Sense of competition driving White House leaks?

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," July 27, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KATHERINE TIMPF, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kat Timpf along with Eric Bolling and Eboni K. Williams. "This is The Fox News Specialists."

A showdown over leaks at the White House heats up as newly appointed White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci continues to shakes things up and goes old school on his colleague chief-of-staff Reince Priebus, calling him out over what he's saying are unauthorized release of his finances.


ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR: As you know, from the Italian expression, the fish stinks from the head down. But I can tell you two fish that don't stink, OK? And that's me and the president. I don't like the activity that's going on in the White House. When I put out a tweet and I put Reince's name in the tweet, they're all making the assumption that it's him because journalists know who the leakers are. So if Reince wants to explain that he's not a leaker, let him do that.


TIMPF: Anthony Scaramucci has vowed to do everything possible to plug the leaks that have been dogging the Trump administration from day one. Can he get the job done? All right. Now, these are a little different than some of the other leaks because although frustrating, this was public information. We don't know how Politico got it. What do you think, Eboni, about his response?

EBONI K. WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: First off, I don't care what anybody says. I personally adore Anthony Scaramucci. It's just classic. It's really like Scorsese meets the White House. It's amazing. You know it's not a leak in the classical -- in the legal sense. But I understand his frustration. At the same time, you know, Anthony Scaramucci is not a novice as to what the procedure looks like, so he knows the second that he actually enters the administration as he's now done, a lot of this -- the scrutiny and the disclosures and the publicness of all of these things, including the finances are going to be at a higher level.

TIMPF: Right. Eric, he's not wrong about the overall picture. There's a lot of leaking going on in that White House. That's a fact.

ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: That's what he's talking about. I mean, I know you're referencing the financial disclosure of Scaramucci, which was public record. But he's -- Anthony was brought in, and I made this point the day he was announced that he's the new coms director that he reports directly to President Trump. He doesn't go through chief-of-staff Reince Priebus for this reason, because he's brought on. Think about it, have you ever seen -- have you even known another coms director that well, but who's been empowered with that much juice in the White House? I mean, he's the right guy to get there and clean the leaks up. They're going to stop leaking or the people are going to be fired, and just by nature of that the leaks are going to go away. I think you're going to see a very, very slow trickle of leaks of what used to be a lot of leaks coming out of the White House.

TIMPF: All right. Well, let's meet today's specialist. She's the former Ms. America, host of the Sonder Podcast on Faithwire News, and a conservative commentator, and she specializes in faith and politics, Kirsten Haglund is here. He has spent nearly a decade as a journalist and advertising writer, he's a regular on the Tom Shillue Show on Fox News radio, and is a standup comedian with a new album out called First Date with Joe DeVito, and he specializes in tattoos, he has tattoos in nearly three percent of his body, it's amazing, Joe DeVito is here. All right. Kirsten, I'm going to you. I think that -- although these aren't leaks as Eboni pointed out, and this is public information, he is touching on a larger issue in the White House that I'm sure anybody that was involved in would find frustrating.

KIRSTEN HAGLUND, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: Right. Well, leaks have been a normal part of politics and their relationship with the press, for as long as the press and politics have been around, so this is nothing new. What's interesting and unique about this administration though, there's two big incentives for leaks. One of which, actually, Sarah Huckabee Sanders talked about today in the press briefing, and that was that the president likes to foster this healthy competition. I mean, we saw it in The Apprentice, that's kind of been his management style. So when you have that you've got people within the administration who are going to jockey, who are going to use the information that they're privileged to have, leak it to the media in order to make others look bad, or in order to give to their position more credence with the public and the press. That's one big incentive for leaks. And the other is the fact that you've got, you know, these two individuals, Reince and Scaramucci in the White House, and you've got this major fight going on, right? And whatever they can do to try to divulge and then influence the president because he paid so much attention to the media that incentivizes leaks as well.

TIMPF: What do you think about the fight between Priebus and Scaramucci?

JOE DEVITO, STAND UP COMEDIAN AND WRITER: I think Scaramucci needs to work on his analogies. When he said we fight like brothers and gave the examples of Cain and Abel.

TIMPF: Right.

DEVITO: You know I'm sure that Serena and Venus don't get along every now and then, but they're not killing each other in the metaphor he's using. It's like when people want to be romantic and say we're like a modern day Romeo and Juliet. Oh, the teenagers who killed themselves.

TIMPF: Right. I always have that thought as well.

DEVITO: He needs to work on that. And the fact that he said that, you know, I like that he's going to go after the leaks, but I'm not sure if they're -- they call it the optics, I'm not sure if it's coming off as well. It's sounding a little bit like the house of the Borges here. In some ways the search for the leaks it's a lot like Trump's hair, that even if it's real, it still looks bad.

