Laura Ingraham shines a spotlight on everyday Americans and examines how their lives are affected by politics at the federal, state and local level. That is going to say, no, the president doesnt have the authority to take away somebody Security Clearance . They act like there is some sort of property right to keep a Security Clearance for post government work. There is no such thing. What he is doing is irresponsible and selfish because he is identified with the Intelligence Community. I was a member of that. It makes all of us looks like a bunch of partisan hacks when he goes off in every direction spewing all this vitriol, it really reflects poorly on the Intelligence Community. People sit back and say, well, now we know what he was thinking when he was head of the cia. It doesnt reflect well. Jason i think it does undercut the credibility of an agency that prides itself on being a nonpartisan and apolitical. Newt gingrich was on Fox And Friends this morning. Lets listen to his Point Of View and dan, i would like you to react to it. How would you like to have director of Central Intelligence so lacking common sense that he
officer rather than saying this on msnbc or writing it in the press, he mightve gone straight to the Special Counsel and explained what his concerns were. But the problem is that its not just our own citizens who are listening john brennan, there are foreign governments and spies stealing secrets on our behalf who are going to believe that john brennan knows something that maybe we dont and their trust in our government is going to be degraded. Our national security, as a result, will be impacted negatively. The second point i would make quickly is that those who signed this letter might question whether they want to be tethered to john brennan, who is really the weak link in this chain here. Hes not a credible witness. I think that those who are concerned about a Security Clearance issue and maybe feel like the cia, who held the brennans clearance, should have been responsible for revoking it or not, i think their argument is damaged because again, brennan is not a credible witness. Jason roger, does dan make a point here . That is, we undercut the credibility with our foreign
adversaries and the sitting president . Does that concern you at all . It does but there are plenty of things that concern me in that same realm. The President Leaking Intelligence that we got from israeli sources to the Russian Ambassador in the oval office. Whatever happened to him in two hours in helsinki. This, i think jason why does that concern you . Why do suddenly democrats get concerned with that . The idea the president is engaging in diplomacy is something that ive always thought the democrats engaged in and supported and then donald trump does it and suddenly hes criticized for it. Ive been in these rooms. Im assuming some of the panel have as well and probably you as well, congressman. There is always notetakers, interpreters, some kind of official record, and its no accident that as soon as helsinki was over, we come home from that, and then theres the announcement that there is not going to be readouts from phone calls with foreign leaders. I agree with the instincts about being concerned about whats going on. I think the brennantrump thing has taken on its own life and in the last 48 hours that i dont think that anyone is necessarily happy with or proud of. If one has the instincts and the intent of our being concerned about national security, i wouldnt put mr. Brennan and his actions the last four or five days of the top of the list. Jason i would. I think he uses it as a tool for his own personal political gain and financial gain. That is my own personal opinion. Chris, it begs the question, why do people in perpetuity continue to get Security Clearances after they leave office . Its expensive to do, right . Is this really justified in this day and age . I dont think so. I think there are far too many people post Government Service who retain their clearances. They are expensive, got to do reinvestigations periodically, and the test is, the criteria is, is it in the best interest of the government for them to keep their clearances . I would say, the number of
people that retain those clearances, the answer is no. Its a commercial gain for them, not so much benefit to the government. Jason the cost is exorbitant. My understanding is, i think it was on 15,000 to reup and do this and you really ought to go back to what senator Patrick Moynihan from new york said some 27 years ago, he spearheaded a commission that said, when everybody has a Security Clearance, nobody has a Security Clearances. When everything is classified, nothing is classified. But i would like to see, it the government in a bipartisan way, have trump, the speaker, majority leader, appoint a Bipartisan Panel to review this whole thing, top to bottom, and come up with a real solution. We got to take the politics out of it and figure this out. Dan, i got to ask you, weve had some terrific things that brennan has done in taking away Security Clearances. What do you say to those Men And Women that were, say, in benghazi or other places, and
