Speaker Ryan defends FISA memo: Congress is doing its job

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," February 1, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kimberly Guilfoyle, along with Juan Williams, Jesse Watters, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld. It's 5 o'clock in New York City, and this is "The Five."

Tonight, new developments in the showdown over a classified memo on allege surveillance abuses by the FBI in the Russia investigation. President Trump is expected to approve the release of the documents after agreeing to some redactions at the FBI's request. It could be declassified possibly by tomorrow morning. This afternoon, Speaker Paul Ryan advocated for its release as long as sources and methods aren't revealed:


SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE PAUL RYAN, R-WIS.: Let me tell what this memo is and what this memo is not. What this memo is, is congress doing its job in conducting legitimate oversight over a very unique law, FISA. And if mistakes were made and if individuals did something wrong, then it is our job as legislative branch of government to conduct oversight over the executive branch is abuses were made.

With this is not is an indictment on our institutions, of our justice system. This memo is not an indictment of the FBI, the department of justice. It does not impugn the Mueller investigation or the deputy attorney general. The government has been given extraordinary power over citizens' civil liberties. It is our job to make sure that the process is followed properly.


GUILFOYLE: The memo was commissioned by Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the house intelligence panel. Democratic leaders Pelosi and Schumer had called for Nunes' removal as chair accusing him of waging a cover-up campaign for the White House. But Speaker Ryan says he will not be doing so:


RYAN: They're playing politics and I think they're looking for a political distraction is what I get out of that. Devin Nunes help shepherd through a reauthorization of 702, which is the foreign terrorist foreign surveillance law. So he's focusing on keeping our country safe, focus on national security. I think what they're trying to do is just sidetrack us for some political game.


GUILFOYLE: OK. Dana, so we're probably -- it sounds like it's going to get some big breaking news on this tomorrow that's going to release in terms of the reporting if that meets with the expectations. What do you think that we can expect and what do you think about this messaging?

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: I'm not sure. I understand what Speaker Ryan is trying to do. A couple of things, one, he's trying to explain that the memo has nothing to do with the Bob Mueller investigation. I really think that's a very tough communications bar to clear because, even if -- even if it's true that it has nothing to do with it, everybody assumes that it has something to do with it. And all these background sources say that the White House or some in the White House, sometimes they say the president, believes that this is actually going to help him in the court of public opinion thinking that there is bias against him, and therefore questions the credibility of the whole Russia investigation.

Then you have the FISA issue, which is there's lots of different titles in the FISA bill. We talked about this the other day, where you have foreign terrorist calling into Americans and you get a warrantless wiretaps, that's one part of the FISA program. When I understand is that the concerns about possible abuses or inappropriateness is in a different title, and title one which is about basically going after a warrant for an American here. So that's where the abuses apparently were and maybe they'll be able clarify this when it goes forward.

Just before we came to air, Axios is reporting on background -- on background sources that some people in the White House are fearful that maybe this isn't all it's cracked up to be, and that maybe it's been overhyped. And when Speaker Ryan says that Pelosi and Schumer are just calling for a distraction by saying that Nunes should step down as the chairman of the intelligence committee, you do have to think that the Republicans have actually been looking for a distraction for the past couple of weeks as they've gone through proper channels to try to figure out a way to release the memo.

GUILFOYLE: OK. All right, Jesse, what do you make of the -- little-bit, perhaps, are they overhyping this? What do you think? What can we expect?

JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: I fear there could be some overhyping and I'm nervous about it because they've been hyping this thing bigger than I've ever seen. And if they don't deliver, everyone is going to be very disappointed. With that said, the way Pelosi is acting, and the way Eric Holder is acting, or James Comey is acting, it leads me to believe that the Democrats, at least, think that it's a very damning memo and it is going to hurt the Democrats and it's going to raise a lot of questions about the Russia investigation.

PERINO: And that's exactly what Paul Ryan says that it's not, right? That's why I think the Republicans' communications messaging is hard because they're saying it has nothing to do with the Russia investigation and Bob Mueller, but it is being conflated, reasonably so.

WATTERS: And I think the conflation comes in terms of one of the things, I think, the reporting says that we do know is that this dossier that was paid for by Hillary and was fake was used as the justification to spy on the Trump campaign. That seems like the hardest bit of evidence we have. As far as anything else, it looks like Comey's been implicated in some capacity. Rosenstein has been implicated. I've heard those names being bandied about. Now they want to redact those names. I don't see what redacting names will do. They're now saying that they've changed the memo. That's a lie. I think it was a grammatical change. And the other change was something that the Democrats wanted.

So, the smoke screen, the Democrats like to say is, this is a smoke screen for the Russia investigation. The Democrats are now deploying a smoke screen for the abuse of power because right now it does look like when people were debating this for many years, worried about the fourth amendment. We're worried about federal government knowing too much and abusing their power or getting into personal stuff. Looks like some of those fears were founded on, you know, actual reality. So, we'll see what happens. I'm sick of hearing about it. Just release the damn thing.

