and how sloppy they’re getting because they live in such a bubble.

Jason Chaffetz: Now, Joe is joining us here on set in New York. “Happy Impeachmas.” It was pretty clear what she was trying to do, but then she tried to take it down and kind of change her story, didn’t she?

Joe Concha, media analyst: Yeah, she said that we -- if we saw the tweet, we misinterpreted what the meaning was in this situation. Not a good look for the Washington Post -- she’s also a CNN contributor, by the way -- and it goes back to perception. So, I go back to the 2016 campaign. A USA Today poll asked a thousand likely voters, “Who do you think the media is rooting for, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?” By a 10-to-one margin, the public said Hillary Clinton, including Clinton supporters saw it that way. So, that’s the perception, right? Then we look at 2016 again. The Hill does a tally, how many major newspapers were endorsing Hillary Clinton and how many Donald Trump. Fifty-seven for Hillary Clinton; two for Donald Trump. What did that get Hillary Clinton? A set of steak knives and a concession speech, right?

So, the bottom line is that we saw the clips that you just played before. This wounds the president. This is devastating for the president. If that's the case, then why are his poll numbers now on a 12-point upswing since impeachment proceedings began. In Gallup, his Gallup approval rating is now higher than President Obama's was at this stage of the presidency. And as you know, President Obama went on to win the 2012 election quite easily. I don't think it wounds him. I think it only strengthens him because now his base is more energized than ever before, and independents are looking at Democrats and saying, "You've done nothing. This president's getting something done, and this impeachment show is a show about nothing."

Jason Chaffetz: Larry, Joe makes a great point, right? The president's poll numbers keep going up. But I also want to ask you, in conjunction with that, is it fair to ask these questions and follow the story about Vice President Biden's son and these paternity suits and the lack of financial information that he hasn't paid? I mean, is that going too far after somebody's family? Or is that right to ask in this public discourse and discussion that we're having in this country?

Larry Elder, talk radio host: It's politics. Are you telling me that if Donald Trump's son had similar issues, the Democrats would have a hand-off approach, the media would have a hands-off approach? I'd rather doubt it. About The Washington Post, though, understand something. The Washington Post has never, ever endorsed a Republican president in its entire history. The New York Times hasn't done it since 1956. Only 7 percent of reporters self-distributed as Republican. This is the kind of blatant bias that we're talking about. And in 2008, The Washington Post has an ombudsperson, a job whose person's job is to look and make sure the pap is exercising its journalistic integrity. And she said, no question, more pictures of Obama than John McCain, more stories about Obama than John McCain, more flattering pictures of Obama than John McCain. No question. She said, "Our own paper was biased in favor of Obama." At least they were honest.

Jason Chaffetz: Well, look, I don't think the media ever took the time to figure out why Donald Trump won the election. And the way they post up these pictures, and you have Nancy Pelosi, you know, trying to scold her members, "Hey, let's don't be cheerful and all that," it's all a facade, and America sees right through it.

Larry Elder: Of course it is.

Jason Chaffetz: And I appreciate all three of you and your perspective. So Joe, Larry, Rachel, merry Christmas, and thank you for joining us tonight.

Joe Concha: Merry Christmas.

Jason Chaffetz: Coming up, the squad is speaking out on impeachment, and you won't believe what they're saying. Dan Bongino and Geraldo Rivera will have reaction coming up next.

[commercial break]

Jason Chaffetz: Welcome back to Hannity. For years, the moral, spiritual, and intellectual leaders of the Democratic party known as "the squad," have been pushing for impeachment. And despite Pelosi demanding that her members pretend to act somber during yesterday's impeachment vote, socialist Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib just couldn't contain her sheer joy. Watch this.

[begin video clip]

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.: Hi, everyone. I am on my way to the United States House floor to impeach President Trump. On behalf of my incredible district, 13 district strong. Let's do this.

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: The mean-spirited, impetuous congresswoman from Michigan won't any awards for civility. But that won't stop her fellow squad allies from defending their colleague when she gets called out on the House floor. Now listen closely.

[begin video clip]

Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.: In January, when we all stood in this body, we stood up, we raised our hands. We swore that we'd uphold the Constitution. And a few mere hours after that, Congresswoman Tlaib said she was going to impeach the mother F-er. Those are not my words!"

[end video clip]

Jason Chaffetz: That voice you heard in the background was reportedly Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. Apparently, the truth was just too much for her to hear. And here now with reaction, our Fox News contributor Dan Bongino and Fox News correspondent at large, Geraldo Rivera.

Male Speaker: Hey, Carson [sic].

Jason Chaffetz: Geraldo, it's an honor to have you on this program and to host this program.

Geraldo Rivera, Fox News correspondent-at-large: Oh, you're so nice.

Jason Chaffetz: But I want to -- I want to go to you first here because The Washington Post, like literally minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in, they start running stories about impeachment. I mean, this is something that Nancy Pelosi admitted that she's been working on for two and a half to three years. What is your reaction to today's news, that they may not even send it over to the Senate.