BOLLING: What do you mean? What does that mean?

DEVITO: Well, I'm saying that it looks like they're not working on the business of governing the country that they're setting each other up.

BOLLING: No, you said -- searching out the leaks kind of looks like Trump's hair, even if it's real, it look bad. Searching out the leaks looks bad?

DEVITO: The way they're doing it, they're making it look like.

BOLLING: Scaramucci is putting his foot down. He's saying the leaks are stopping or you're getting fired. And that goes all the way to the top. By the way, Reince heads up, you're not above this.

HAGLUND: I think.

DEVITO: I just don't agree with the way they make it sound. You mention healthy competition. Well, when sharks are being born and eating each other in the womb, that's healthy competition, too. But I'm not sure it's great for the other shark.

HAGLUND: Well, here's what I think maybe Joe is talking about, and I do think you are correct in this. And this is that they're having a lot of transparency issues right now. Obviously, they're under investigation. The White House has sure a lot of political capital, you know within his own party right now because of the policy, because of healthcare, because of the Russia investigations. So, anything that's like we're going to crack down on these leaks, even though it's a good thing, it could look like they're continuing to hide behind, you know, this veil of they don't want to be transparent, they don't want to let people in, they want to, you know, make sure that they're protecting themselves against any kind of deeper look. I think that's why it looks bad.

WILLIAMS: But I think the thing is, Kirsten, I've said on this show and have said many times, at some points it's not satisfying to keep blaming Obama holdovers and what have you. At some point, President Trump is the commander-in-chief. It's his White House. So you've got to -- you know, totally gut shop. If that means Priebus, that means Priebus, quite, frankly. And I really don't care if it looks bad, Joe. I mean, at this point, I think that's why Scaramucci is being brought in at this point in the game to say, you know what? Whoever you are, there's no protection around it. If you're the source of the leak, I don't care if you're a senior adviser, you're getting fired.


BOLLING: Let's be honest. Hold on, let's be honest. Reince Priebus ran the RNC. Sean Spicer was his number two, his coms director at the RNC. At one point during the campaign when there were 17 people running, including Jeb Bush, Kasich, and Marco Rubio, Reince and the RNC suggested Donald Trump back out of the race. Now he's chief of staff.


HAGLUND: That was Donald Trump's choice, though. That was Trump's choice. So if he didn't want him, and he thought is that he wouldn't have his loyalty, then he shouldn't have.

WILLIAMS: I thought this would be a problem. I will say that. And I do think at some point the president is responsible for the people he brought in, because there's always these two very competing -- a healthy competition and then there's what? Unhealthy competition.


WILLIAMS: Now I think Eric is conflicting and undermining one another. I don't blame President Trump for bringing Scaramucci in. But, I mean.

BOLLING: I mean, when you're a non-politician who won the presidency -- never been happen -- never happen like this before, you go to D.C. and you have to bring in.


BOLLING: . thousands.

WILLIAMS: Oh, no, no, no. You have to bring in thousands. But do you have to bring in an establishment of people. That to me surprised me when I saw him bring in Reince and Spicer.

BOLLING: Donald Trump went to the White House said, oh, by the way, my chief of staff is going to be Ivanka Trump. You guys have lost your mind.


BOLLING: Listen, look, we're six months in. So you go through iterations. Sometimes things don't work out in six months and you replace. That's what Donald Trump is doing. He's finding out what works and what doesn't work. And frankly, Sean Spicer didn't work. I'm not sure Reince Priebus works. Maybe he doesn't work either.

WILLIAMS: Maybe doesn't work.

BOLLING: But he'll find out and he'll make the right changes.

HAGLUND: you know what is interesting is that I talked to some people within the sphere of the White House, and what's interesting is that we have a president who hasn't necessarily been real open to people within the administration, coming up and giving him ideas. So people have leaked to the press in order to try to influence him because they know that the president pays attention to the press. I don't think it's a good -- I don't think it's a good thing at all. But that -- I don't say -- I totally agree with you, Eric. I don't think it's good either. But it comes from management inside the White House. People feel like the only way to influence him.

BOLLING: Who's the top manager outside of Trump when he's running around doing policy?

HAGLUND: The chief of staff.

BOLLING: Of course, and it's failing.

HAGLUND: Then he needs to go. I totally agree. That is the management.


TIMPF: We're going to move on. Controversy goes a little beyond just this. There's also President Trump various attacks against Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Allies are warning the president of a GOP revolt if the attacks continue.


SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: If Jeff Sessions is fired, there will be holy hell to pay. Any effort to go after Mueller could be the beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.