GUILFOYLE: OK. So tomorrow -- it will be over for you. Greg, so what do you make of this in terms of -- Paul Ryan coming out making this statement. The White House -- some people wanted this to come out today, ahead of time, versus Friday.

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: Yeah, I love our viewers. I love our viewers so much that I have -- sometimes I have to give them some tough talk. This is a memo intervention. The more this is played up on cable news, the less it may be. You've seen this happen with other scandals. I call it let down-itis. It get built up and creates a lot of ratings, and a lot of fire, and a lot of fury, and then it just fizzles and then we move on to something else. It's like the reboot of Full House. I was looking forward for that in ages. And when it came out it was a big letdown.

And what you're seeing with the Russian collusion thing, it's the same thing. The facts there are thinner that Stetter's hair. You look at that --you look at that and then you look at the memo. It's like competitive strip tease. One side is saying look at this, look at this. And then the other side, look at this, look at this. And then when you look at that, and you look at that, you realized this is the worst strip club ever. I mean, if you look at MSNBC, Rachel is fantastic, and every day she's selling that story. She's selling that story. And then, if you come to other networks, it's the memo of the network selling that story. So it's scandal ping-pong --

WATTERS: Competitive strip tease coming to a theater near you.

GUTFELD: But it's really just scandal ping-pong --

GUILFOYLE: Just say scandal pong.

GUTFELD: I could be completely wrong. I've been wrong before. I hate talking about stuff that I don't know about, but if I follow that, I would never open my mouth. So, I am going to say a prediction that we probably will be let down. If I'm wrong, then we'll talk about it tomorrow. Probably lead with it.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. What a happy Friday it will be. OK. So Juan, do you think here in terms of what the Republicans, some of the messaging that they've gotten ahead of the game here, or how do you see this?

WILLIAMS: Well, I think that the purpose is pretty apparent, which is that President Trump doesn't like the investigation. He's trying to undermine the FBI, justice department, as part of an effort to get his supporters to disbelieve anything that comes from the special counsel or any of these investigatory agencies. What's striking to me about this is you had the director of the FBI, Christopher Wray, go over to the White House to meet with the White House chief of staff, John Kelly, accompanied by Rod Rosenstein who is the deputy attorney general. And both said this would be a reckless act, it would endanger national security if you have this put out there, that this was a cherry picked document.

There are omissions of fact. There are things that are distorted in here. And it will lead to, you know, methods and sources being divulge. And they asked. Now, these are two Trump appointees. This is not the Democrats, which I guess we can easily, you know, just picking up on what Greg was saying, getting to team sport politics here. But at some point, you have to look out for American institutions and trust in law enforcement.

And here, despite what Paul Ryan says, we have the president putting his interests, his disinclination to listen and abide by anything that's coming from the Mueller investigation over the best interests of the American people. And I'm surprised by the Republicans, over the best interest of law enforcement in the United States.

GUTFELD: Well, that's funny because -- for so long we've been told how heroic whistle-blowers are for exposing all this information. I mean, where's the Chelsea Manning fan club right now? Why aren't they saying release the memo? I really don't think there's any reason for secrecy in this memo because I do think what's in the memo, we already know. I think the idea that it's top-secret is unfair to the American people.

WILLIAMS: Well, here's the thing then. The same group that says let's be transparent says no. Democrats, your memo can't go out.

WATTERS: That's not true.

WILLIAMS: And then secondly, when they asked about the classified information behind the document -- if you believe in transparency, they said no, no, we can't put that out. So, you just have to listen to our interpretation.

WATTERS: I don't think that the president is trying to undermine anything. I think congress is doing oversight and that's what the job of congress is. You also said the FBI doesn't want it out. Of course they don't want it out because it's very embarrassing to the FBI. And, all of a sudden, Juan Williams trust law enforcement. I just want the record to show that for the last year you said law enforcement needs to be -- have body cameras on them, and we have to look out for bias in law enforcement. Now, we actually have evidence of bias in law enforcement and you don't want to know about it, Juan. So, when is the media not wanted more information. I always thought you as a journalist would want more.

WILLIAMS: Jesse, you know -- I don't know. You're on such weak ground. I understand why you want to do some sort of personal attack on me. But let me just say --

WATTERS: It's not personal --


WILLIAMS: If I talk about police in the streets in black communities, I'm not talking about the FBI looking at our politicians --

WATTERS: If there is a biased cop patrolling a black neighborhood that doesn't like black people, wouldn't you suspect that black cop? So, if there is a biased FBI agent that doesn't like Donald Trump and he's overseeing the investigation, wouldn't you question that too?