Geraldo Rivera: Well, I think they will send it to the Senate. They want to rest the best deal they can probably get. They're trying to get live witnesses. They're trying to extend this horror show as long as they can. I think it's a corrupt process. I hate what's happened to the president. But I think you guys really way overreact to the squad. I mean, they are, to me, refreshing. They have new diversity: First Palestinian woman ever; first black woman to represent Massachusetts; the youngest member of Congress, the Puerto Rican, you know, AOC from the Bronx New York; Ilhan Omar, the first refugee from Africa. My goodness, they're not going to be like, you know, straight people that look like more of the majority. They are -- you know, they’re there for their diversity. I celebrate it. Let them be as outrageous as they want. People have to understand it takes all -- you know, kind of all boats to float.

Jason Chaffetz: Okay, Dan, you’d better take over before I take on Geraldo here on this. You jump in.

Geraldo Rivera: [laughs]

Dan Bongino, Fox News contributor: You guys missed what the camera -- me, like, face-palming. I mean, Geraldo is a smart guy sometimes, but I don’t -- he says this all the time, and it’s puzzling.

Geraldo Rivera: What do you mean, sometimes?

Dan Bongino: These are House of Representatives members, right? These are members of the House of Representatives. They’re very powerful people who are espousing ideas that have literally killed millions of people -- socialism, government-run health care, the rationing of health care, ideas that have been a historical stain throughout history -- and we’re supposed to claim for them because of why?

Geraldo Rivera: Not clap --

Dan Bongino: Because they’re some fake -- what do you mean, diversity? We have members in the --

Geraldo Rivera: Just don’t overreact. Don’t freak out.

Dan Bongino: Wait, wait, wait. Hold on. You do this all the time. You say, “AOC -- her story; she’s AOC from the Bronx.” Jennifer Lopez was J-Lo from the Bronx. That doesn’t mean she should be in Congress. What does that mean, Geraldo? They’re talking about ideas that would bankrupt and ruin people's lives, and we’re supposed to clap because of some -- your exciting diversity? That has nothing to do with bad ideas.

Jason Chaffetz: Geraldo, yesterday --

Geraldo Rivera: I think you’re taking it way too seriously.

Jason Chaffetz: But yesterday --

Geraldo Rivera: You’re playing into their hands.

Dan Bongino: No, I’m not, Geraldo. These are members of Congress.

Geraldo Rivera: You’re letting them run the narrative. Sorry, [unintelligible].

Dan Bongino: Come on, man, wake up.

Jason Chaffetz: Geraldo, yesterday Nancy Pelosi --

Geraldo Rivera: Listen --

Jason Chaffetz: -- goes to the floor of the House; she’s wearing a black dress because it’s a somber moment. Today, she’s wearing a red one, saying, oh, she’s got a skip in her step, and then she won’t even send it over to the Senate. We’re just supposed to digest that and say, “Well, we should be celebrating this?”

Geraldo Rivera: I -- listen, I love this president. I think he has been cruelly treated. Having said that, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, was dignified; she was strong; she was -- in my mind, she was “don’t mess with Mama.” When she cut off the cheering of her caucus during the heat of this debate, I said, “This is a woman who has class and dignity.” And even though --

Dan Bongino: Wow.

Geraldo Rivera: -- I disagree with almost all of her policies, certainly as they regard the president of the United States, I think as the Speaker of the House and as the person who runs the opposition, she was brilliant.

Jason Chaffetz: Brilliant? Dan, jump in here.

Dan Bongino: What do you -- she was brilliant? You realize they just impeached the president on a hoax charge based on a whistleblower, a fake whistleblower who made up a quid pro quo that never happened? And, Geraldo, I don’t get it, how you were so easily taken by appearance, by the melanin content of people’s skin, by the perceived class and dignity. Do you understand what’s going on? I mean, you’re a smart guy. They just impeached the president on a hoax --

Jason Chaffetz: Gentlemen, I have to break --

Dan Bongino: -- and you’re saying it’s --

Jason Chaffetz: -- and I know you know what that means.

Dan Bongino: Are you okay tonight? Are you –

[cross talk]

Jason Chaffetz: Up next, America’s anchorman, Rush Limbaugh, weighs in on the Democrats’ impeachment fiasco. Stay with us.

[commercial break]

Jason Chaffetz: Welcome back to Hannity. The great Rush Limbaugh had a few choice words for Nancy Pelosi after the House, in a completely partisan vote, approved articles of impeachment against President Trump yesterday. Have a listen.

[begin audio clip]

Rush Limbaugh, talk radio host: They want Trump gone, folks. They want the 2016 election overturned. They want the precedent of being able to say they did it once. They want to be able to overturn the election results. If they can do it this time, they can do it anytime in the future they want, and that’s McConnell’s point in allowing this to go forward. As it sits now, there’s no reason for it to go forward if she’s not going to send the articles over because she doesn’t want an acquittal. So, that’s why she’s -- she’s not sending over because of any other reason. That’s it. She knows the articles don't have any substance. She knows the charges are entirely bogus. There’s not a crime specified; there’s not an impeachable offense specified. It’s nothing but a bunch of opinions from scholars and so forth.

[end audio clip]

Jason Chaffetz: Rush Limbaugh, spot on, right again. If you need a gift this holiday, I would suggest my Power Grab book, The Liberal Scheme to Undermine Trump, the GOP, and Republic. It’s what’s happening right now. I'll be back in the chair again tomorrow night. I hope you join us here on Hannity. Thanks, Sean, for letting into you -- for you. Make sure you set your DVRs, and we’ll be back with you tomorrow night. But coming up is going to be a great show with our favorite, Laura Ingraham. She’s up right now.

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