SEN. ORRIN HATCH, R-UTAH: I naturally think that Jeff ought to be treated better than he's being treated. He's been very loyal. He was the first and, really, for a long time the only senator who supported the president. I think Jeff deserves a better treatment.


TIMPF: Eboni, he has been very loyal to President Trump the entire time. I don't know why he's doing this. If he wants him out, he could fire him. I mean, this isn't a sorority. You don't have to like bully someone out of it. I don't really understand.

WILLIAMS: My sorority doesn't bully, Kat.


WILLIAMS: You know what? I have never been a fan of Senator Sessions -- A.G. Sessions, excuse me. But I do think this is starting of a cautionary tale to everybody else in the GOP and, certainly, in the U.S. senate. That says, you know what, if his day one, essentially, which Jeff Sessions was for a long time be first and only U.S. senator to really legitimize candidate Trump's candidacy, if he's on the chopping block, then, so are we.

TIMPF: And Eric, he's continuing that. He's going into investigating these leaks. He doing the things that President Trump wants him to do.

BOLLING: Now he is. Now he is. It took him until he was called out on twitter to actually say I'm going to investigate the leaks. He took it. Listen, he announced this investigation yesterday. Where was this five months ago.

DEVITO: Then why not just replace him?

BOLLING: Because -- he could, yes. You're right.


BOLLING: You would say, look what he's doing. It's almost unprecedented.

DEVITO: I'd have no problem with that.

BOLLING: How is this? Jeff Sessions let the president down. He sees that.

WILLIAMS: He's not going to resign.

BOLLING: I don't think he will either, but he should.

DEVITO: I would like to see Sessions go just because I don't like a lot of the things that he's brought to being attorney general.

BOLLING: It's amazing how lefties all of a sudden love Sessions. Like because he's getting -- from President Trump. All over the network, all over the mainstream media, oh, poor Jeff Sessions. Meanwhile, when he was appointed, oh, my God, you guys hated him for everything he represented.

DEVITO: But isn't Trump going to run out of political capital if he's bringing in his guys and this is how he's treating.

BOLLING: No, that's what he needed to do from the get-go. He should have never brought in.


HAGLUND: Well, this is what he does have to be careful to. He was just in Ohio doing that major rally. And if he's thinking about his base, they loved Senator Sessions as A.G. because he was really the guy who's gung ho about going after Donald Trump's agenda. And so, if he gets rid of Sessions, there's a possibility that those voters are finally going to go, oh, I don't know about this.


WILLIAMS: I thought so, too. But then, the callers came in on the radio show. And no, believe it or not, absolutely, I agree with Eric on this. The actual true and tried Trump base will go with President Trump on this. If he's lost faith in Sessions.


WILLIAMS: I'm telling you what they told me. Their leadership follows President Trump. If he loses confidence, they would lose confidence to Sessions, too.

BOLLING: They elected Donald Trump. They didn't elect the establishment wing of the party. They didn't elect Jeff Sessions. They elected Donald Trump.

HAGLUND: And he has no accountability. He can do whatever he wants without sticking to an ideological core? That's the foundation of American politics. We need to demand that. The voters need to demand that.

BOLLING: The next time 2020 comes around, put someone up that can.

HAGLUND: Then why do we have Republicans and Democrats?

BOLLING: But they couldn't do that. They couldn't do that.


BOLLING: Can I point something out, you're laughing. Can I point something out? The stock market made another record high today. The labor market -- there's more Americans employed to date than ever, ever in this country, ever. The housing market is on a record high than it's ever been also. What in the hell do you guys want? What else do you want?

DEVITO: I'd like to see more consistent employment in his staff and his.

BOLLING: That's what you want? You know what look at that in your camera two. Tell those people you care about who Donald Trump employs or do you care about how much they make -- how much money they bring home to their family.

DEVITO: Why does it have to be an either or? Why can't it be both? What it does is what looks bad. It just shows does he's not -- doesn't make him look competent. It looks like he's.

BOLLING: You know what? We're hung up -- we're doing it -- we're talking about Russia, we're talking about Jeff Sessions. What we should be talking about is, how are the American people, are they better off or worse off today that they were six months ago?

TIMPF: President Trump is the one that keeps talking about Jeff Sessions. He's the one making us talk about it, because, Eric, you have to admit -- Eric, it's a little strange to have a president being a sort of twitter troll to his A.G. That's a little strange. And of something strange happen, we're going to talk about it. Am I saying would I rather have American.

BOLLING: It's small ball.

(CROSSTALK) TIMPF: Eric, let me finish. Eric, let me finish, please. I think that it's great. Yesterday, I spent almost the entire show saying how wonderful it is that President Trump is getting rid of all these regulations and what wonderful things that's doing for the economy. I can believe that. And I can also believe that it's kind of strange that he's treating A.G. Sessions this way. Who, by the way, is not someone who I like for political reasons. I don't agree with him on a lot of things. I think it's strange, and I'd like to know why it's important.