WILLIAMS: I tell you what, maybe then you should go back and look at the newspapers --


WILLIAMS: I am. Because, yesterday, the agent you say doesn't like Donald Trump, it was disclosed was the guy who wrote the memo saying let's go after Hillary Clinton. Let's reopen this thing ten days before the election.

WATTERS: And you know what else happens, McCabe, who was just let go to go collect his pension, knew about these extra emails that Hillary had with Huma and Weiner, and didn't tell James Comey for weeks, for weeks. Why not, Juan? What was he hiding?

WILLIAMS: He wasn't hiding anything.

WATTERS: Why did he wait weeks to tell James Comey that they found all these extra emails?

WILLIAMS: Because, ultimately -- by the way, Comey has said, nothing has come out that would justify having prosecuted Hillary Clinton.


GUTFELD: The great thing about this is we're all arguing about something that nobody's read outside of a few people.

GUILFOYLE: Right, but we will know.

GUTFELD: We will know. It's tomorrow, Dana.

PERINO: I can't wait. I'll set my alarm. One other point, the Wall Street Journal just posted a news article about Carter Page and the original FISA warrant, which it said was not during the Trump campaign. It goes back to 2013. There's additional information in this article that I think what you'll see, I don't know how the Wall Street Journal got it, but if this memo comes out tomorrow and the Democrats want their memo released as well, you can bet that there are probably other information that somehow leaks out and tries to -- at least get to the bottom of it. Maybe we will all know more tomorrow after that memo comes out. But that Wall Street Journal article that just posted around 4:00 is important.

WILLIAMS: Let me ask you something before we go, what happens for you, any of you, if, in fact, the president says Rod Rosenstein, you know, you implicated this memo. I want you gone and I'm going to put somebody in there who I think can reign in this Mueller investigation, would you say, boy, this is horrible? I can't believe that the president would interfere with the law enforcement agencies in this country in this manner to protect himself.

GUTFELD: You're posing a question about something that hasn't happened yet?

WILLIAMS: You don't think this is a set up for firing Rosenstein?

GUTFELD: I'm just asking.


GUTFELD: That's what I think.

GUILFOYLE: OK. And the president didn't offer the memo. All right. President Trump takes on Democrats again, today, for doing nothing on DACA as a new deadline rapidly approaches. It's all next. Stay with us.


WATTERS: Another deadline is approaching to strike a deal on immigration. President Trump, today, putting more pressure on Democrats to strike a deal on DACA at a GOP retreat in West Virginia.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: We want an immigration policy that's fair, equitable, but that's going to protect our people. As the Republican Party, we have a great opportunity. We're getting very little help from the Democrats. They talk a good game with DACA but they don't produce. If the Democrats choose to filibuster a framework that includes a generous path to citizenship or something that is not fair, we are not going to approve it. We're just not going to approve it. So we'll either have something that's fair, and equitable, and good and secure, or we're going to have nothing at all. It's now an election issue that will go to our benefit, not their benefit.


WATTERS: Mitch McConnell says he'll hold an immigration vote in the senate as soon as next week. Over in the house, Nancy Pelosi taking aim at the president's DACA dialogue.


HOUSE MINORITY LEADER NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: Make these statements about newcomers to our country and equating it in a criminal way. What is that about? And it has instilled fear as I say over and over. What he is doing brings tears to the eyes of the statue of liberty and instilled fear in the hearts of people who are concerned about our dreamers.


WATTERS: So the difference is, it looks like the Republicans, Greg, have a deal on the table and there's some bullet points and this is what they want. And the Democrats are just calling people names and using emotion.

GUTFELD: I'm going to pose a weird question because I don't know if I'm right or wrong on this, but this could lead to an ideological realignment on immigration by party. If Trump turns the Republican Party into the path to citizenship party, making it possible for 1.2 million people in limbo to obtain citizenship, and in effect saying that we're all dreamers. Everybody has a chance, not just Mexico, but everybody. That's a big shift for the Republicans and it's going to piss off a lot of the hard line right people. That's an ideological realignment in the party. If the Democrats saying no to this, what does that make them?

You could actually see something happening long-term where the Republicans become the party for immigrants, and the Democrats looks like losers for resisting what is clearly an amazing deal. This is -- 1.2 million people and it's amazing -- he's talking about fixing up the house before people move in. You want people to move, you've got to make sure the walls are secure. You've got to make sure there's a process to get in, a front door. That's all he's talking about. He's making it possible for the good to stay and the criminality to be removed. All he wants in exchange is a wall. It's not much to ask for.

WATTERS: Well, let's put that question to Juan. If President Trump is offering a pathway to citizenship for over a million people, which he said during the state of the union was three times more generous than President Obama's offer on the pathway to citizenship, and all he wants an exchange or a lot of the same things that Democrats have voted for in the past, why aren't the Democrats hopping on board with it?