they see this brennan out there spewing what hes spewing today . Ill be honest with you, i dont think it impacts our Intelligence Community at all. We, historically, and i think it carries on today, we are just we just dont Pay Attention to those things. John brennan can say what he wishes. There is no impact on the Men And Women of the cia who were going about their job, focused on the mission, focused on recruiting, and stealing secrets, even though john brennan didnt like to say we steal secrets, thats what we do, and write all Source Analysis for the president to make an educated Foreign Policy decision. I think john brennan is bringing dishonor on himself but i really dont think hes impacting Intelligence Community. Jason good. I hope hes 100 right and the Men And Women who are serving in our intelligence services, cant thank them enough for the great work. And i hope these little side shows that the former director
had put in place are dismissed for the shenanigans that they are. Gentlemen, i thank you for joining us tonight. The Media Overhyped yet another leak in the Mueller Probe. Well have the real story up next. And non24 can make me show up too early. Or too late. Or make me feel like im not really there. Talk to your doctor, and call 8442342424. The New York Times put out a piece over the weekend that said White House Counsel Don Mcgahn spoke to Special CounselRobert Muellers team for about 30 hours, revealing new details about the president s attitude toward the russia probe. That prompted some to speculate that mcgahn had turned on donald trump. But the Washington Post is out with a new report stating that mcgahn does not think he put trump in any legal jeopardy citing what mcgahns attorney has revealed to President Trumps lawyers. Earlier tonight, trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani made this key point. Heres the most important thing, i knew not to worry about it because of the president had said anything criminal to the council of the white house, mcgahn wouldnt be there now. Mcgahn as a matter of legal ethics and possibly even law, would have to quit. Jason good point. Joining me now with reaction from washington, d. C. , are james, whitecollar litigation attorney, and democrat attorney scott bolden. Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here tonight. Good evening. Jason the internal debate, the discussion is, did they Do The Right Thing . Did they cooperate, did they not cooperate . That they open it up, fight back . President s in recent history have fought to keep Executive Privilege, they have fought for that. But donald trump is going to waive that, gave them a million plus documents, mcgahn, others that have been there for interviews. So the question is, is the president doing the right thing or not doing the right thing . Scott, what say you . It depends on what legal team he had at the time. The very beginning, remember john dowd was trying to cooperate and make the investigation go away. We have all been there, we know that strategy is very important, they walked away hes walked away from his lawyers, hes got a new team and, they are fighting because they think the Mueller Investigation is tainted with prejudice. The reality is, though, Executive Privilege is super important. It frees the general counsel im sorry, the white house counsel, it protects the president and to waive it based
on cooperation is very dangerous. Its good that the lawyers are talking but the reality is, 30 hours is a really, really long time and i will be honest with you, under oath, telling the truth, mcgahn is a pretty ethical guy, hes fought with trump before, thats a lot of time. Jason it is telling, though, that the president is waiving all the privileges, and not putting up the Legal Defense that he could have done. Doesnt he score some points in terms of openness and transparency. Its completely inconsistent, isnt he . Jason sorry, let james jump in. Thanks, jason. I dont think it is that inconsistent or at least its an inconsistency he can live with. He can still attack the Mueller Probe and say they are doing things wrong, saying that they are comprised of partisans, whatever you want to say, but also be able to say at some point, hey, i, as president , was transparent. I allowed my attorney to speak unfettered to them for 30 hours. I turned over millions of documents. It is unnerving for us lawyers to think of waiving an available privilege but i think it might deserve the message pretty well for the president overall, which is, even though he doesnt like this probe, hes willing to be cooperative and give them what they want. Jason james, is giuliani right . If mcgahn had evidence of a crime or something going on in the white house, he wouldnt be here, right . I think is a pretty good assumption. I think thats probably right. I hesitate only because rudy might change his comments any minute. But overall, i think youve got this one right. Jason scott, do you think giuliani made the right assessment and his comments that he made tonight . I dont think he knows what hes talking about in the sense that he doesnt know what mcgahn said for those 30 hours, neither does trump. They know what his lawyers said. But the fact that he even took a lawyer in shows that he was concerned about not only maintaining his integrity but also the fact that he did have a concern about donald trump setting him up as the fall guy,