DEVITO: I agree with Kat. I think it distract him on things he's getting done because we're talking about -- look, these tweets aren't that a hamster ran across his keyboard at night, this is the president at night is doing these ridiculous tweets.

BOLLING: What's distracting about a record high stock market, record high employment, and record high home prices?

DEVITO: Nothing. And I'd like to hear more about that.


TIMPF: It appears that we have to go to a break. So we're waiting on a press conference on healthcare from Senator McCain and other GOP senators. We'll bring you that when we have it. The senate started it the debate over the new skinny healthcare bill today. We'll bring you the latest from the floor. So don't go away.


WILLIAMS: And we are going straight to Lindsey Graham doing a GOP press conference right now on the healthcare bill. We'll listen in.

GRAHAM: There's an increasing concern on my part and others that what the house will do is take whatever we pass, the so-called skinny bill, not take it to conference, go directly to the house floor, vote on it and that goes to the president's desk with the argument this is better than doing nothing. Here's my response. The skinny bill policy is a disaster. The skinny bill as a replacement for Obamacare is a fraud. The skinny bill is a vehicle to getting conference to find a replacement. It is not a replacement in and of itself. The policy is terrible because you eliminate the individual employer mandate, which we all want eliminated, but we've actually have overall solution to the problem of Obamacare. So you're going to have increased premiums and most of Obamacare stays in place if the skinny bill becomes law.

Not only do we not replace Obamacare, we politically own the collapse of healthcare. I'd rather get out of the way and let it collapse than have a half-ass approach where it is now our problem. So we're not going to do that with our vote. What we will do is move the process along. Our freedom caucus friends who I disagree with a lot, but sometimes I agree with them. Here's what Mark Meadows said. We would send a skinny bill to the president to question? The answer is no. So it becomes the vehicle for conference. Mark Meadows agrees the skinny repeal would be dead on arrival in the house, but he understands it's just a vehicle for a conference. Here's the problem. The whip in the house is suggesting the sum, that whatever we send becomes the final product, there will be no conference, and I am not going to vote for the skinny bill if I'm not assured by the house that there will be a conference for my idea and other ideas can be taken up so we can actually replace Obamacare. I'm not going to vote for a bill that is terrible policy and horrible politics just because we have to get something done.

So all three of us want to move the process along. We're encouraged by our leadership to be team players. They're coming up with a skinny bill that changes by the moment, but none of us believe it actually replaces Obamacare. Neither does the freedom caucus. And I need assurances from the speaker of the house and his team that if I vote for the skinny bill, it will not become the final product. It will be the vehicle to have a conference between the house and senate where we can consider a true replacement. If I don't get those assurances, I'm a no because I'm not going to vote for a pig in a poke, and I'm not going to tell people back in South Carolina that this product actually replaces Obamacare because it does not. It is a fraud. And with that, I'll turn it over to my great friend, John McCain.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.: I have nothing to add.


MCCAIN: As I stated earlier this week, I'm not supportive of the legislation as it stands today. I'm in close consultation with Arizona governor, Doug Ducey, regarding this so-called skinny repeal and its potential impact on the state of Arizona. My position on this proposal would be largely guided by Governor Ducey's analysis of how it'd impact the people of our state. My friends, this is legislation that directly affects the lives of the people in my state. I trust my governor. I trust his people. And he is looking carefully at this. He's looking carefully at the skinny bill repeal, but he's also looking at steps that need to be taken in addition to it.

So I am convinced that we can move forward, but we have to have an assurance that it will go to a normal conference. Right now, that is not the case. And we do not have the assurance that is the case. I believe that one of the major problems with Obamacare was that it was rammed through congress by Democrats without a single Republican vote. I believe we shouldn't make that same mistake again. And necessary, this is where we're about to hear from an antique phone that very few Americans have.


MCCAIN: There's very few Americans anywhere in the world -- I believe there's person in Togo who also has this phone.


MCACAIN: Look, we can't make the same mistake that we inflicted in 2009. We've got to have some bipartisanship. All of you saw my speech which I will be glad to provide you with a recording of in case you missed it or in case you have insomnia. But the point is, we've got to have Republicans and Democrats sit down together and come up with a bill that gets a majority in both houses. Otherwise, we're going to see this continuous gridlock. And I don't want to go on and on. But when we passed Obamacare in 2009, it split us. It split us dramatically. And it split us for years. It's time we sat down together and came up with a piece of legislation that addresses this issue. And don't think this issue is just out there sitting by itself.