WILLIAMS: Well, he's cutting legal immigration. He wants to do away with what he calls chain migration, which actually is about the ability of families to stick together. It used to be called family reunification.

GUTFELD: But the family is -- it's not just that, it's more than that.

WILLIAMS: That is the heart and soul of it --

WATTERS: Amnesty for 1.8 million people over Uncle Louie coming in on someone's visa?

WILLIAMS: I just reiterate. He wants to cut legal immigration --

WATTERS: He wants it merits-based, Juan.

WILLIAMS: No, he wants to cut the absolute number --

WATTERS: Well, 75 percent of the country wants to see a reduction in legal immigration.

WILLIAMS: He wants a cut in legal immigration --


WATTERS: I'm sorry, Juan. Go ahead.

WILLIAMS: It's OK. Let me just say, I was so interested in this because I really appreciate the point that you and Greg are making that may be President Trump's rhetoric is so harsh because he's got to please his base. And then he's going to take a step that says, oh, no, base, I'm going to angry you because I'm going to make a deal. And maybe the way to it hit people like me is, boy, you know, MS-13? Boy, he's making a lot out of this, and now all illegal immigrants are criminals and murderers? Why is he saying this stuff?


GUTFELD: You should get that checked out.

WATTERS: We actually have some sound of MSNBC talking about MS-13 after the state of the union. Let's listen.


JOY REID, MSNBC: He makes it sound like the biggest issue in the United States -- MS-13. Again, nobody that doesn't watch Fox News has ever heard of. Makes it sound like they're the biggest threat.


WATTERS: All right, Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: I can't take it because, you know, MS-13 is one of the most notorious, violent street gangs out there. They're actually quite organized. They're present in 46 states. They do a tremendous amount of horrific crime across this country. So why is she thinking that she should champion them and dismiss them? Anybody who has any sense of like law enforcement and what goes on in this country in terms of trafficking and the crimes that they commit know what a serious problem they are to this country.

We saw earlier -- later, last year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions going and examining and doing some follow-up on MS-13 as well. And, you know, under the Obama administration they became the first and the only street gang designated by the United States government as a transnational criminal organization. That is the status that they achieved during the last administration and how they proliferated.

WATTERS: All right, Dana.

PERINO: Well, on the MS-13 thing, obviously, they're a terrible gang and the president just showed that on Tuesday night in a very moving way. But I would say that there is some peril for Republicans to really push forward on MS-13. Ed Gillespie who ran for governor in Virginia, he ran -- was very tough on MS-13. He got more votes than any Republican ever for the governor's race in the commonwealth of Virginia, and he lost by nine points.

So, I don't know if -- it's not the only issue. The DREAMER issue is really important, 2.5 million U.S. citizens live with DACA eligible children. And then you have a state like Colorado, you have a Republican and a Democratic senator, they both support legalization for the DREAMERs. That's a 90-10 issue in Colorado. So you start picking it off. You start to realize you can't lose that many senators in order for President Trump to get his deal. The last and I would say is, I hope when we talk about merit that we can include something about grit because we need people to come that want to work in the country. You don't have to have a master's degree to be able to come in the country and succeed.

GUTFELD: Exactly, I would say master's degree works against you. They're highly overrated. I don't want more people going to college. I want less.

WATTERS: OK, you heard it here. Greg Gutfeld, education secretary. Maxine Waters off the rail again over President Trump, her latest meltdown up next.


PERINO: Maxine Waters made an appearance on BET last night to deliver her own rebuttal to the state of the union. The California Democrat still pushing for President Trump's impeachment, and now she's also pushing for a presidential parental advisory. Watch this.


REP. MAXINE WATERS, D-CALIF.: One speech cannot and does not make Donald Trump presidential. He's not presidential. He's a dangerous, unprincipled, divisive and shameful racist. His vulgarity and his disrespect for women and people of color is a terrible role model for our children. Whenever he appears on TV, there should be a disclaimer that says, this may not be acceptable for children.


PERINO: All right, Greg, good line for speech or not?

GUTFELD: I'd love to live in that Waters' world.


GUTFELD: As if the Democrats are so squeaky clean. Every leader, you've got to be honest at this point, it's foulmouthed, it's part of the job, it's just that we're in an era where people tell on you or record you. The thing that drives me crazy are the stories that begin with Donald Trump erupted at 'X'" or "Donald Trump exploded at 'X'." If you -- if you were ever in a workplace, people do yell at people, and then they move on. When you're ticked off about something, you yell.

When I first got to FOX and I was doing "Red Eye," and I didn't know what the hell I was doing, I was screaming at inanimate objects.

So Trump reads, like, the newspaper and he'll yell "What the hell is going on?" And that's a boss; that's a boss. And I think a lot of liberals are unfamiliar with having a boss.

PERINO: Well, wasn't it true that -- Juan, that Bill Clinton was notorious for having a foul mouth? But the media sort of, if you heard it, you sort of -- not you, but you sort of underplayed it. But now everything is just out in the open.

WILLIAMS: Well, I think the difference is -- boy, Lyndon Johnson...



WILLIAMS: These guys did have foul mouths. But I think the difference is what gets said not only in front of a camera but within earshot of people these days.

And I think that the president takes that to a different level. And he doesn't...

GUTFELD: ... raps (ph), Juan.

WILLIAMS: I'm not sure if he doesn't object, because I think his base seems to embrace the fact that he is a truth teller.


WILLIAMS: And he's not a PC guy. But you know, it's not just Maxine Waters. I've heard other people say that children shouldn't be listening. They don't want children in front of the political TV much any more.

GUTFELD: We let them go on the Internet.

PERINO: Children should be doing homework, right, Kimberly?

GUILFOYLE: Children should be doing homework?



PERINO: Right, Ronan?

PERINO: Yes, Ronan. He's got a little reading assignment tonight.

GUTFELD: There are worse things on the Web, worse things on the Web than Donald Trump, trust me.

GUILFOYLE: No, but let me tell you something. When you see the president around children, whether it's, you know, the Easter parade or you're on the front, the lawn of the White House...

GUTFELD: The press kids.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. I mean, it's just -- he absolutely loves children. He loves his grandkids. He can't get enough of having them come visit and being around them. That's one thing that, like, that you see him just light up.

Children are, like, his -- he just absolutely loves them. And like, his reaction when he saw the children who were killed in Syria, as well.

So for her to say that he's not suitable for children is just, you know, it has just no authenticity. It rings so hollow. And it just seems that she was trying to demonize him regardless of what he said and what he did and that she'll go to any length, including saying -- calling him a racist, which is a very strong statement, a terrible thing to say about someone, if untrue.

PERINO: Do you think, Jesse, that she believes it or is just -- had a good line for her speech?

WATTERS: It was a good line. Maxine Waters, no relation. But I don't take her seriously. What makes Donald Trump presidential is because he won the Electoral College. And that's going to be -- you know, that's...

GUTFELD: That would be the best talk show, "Waters and Watters." Wouldn't that be amazing?

WATTERS: I think there would be a lot of fights in the green room.

GUILFOYLE: It would last, like, one night.

GUTFELD: You'd probably get along famously.

WATTERS: You think so?

GUTFELD: Oh, yes.

PERINO: It could be -- it could be a hit. It could be a hit. But don't leave us yet.


PERINO: Ahead, the best tax reform bonus yet: more Twinkies. They gave me this to hold. We have more on this, right next.

GUILFOYLE: Somebody's going to eat them.



The great thing about a good economy: Everyone gets a piece of the pie. And that includes Fruit Pies, CupCakes, Donettes and Ding Dongs. Yes, Hostess -- which makes all of those wonderful products -- is giving workers one-time payments of 1,250 bucks, but it's also offering a year's worth of free food -- which is one multipack of their favorite item a week. I'd eat that in an hour, but why look a gift horse in the mouth, especially when the gift is for your mouth?

And these free snacks, they really are a perfect symbol. No one's getting free kale under Trump. But here's your Ho-Ho. And like clockwork, Hostess cited Trump's slashing of the U.S. corporate tax rate. And remember: This is Hostess, who filed for bankruptcy under President Obama and even shut down under that president. But now the tax change gives the company that chance to increase compensation, sharing the company's success with its workers. That's good news, even if it makes you fat.

Now, I know the response we're going to get from the Pelosi-bot: This is just crumbs. And she'll be right for once. There will be crumbs, literally, from all the free food given by a company that found new life in a climate that makes such deeds possible.

It's actually a bigger story, one of peer pressure profit sharing. One company looks at another company giving bonuses and says, "Hmm. I think we better do that, too." And if Pelosi or Debbie Wasserman Schultz can't see the goodness in that, then they're the real Ding-Dongs.

Yes. Finishing it on a silly little pun, Dana.

The thing is, Hostess isn't out of the woods yet, because there's a change in eating habits. You've got automation.

PERINO: But you're going to help them out right now.

GUTFELD: Yes, I am. But the thing is, this -- this tax, corporate tax change helped -- it's helping this company.

PERINO: Let them eat cake.

You know what's interesting, is like the American public...

GUTFELD: Sponge cake.

PERINO: ... is watching a real-life Economics 101 lesson. Like, you don't -- you don't have to go to YouTube or anything. You can say, like, if you allow companies to have more money in their coffers and the economy is good, they will want to keep their employees and reward them. It's a whole supply and demand thing.

But here's the thing.

GUTFELD: Look what's inside.

PERINO: I would say -- I would ask them, if I could get an extra $5 a week instead of the calories.

GUTFELD: Yes, that's a good point.