In my state, we're down to one healthcare provider in every county. Co- pays are going up by the hundreds -- you're right. You see the freshman show no respect for their elders. I'd just like to say, again, in my state, Obamacare is a failure. It needs to be fixed. We have fixes, but it's got to be done in the normal process. And what I'm afraid of, of course, is that this thing dies this week and then it sits out there over the August recess or whatever it is. It's time we sat down together and came up with solutions that the American people would overall support.

I guarantee you, in my state, the status quo is not satisfactory, and that's one of the major reasons why I've been in constant contact with the governor of the state of Arizona, who bears large responsibility. Now, as is keeping with our seniority, we will allow the two additional senators 30 seconds each.

SEN. RON JOHNSON, R-WIS.: Thanks much, John. First of all, John, its great see you come back. And I've told you a number of times. It's an honor being able to serve with you. I'm happy to join Lindsey, and John, and Senator Cassidy, just asking very simple request. Give us insurance, give us the guarantee that whatever we pass out of the senate is going to conference, so we can work on for example the great ideas that these two gentlemen have been working hard with our governors, something that I think can really get a great deal of support. The fact of the matter is.

WILLIAMS: Coming out of that, we heard from Senator Graham, Senator McCain. Let me ask you, the word I heard that the skinny bill is a fraud. McCain begging almost for bipartisanship. Is this for you, than speaking to conservative principle or no? Is this them getting in the way of President Trump's agenda?

BOLLING: I think that's all it is, Eboni. This is more obstruction from the establishment Republicans. John McCain flew across the country, to his credit, to come and start the debate to continue the healthcare debate. And then voted down -- here's what he said. He said we've got to find a bill that gets the majority votes on both sides -- on both houses.


BOLLING: He had one yesterday. He had a clean repeal that they passed in the past, and it could have done exactly what he asked for. But he said no to that.

WILLIAMS: Well, I think he's talking about a replacement, though. Right, Eric?


BOLLING: No. He said a bill. We've got to find a bill that gets a majority on both sides. He had that, he push back, he voted against it, he voted it down, and now here's exactly -- I'll disassemble what they just said right there. They want to send a bill, the skinny bill that they hate, all of them hate.


BOLLING: A fraud. Over to the house. Let the house play with it and guarantee that the house sends it back for them to play with it some more. To put more tens or hundreds of billion dollars into it before they send it to the president.

WILLIAMS: They're calling it a fraud.

BOLLING: Good Lord, that is the worst of the worst political sausage being made I've ever seen, right there.

WILLIAMS: OK. To that point, they're calling it a fraud. They're saying we'll vote on it if it fairs if you give the complete assurances that it's going to ping-pong back and forth until we get it the way we want it. Your take on the effectiveness of that. You we're talking.

DEVITO: I think the first thing we learned is Lindsey Graham thinks he's pretty popular without turning his ringer off there. He's hot stuff. Yeah, again, it looks like the GOP wasted seven years without coming up with a viable alternative for this. He's going to keep kicking it back and forth. I would like if all bills came in skinny and cut out as much as possible. But it doesn't look like it's going to work on this one. I agree with Eric, the GOP -- they're blowing another opportunity here. And they're going to take the heat for it. People are going to blame it on Trump. They're going to blame it on the GOP.

WILLIAMS: That's interesting. I think a lot of people aren't, Kirsten, going to say, you know what? President Trump had a nice lay-up for you. Basically, many of you are in office because you rode the coat tails of President Trump's popularity in 2016. And here's a great opportunity that every Republican in American ran on, repeal, replace, can I get it done.

HAGLUND: Right. You know, I just like so many other people who are, you know, more conservative, want to see a win on healthcare. However, it has to be a good bill, because come 2018, people are going to be dealing with the fallout from whatever decision is made and they're going to take that to the polls.


WILLIAMS: So don't pass nothing that has something that is not conservative.

HAGLUND: Twenty percent premium increases if they just passes because there's no financial liability.


TIMPF: I also don't know how we're going to work together when the Democrats, a lot of them, want single payer. How are we supposed to work.

HAGLUND: That's the thing, American people deserve better than this. You can't just have a win with no substance.

WILLIAMS: They certainly do. Coming up, we will be right back. And guess what, it's time to wake up America. Our friend, Eric Bolling -- has some thoughts on the people polls and President Trump. He'll explain it all when we return. Stay with us.


BOLLING: All right. Time to "Wake Up, America." Check out this cover of the Rolling Stone magazine with Justin Trudeau. Now read that little subtitle over there on the left: "Why can't he be our president?" Really, Rolling Stone? You prefer a pseudo-socialist Canadian prime minister to the United States president? By the way, he can be your president. Just move to Canada, and he'll be your president. And do us all a favor and bring the rest of the editors and writers at Rolling Stone with you. We'd love that.