You know, Juan, I open this up and I have to ask myself, "Why does this have to be white.

WILLIAMS: Is that right?



GUTFELD: Didn't they do chocolate -- didn't they do chocolate Twinkies for a while? That was amazing. Bring that back.

PERINO: No, they have the other ones. There were...

GUILFOYLE: You're talking about Ding-Dongs.

PERINO: Zingers.

GUTFELD: Zingers? No, the Twinkies had...

WATTERS: That was Ho-Hos.

GUTFELD: No, Ho-Hos, I know my Ho-Hos.

Juan -- Juan, good -- this is good news, 1,250. That's not crumbs.

WILLIAMS: It's not crumbs. You know, I'm amused by all this. I can only think, it's like Trump saying, "This is the biggest tax cut ever," and of course, that's not true.

PERINO: But you know what? If this had happened under President Obama, if he had done the corporate tax cut like he had wanted to, and all these companies were giving bonuses, yes, you do have to wonder what the right would be saying. They would be saying it's not enough.

WILLIAMS: It's not enough.




WILLIAMS: But I'm just saying, you would...

PERINO: But they didn't get a chance to do that.

WILLIAMS: ... make fun of Pelosi, I think, right?


WILLIAMS: And my thought is, well, make fun of Wall Street. Because what Wall Street says is, basically, this is, like, less than 1 percent of the workers in the country who are getting anything, and most of the money is going to be used either to buy -- buy back stocks for the companies, increase dividends for shareholders, or increase executive pay. So if you give...

GUTFELD: 401(k)s, Juan.

WILLIAMS: Excuse me?

GUTFELD: 401(k)s.

WILLIAMS: There are only -- less than half the country has a 401(k).

GUTFELD: Well, but still...

WATTERS: Forty percent of America is a lot of America.

WILLIAMS: I'm just saying, if you think is across-the-board beneficial to the entire country, it's beneficial to people who already have money.

WATTERS: Well, OK, everybody has a little money, and it is beneficial to everybody in the country, because according to A.P., not fake news, right, Juan? A.P., right?

WILLIAMS: I hope not. I hope not.

GUTFELD: Does this mean your cousin Apie?

WATTERS: This is -- this is hot off the press, A.P. Tax bill beginning to deliver bigger paychecks to workers. And this is what they said.

Ninety percent of Americans are getting a tax cut. That's a lot of Americans.

WILLIAMS: That's true.

WATTERS: Average middle-class family getting $1,000 in tax relief this year. And some guy was quoted. He just got an extra $200 in his paycheck.

UPS just announced $13,000 per worker going into their pensions. Lowe's is just offering $1,000 bonuses. This is big money; this is real money.

But I'm glad, Juan, that you say that you want workers to get more money.


WATTERS: I'm glad you've finally come around. Juan is a tax cutter.

WILLIAMS: What's wrong with that?

WATTERS: Juan is a tax cutter.

WILLIAMS: But you know what I worry about?

WATTERS: What do you worry about?

GUILFOYLE: Everything.

WILLIAMS: Because I care about you so much. I don't want you walking in Times Square. Because if those guys are playing three-card monte, you'd fall for it.

WATTERS: I have, and I will admit it.

GUTFELD: Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: That's -- that's big in San Francisco.

GUTFELD: You are -- you are a true hostess.

GUILFOYLE: Thank you.

WILLIAMS: No, no, she's a true cupcake. In our eyes.

GUTFELD: I would stop there. Let's...

WATTERS: No one's eating it?

GUILFOYLE: I was going to eat it, but...

GUTFELD: This is got to put a smile on many people's faces, including my own.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I think it's sweet. And you know what? Why not, like, celebrate the successes and that, actually, the tax reform is resulting in more dollars in people's pockets, which is going back into the economy, into the stream for purchasing power, for consumerism.

And I like that companies are treating their employees well. And maybe if they work for Twinkies, they really love them. They'll be happy to take all of them home.

GUTFELD: It's funny. Like, if other companies said, "We're going to give what you work on," that you can take it home. So, like, we would get free news. Like FOX News gives us all a big pile of newspapers to take home.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no, they should give us real news.

But you know what? Let me add this: Wal-Mart -- Wal-Mart says, "Oh, we're going to give you stuff," and then they fire, like, 10,000 people from Sam's Club. Does this ever -- it doesn't connect to you guys?

GUTFELD: That's a different segment. How dare you?

Ahead, scientists proved it once and for all: I am better looking than Juan.


GUTFELD: I'll let him explain.

GUILFOYLE: Are you sure?


WILLIAMS: I'm not so sure about this story, so I'm going to ask you. You decide. A real report.

A recent survey has determined that Republicans are usually better looking than Democrats. Researchers claim a person's physical attractiveness can alter their political views, their worldviews.