But really, could the media be any more biased against Trump? If you listen to the media, all they seem to want to do is repeatedly cry "Russia, Russia, Russia." They even claim Trump's approval rating is tanking because of Russia. But something isn't adding up again.

Take a look at scenes from President Trump Wednesday night in Ohio. Just look at those crowds. Listen to them for a second. I'm going to double down on a call I made over a year ago. Watch the people, not the polls. This president is popular with the people. Not the New York crowd or the L.A. crowd and certainly not the mainstream media, maybe not even some people on this set. But real people. Middle American people. People who care about their families' bottom lines, their wages and whether or not they can buy their kids back-to-school supplies and maybe a new outfit for the first day of class. That's what matters to America. The real America. They really don't give a damn about Russia, period.

The despicable Washington Post complained about this. A couple nights ago, the president spoke at the Boy Scouts jamboree. And the Wash Po complained it was indoctrinating the kids. Seriously, Wash Po? Now you have a problem with the Boy Scouts. You just don't get it, media and liberals. America loves a president who addresses the Boy Scouts.

And to my fellow deplorables, stop listening to the fake news media, the propaganda stream media. Watch the people, not the polls. Trust me, you'll get called names. You'll get ridiculed. You'll be made fun of, and in the end you'll be right, and the emphasis is on "right."

All right. Eboni, a little fired up there.

WILLIAMS: Yes. A little bit. I'll say this. You know, I have my opinions about the president. But this is what I do know.

My mother is a supporter of the president. There's a person that we both know in our industry, and this person went through social media and called my mother an idiot for voting for President Trump during the campaign cycle. And I haven't really had a relationship with that person since. And I used to. It used to be a mentor of mine.

So when you talk about the deplorables, you talk about -- and my mother is many, many things. Smart, smart woman. Brilliant woman. And that -- not only did it hurt my feelings, it enraged me. Because this is America, OK? I didn't vote for President Trump, but guess what? She gets to. It's her right. And you shouldn't made to feel bad about it. You shouldn't be shamed about it. You shouldn't be dragged intellectually about it. And it's a sad day in America where we cannot civilly disagree, politically or otherwise, without calling each other names. And it's really sad, because it ruined that relationship.

BOLLING: All right. Very good, very good. Your thoughts, Kat.

TIMPF: Yes, I think that there's no doubt that President Trump's base is very fired up about President Trump. And there's no doubt that the mainstream media is incredibly biased against President Trump. That people -- everything he does, they do look at it through the lens of "How could I make this against President Trump? How can I ridicule him for this?" That's pretty obvious.

The Boy Scout speech, a little weird, but I thought it was funny. So I was laughing during...

BOLLING: And Kirsten, look at -- those crowds in Ohio were amazing. Quick thought on this.

HAGLUND: Absolutely. I mean, they are fired up about him. They love him. We talked about it earlier, and that is great. I want to see him continue to use that momentum and use that energy and political capital to get some things done. And a lot of them are looking forward to tax reform, because that's going to affect their wallet and pocketbook. I mean, we need...

WILLIAMS: That's why my mother voted for him, specifically.

HAGLUND: Yes. And we need to learn how to disagree well.

WILLIAMS: Absolutely.

BOLLING: Give me a quick final thought.

DEVITO: I think Rolling Stone hasn't been relevant since they stopped including a free roach clip with the publication. And here they are smooching up to Trudeau. At least it's not as bad as their Boston bomber glamor shot cover. So they need to spend more time fact-checking their campus rape stores and less time doing this.

BOLLING: Got to leave it right there.

Up next, Iran takes a big step towards a potential long-range missile launch, just as North Korea could be preparing for yet another ICBM test any day now. The latest on that and how the U.S. should respond, next.


TIMPF: Welcome back to "The Fox News Specialists." Our specialists today are Kirsten Haglund and Joe DeVito. Let's continue the conversation.

U.S. officials confirming to Fox News that Iran has launched a rocket carrying a satellite into space. The move marks the country's most significant step to date towards a possible long-range missile launch. Officials are also warning that North Korea could be preparing yet another missile test.

WILLIAMS: No surprise there. I mean, this is what we know, right? I mean, again, I'm not suggesting anything radical or overreactive, but the days of putting our head in the sand and pretending that things are developing at a rate that is going to be very, very difficult to get in front of, if not impossible. We cannot afford to do that any longer. Period.

HAGLUND: You know what is kind of disappointing, as well, is that there was -- initially, it seemed like some momentum with the Chinese president and President Trump. You know, it seemed like there was a relationship that was forming there. And there was an expectation that there was maybe going to be some help from the Chinese on pressuring North Korea, and yet, we haven't seen that develop. I hope we will.

The other interesting thing about Iran is that, you know, we have to tread carefully there because of their help with Iraq and rebuilding that government there and stabilizing it. So there's this interesting dynamic playing out in the Middle East right now.

And as we've seen, even as hard as President Trump was going on the Iran deal, now we've had to now kind of, you know, take our hands off that a little, even though there's sanctions.

So the polarization in the region right now is really interesting to keep a watch on.

DEVITO: Well, it's nice to see that two-thirds of the Axis of Evil are still getting things done.

And in Iran, I guess the best we can hope for is they put that satellite up there to maybe get free Playboy Channel or something. It's -- I'm more concerned about them than North Korea, because whenever they show Kim Jong- un at some site where they're doing testing, if you look at their technology, you realize it's completely fake. He's got -- he's looking at, like, a microwave that's plugged into a power strip.

So I don't think North Korea is going to be able to do anything, even though they already have the nukes. I'd be more worried about Iran.

TIMPF: What do you think, Eric?

BOLLING: I think you can step up. I think you can renegotiate the Iran nuclear deal. I think that Trump is going to do it. There's certain time frames that they had to hit, and they had to put the check -- they had to check the box like last week and the week before.


BOLLING: But I think they're going to re -- just look at that and see if we can reapply the sanctions. Because I think sanctions will hurt Iran.

As far as North Korea, I'm on record as saying we need to do something pre- emptively, whether it's, you know, get in there with our intel computer, with our very, very capable computer, cyber people and dismantle it from inside. And let them say, we did it. Yes, we did it. So what? Stop shooting bombs at us.

TIMPF: All right. Well, we've got enough time for that.

Next up, the heat is on for sanctuary cities. The head of ICE warns that city leaders could be slapped with smuggling charges if they don't obey immigration laws. Eboni's "Docket." We'll break it down next.


WILLIAMS: Time now for "The Docket." Few issues are as controversial, emotionally polarizing or divisive as illegal immigration. It is such a hot-button policy issue that I submit to you that Donald J. Trump rose to the presidency on its intensity.

Last week's horrific deaths of 10 migrants that died of suffocation and heat exhaustion while being illegally smuggled in a tractor trailer tragically illustrates shows how dire the consequences are of continuing to kick the can down the road on real policy solutions around immigration reform.

Sanctuary cities have been the answer for many of the pro-immigrant community. Now while the intention of sanctuary cities is to protect the immigrant community, I submit to you that they actually further endanger the immigrant community itself, along with greater law enforcement and the public itself.


TOM HOMAN, ACTING DIRECTOR OF ICE: Sanctuary cities are criminals' biggest friend. If you're an alien smuggler, and you're smuggling people in this country as -- for a living, that is one -- that's one sales pitch: "We can get you to a sanctuary city where that city will help shield you from immigration."

So you know, I've said it -- every time I speak, I say it: Sanctuary cities need to help us keep their communities safe. Sanctuary cities not only endanger public safety. They endanger my law enforcement officers.


WILLIAMS: So Homan so strongly feels that way that he is threatening prosecution of those aiding and abetting human smuggling with the promising of delivering undocumented men, women and children -- children -- to, quote, "safe havens" known as sanctuary cities.

Homan's prosecution would not be wrong. Beyond blatantly breaking the law -- and for the record, I want to make it really clear, it is absolutely against the law to conceal, shield or harbor undocumented immigrants. Don't take my word for it. Look at the Code 8 USC 1324.

Also, it flagrantly disregards, and it doesn't cooperate with existing law. And that doesn't make anybody safer.

The dynamic created by willfully defining [SIC] our current immigration law leads to less witness cooperation in immigrant communities, more violence against ICE officers, and more undocumented immigrants being deported in the end.

Now, listen, nobody appreciates and encourages the richness and the beauty of cultural diversity here in America more than me. But I am not here for sanctuary cities as a means to that end. Because they are blatantly illegal, and they're a Band-Aid solution that endangers society, law enforcement, and most, the very immigrants that they claim they're trying to protect.

Now Eric, I know that you said that you are in favor of improving legal immigration. Some people, for some reason, think that's controversial for you to say as a conservative. But I don't get that. I would think that, in the conservative community, a law and order position would be fair. I'm saying blatantly, I do not support sanctuary cities, but we've got to get serious about immigration reform.

BOLLING: Agree. And I'm glad to hear that. I'm very glad to hear that.

If there's any question where the administration stands on sanctuary cities, Tom Homan, the acting director of ICE, just cleared it all up. He was very succinct. He said, "No, we're not going to support this. We're not going to help out, and we may go after sanctuary cities." I mean, he was very succinct about that.