So if you are good-looking, you are more, allegedly so, more likely to identify as a conservative, because you've been treated better in life and view the world as more fair. That, the logic goes, makes them, conservatives, more resistant to the type of social welfare and redistribution programs championed by liberals.

So I'm going to ask the pretty people at the table, beginning with Miss Kimberly, does this make sense?


WILLIAMS: You're objecting?

GUILFOYLE: Greg's like "What about me?"

GUTFELD: That's sexist, but OK.

WILLIAMS: Sexist? Well, at least I wasn't racist this time.

GUILFOYLE: Before your work accident, door incident, for sure it was you.

GUTFELD: I have a third eye.

GUILFOYLE: All right. What would you like to know?

WILLIAMS: Well, what do you think of this theory?

GUILFOYLE: I don't know. I think there's beauty on both sides of the partisan divide.

GUTFELD: She married the other side, remember.

WILLIAMS: Oh. Oh, you were married to a Democrat. That's true. That's true.


GUTFELD: And he was a looker.

GUILFOYLE: Found him attractive.

WILLIAMS: OK, OK. But what do you think of this in general? But that's - - he might be...

GUILFOYLE: I think it's an interesting -- I think it's an interesting premise. I think you can always find supporting documentation to, you know, support whatever kind of thesis you have going forward. That's what creative writers are all about. I don't know.

I mean, for me, I think it's like, look, I grew up in a very, very liberal city, you know, married the other side.


GUILFOYLE: Divorced the other side. Married the other side, and then divorced the other side. I don't know.

WILLIAMS: I'll tell you what's consistent in that picture. They find you attractive.

GUILFOYLE: Thank you, Juan.

PERINO: That's a nice complement.

Well, I'm going to say I don't necessarily believe this. Because have you seen Hollywood? Models, the entertainment industry. They're beautiful people, and they're almost all liberal. And we make fun of Hollywood all the time.

GUILFOYLE: Aha. Like Gisele.

PERINO: Right?


PERINO: Like all of them.

WILLIAMS: All right. Well, Jesse, look at this picture here that we're going to put up. It's a full screen of a liberal and a conservative.

PERINO: Oh, no.


WILLIAMS: Who's more attractive, Jesse?

GUTFELD: Oh, my God.

WATTERS: More attractive?

GUTFELD: Dangerous territory.

WATTERS: I mean, Watters has always said that beauty is what's on the inside, Juan.

WILLIAMS: You know what? High five.

WATTERS: All right.

WILLIAMS: That was a good answer.

GUILFOYLE: I love how you refer to yourself, "Watters." Watters is on the set.

WATTERS: Let me tell you, this is scientific. So if you disagree, you're a science denier.

WILLIAMS: Is that it?


GUILFOYLE: And a winning denier.

WILLIAMS: Every time that you see a study, you have to believe the whole thing? Because I'm going to hold you to that.

WATTERS: You'll forget by tomorrow.

PERINO: It also is total baloney, because basically they're saying if you grow up and you believe in conservative values like for smaller government and states' rights, like you might, if you were in Wyoming, then therefore you aren't a compassionate person, because you aren't for social welfare distribution.

WILLIAMS: Right, right.

PERINO: That is baloney, because actually, the policies are better to help people, like welfare to work. All of these things are actually better. There are compassionate people who are conservatives, as well. So I'm going to call baloney on this.

WILLIAMS: OK. Now for the most beautiful person at the table, Mr. Greg.

GUTFELD: Yes. I think it's -- the premise is half right. Really good- looking people do have it easy. It's the one inequality that nobody wants to talk about, but it is there. There are studies on promotions.

And to your point about Hollywood, you know, an ugly person can't make it in Hollywood unless you're a character actor. But really good-looking people do better in business. They do better in job interviews. And it's an inequality that cuts across race and gender and sexual orientation. People just trust people with certain facial characteristics. However...

GUILFOYLE: They do baby studies on this.

GUTFELD: They do, they do. But it also does result in laziness and coasting. I know a lot of good-looking people who are couch surfers, because they thought that they were going to get far on their looks, and they didn't.

To your point, though, the secondary part of this study, the interpretation is incorrect, because they say good-looking people become conservatives, because they are unfamiliar with injustice and suffering. When in fact, you could argue that conservatives are more compassionate, because they believe in individual power over the reliance on government.

So you could say that conservatives care more about people, because they're willing to tell the people to work on themselves, which is a very hard thing to tell people.

WATTERS: Taller people tend to do better.

GUTFELD: Oh, yes, it's true.

PERINO: We know that.

WATTERS: Studies have been shown.

GUTFELD: I know. But the thing is, that would be -- that is actually -- there is no movement for this. Why isn't there...

PERINO: I don't know if you're helping yourself.

GUTFELD: There's actually no movement for that kind of thing, and why shouldn't there be a movement for height or -- there's no Gandhi for ugliness.

PERINO: Don't give them any ideas.

GUTFELD: There's no Martin Luther King for the plain.

WILLIAMS: Wait, wait. I could be Gandhi for the ugly. What if I wore more makeup? You think America would love me more if I wore...

GUTFELD: If you saw people on cable without their makeup?

WILLIAMS: All right, all right. Let's not go too far. "One More Thing" up next.


GUILFOYLE: All right. Well, hello, it's time now for "One More Thing." Juan, what do you have for us?

WILLIAMS: So Ellen DeGeneres celebrated her 60th birthday by inviting Michelle Obama on her TV show. The former first lady, in her first TV appearance since leaving the White House, said some people are afraid in the current political environment. So she offered a prescription that comes from someone who's lived in the political spotlight for eight years.


MICHELLE OBAMA, FORMER FIRST LADY: I would just encourage your viewers, the country, to do the things we do every day. To love each other, to take care of each other, to show empathy. And you can't do that only when people make you feel good or safe. We've got to do it all across the board. We have to be an openhearted nation, and that's who we are.

So let's just keep living our lives like that every single day and forget what they're staying in Washington. That's not necessarily who we are.


GUILFOYLE: Wow, she looks fantastic.

WILLIAMS: Wow. Did you guys like that?

GUTFELD: I totally disagree.

PERINO: Beautiful.

GUTFELD: Totally disagree. I think everybody should be mean and hateful.

PERINO: And close-hearted?

GUTFELD: And close -- my heart is closed.

By the way, Ellen, for 60? Holy -- damn.

WATTERS: She looks good.

GUTFELD: Wow. I hope I look half as good. I hope I look half as good.

GUILFOYLE: Greg, do you have Ellen envy?

GUTFELD: Well...

GUILFOYLE: Yes, indeed.

WATTERS: You look great, Greg.

GUILFOYLE: OK, Greg, go.

GUTFELD: What am I doing? Oh, yes.


GRAPHIC: Greg's Wasted Alcohol News.


GUTFELD: "Greg's Wasted Alcohol News." All right.


GUTFELD: This story, I love this story because, A, I hate champagne. It's basically hyper-carbonated Miller Lite. Let's be honest.

WATTERS: I like it.

GUTFELD: And anybody who spends $42,000 on a champagne, Magnum, deserves to drop it. This is a guy. In a Vifa (ph) -- not a Visa, a Vifa (ph) club.


WILLIAMS: Oh, my gosh.

GUTFELD: That's a $42,000 bottle all over the floor. I don't think -- I don't know. He probably could afford it. That's what he's trying to say: "I don't need this."

By the way, anybody -- why champagne? Why did champagne get elevated to something special?

PERINO: Good marketing.

GUILFOYLE: We have no time for that. OK, Dana.

PERINO: All right. So have you ever heard of Lord Bates. He's from Britain. He was only a minute late to work, which happens to all of us except for when you work in TV. You have to be on time. But it was no laughing matter. He was very apologetic. Watch.


LORD BATES: Offer my sincere apologies to Bernice Lister (ph) for my discourtesy in not being in my place to answer her question on a very important matter. I'm thoroughly ashamed I've not been in my place, and therefore, I should be offering my resignation. Immediately. I do apologize


PERINO: It's very British, right, Greg? I thought you would like that. So he packed his things and left as lawmakers tried to stop him. I thought at first he was joking. Prime Minister Theresa May rejected his resignation. And because he's such a rule follower, he returned to work.

GUILFOYLE: That's very cute. OK, Jesse.

WATTERS: All right. Now, a new addition of "Mom Texts."

GUTFELD: Smattering.

WATTERS: OK. First one, here we go: "On Chapter 5 of 'Fire and Fury.' An absolute must-read."

No. 2, "Daddy does not like Greg's heavy metal transition music."


WATTERS: No, 3, "Jesse, we're all excited about the Philadelphia Eagles, but this does not merit your losing of all your 'ings' ... 'gettin,' 'goin'... 'winnin'... Or is this "Bro Talk"?

And then finally, "How can I get Trump fired?"

Also, I want to give a special shout-out to "Swamp People" star T. Roy. He's recovering in the hospital from hip replacement surgery. Get well soon.

GUILFOYLE: All right. The best. Very sweet.

OK, so this is something interesting for me, because I love following crime stories.


GUILFOYLE: And Natalie Wood, nearly 40 years after her mysterious death, her ex-husband is, in fact, more than a person of interest in her death. And this has just been characterized by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.

She died, if you'll recall, November 29, 1981, while she was sailing on her family's yacht with Wagner and two other people. So it was originally classified as an accident. We'll see what happens.

Set your DVRs. Never miss an episode of "The Five." "Special Report" up next. Hey there, Bret.

BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Hey, thanks, Kimberly.

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