I think he's got it right, and I'm glad to hear that we're taking a harder stand on illegal immigration and an open mind about increasing legal immigration.

WILLIAMS: And I think that, Kat, for a lot of people that are very pro- immigrant, that's the part of the conversation they're not hearing enough of. They're not hearing people talk about proactively really getting in there and unclogging a very broken and failed current immigration system that really leads people to be so desperate. And I don't think it's OK, and I don't think it's right. But it's that desperation is why ten people are dead now, because they were being smuggled over in a tractor trailer.

TIMPF: Absolutely, absolutely correct. I think that there are some conservatives, though, that don't really see the value in legal immigration. And I know that A.G. Jeff Sessions is one of them. So I think that's why people, when they hear him say anything about illegal immigration, illegal immigration, they just get terrified overall.

And I'm -- I am -- completely think the solution is making it easier for people to come here legally. Because immigrants do provide a lot of benefits to our economy and our culture.

WILLIAMS: Now, Kirsten, that's not something that you hear a lot of in GOP circles, in terms of when you talk about policy reform. That's not something that I can point to a lot of Republicans coming out and really speaking on the record about.

HAGLUND: No, they're not. I mean, it's a political football, and it's very, very touchy. What they also need to talk about, though, however: making it easier to come here. They need to deal with the backlog in the Justice Department of cases, which means more money and more lawyers into doing this. That's also an incentive for people to come here.

WILLIAMS: Joe, quickly.

DEVITO: And I think also, it shows you it's a question of supply and demand. If you -- if you make it more difficult at the end for people to try and get here illegally, you're going to save lives.

And I'd also like to see them not only go after sanctuary cities but also after employers who chronically employ illegals. Because they're just making things worse.

WILLIAMS: Yes, absolutely. That's not going to make life better or safer for anybody, including the immigrants they say that they are trying to protect.

We're going to say good-bye now to our specialists, Kirsten Haglund and Joe DeVito. Thank you both for being here. And a quick note. Joe will be appearing at the Gotham Comedy Club in New York City, Saturday. You want to check him out.

And up next, it's "Wait, What?" Stay with us.


BOLLING: All right. Now, time for our last segment of the day. Time for...




BOLLING: OK, I'm going to kick things off. I'm going to take tomorrow off, but I wanted to point something out. Pull up the full screen.

In a couple of days, I'm going to California. Going to hit the Reagan Library on Saturday and Las Vegas Country Club on Saturday night. Those are tickets. You don't want to miss that. We're going to have a blast, sign some books and have a lot of fun.

And then on Sunday, I'll be in Texas. I'll be in Katy, Texas, first and then Grapevine Mills, Grapevine, Texas, in the afternoon. Looking forward to meeting all of you and thank you. Come out and join me.


WILLIAMS: Awesome.

OK. So I love this story. You know, I'm a big fan of NFL. We often go toe-to-toe, have fights about our teams there, Eric. I'm looking forward to that in the fall with you; it will be fun.

This is a heartwarming story. This is an NFL player by the name of John Urschel. He's 26 years old. There you see him in his Baltimore Ravens uniform, huge guy. Very successful in the NFL. Retiring at age 26 after only three years in the league, because he's pursuing a Ph.D. in mathematics from MIT. I just think that is amazing.

BOLLING: Amen. Amen.

WILLIAMS: Talk about going from one dream career to another.

BOLLING: There you go. Great job, great job. Great "One More" -- not "One More Thing." "Wait, What."

WILLIAMS: Wait, what?

BOLLING: Your turn.

TIMPF: Yes, I found the most ridiculous story that I've ever seen in my entire life today. There was a man in Florida who robbed a bank, and then he got -- he ran down the street naked, throwing money at people. And he was arrested, and everyone said, "What?" And he said he did this, he decided to do this to try to launch his career as a stand-up comedian, or as a comedian.

He told the FBI, and I don't believe that they're finding it funny. And he's now nowhere on the comedy career, but he is, you know, facing federal charges now.

BOLLING: And interestingly, the bath salts in the area were all sold out.

TIMPF: I mean, just running -- imagine just being on the street, someone is running down the street naked, throwing money at everybody.

WILLIAMS: I don't know about the naked part, but definitely, that money part.

TIMPF: Yes. Like, all right.

BOLLING: That is a "Wait, what?" That's by definition.

TIMPF: Yes. Exactly. All right. Comedy is tough, but that's not the way to get into it.

BOLLING: That's all we have time for. Thank you for watching, and make sure you follow us on social media, @SpecialistsFNC on Twitter and Facebook. Remember, 5 o'clock will never be the same.

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.