a la dean in the nixon investigation. But the reality is, we really just dont know. But we will find out, and i got to tell you, i think mcgahn is more important than cohen in regards to what he knew about the white house, the president , comey, and the issues of obstruction or conspiracy going on at the white house and during the campaign. Jason james, wasnt it director comey who says he wasnt really going to chase after false statements . Look, i was very involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation. There were a lot a lot of false statements that were made, but the fbi never pursued that. Is this a Double Standard yet again . It certainly is unsettling, a little weird to see that. Inspector general report specifically talked about a witness in the Hillary Clinton probe lying repeatedly, lying to the point where the agents were, commenting to themselves, wow, we could do a 1001 false statement prosecution against this guy. Nd but meanwhile, comey swore a document that we are not going to trouble ourselves with these false statement cases in the hillary email probe. But in trump, they have been handing them out like candy. Obviously, michael flynn, the
notion of a perjury trap, the notion of a false statement prosecution is alive and well in this case, although it didnt seem to be in the other ones. Jason scott, that is a problem. Hillary clinton was under oath when she testified before the benghazi committee. Jim jordan, asked her some very direct questions and im telling you, she absolutely, totally lied. I signed a letter as the chairman of the Oversight Committee asking the fbi, along with bob goodlatte, chairman of the judiciary committee, to investigate that and the fbi and the Department Of Justice never even bothed to respond. Every doj is their own individual agency. Why . Why . You know what, you hit on just the right point. That is what is wrong with justice in this country right now. Justice no, it needs to have a blindfold. If its a clinton, they let them go. Tell the republicans to fix it because they wont even produce documents jason what do you mean . Donald trump has produced more than a million documents instead of holding off and saying, i can pull Executive Privilege. When Fast And Furious happened and we had dead americans, guess what . They gave 2,000 weapons out there. What did eric holder and the Department Of Justice producing any documents or very little in regard to the house and senate investigation. I got to find something to agree with you on would you rather have comey, who wouldnt prosecute false statements and lie to the fbi . Because that is what you are facing. Now youve got mueller, and mueller is doing his job. You cant have it both ways. Republicans cant. By the way, this is a republican investigation. Isnt it . Jason yes, but scott, you hit on it, got to wrap up, and got to let you gentlemen go. You hit on it. Each Department Of Justice is its own agency based on that is was fundamentally wrong. Justice should be blindfolded they have discretion, though. Jason that discretion has
been tainted with politics. Gentlemen, i have to go. I really do appreciate it. President trump is hitting back at the abolish i. C. E. Movement and hitting back hard. A full report next. Ent and hitt with uncontrolled moderatetosevere eczema, or atopic dermatitis, you never know how your skin will look. And it can feel like No Matter What you do, youre itching all the time. But even though you see and feel your eczema on the surface of your skin, an overly sensitive Immune System deep within your skin might actually be causing your eczema. So help heal your skin from within. With dupixent. Dupixent is not a steroid, and it continuously treats your eczema even when you cant see it. At 16 weeks, more than 1 in 3 patients saw clear or almost clear skin, and patients saw a significant reduction in itch. Do not use if you are allergic to dupixent. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems, including eye pain or changes in vision. If you have asthma,
and are taking Asthma Medicines do not change or stop your Asthma Medicine without talking to your doctor. Help heal your skin from within. Ask your Eczema Specialist about dupixent. From horrible people and horrible, horrible events and crimes. Jason joining me now for debate is National BorderPatrol Council president brandon judd and democratic strategist jose aristimundo. Jose, i appreciate you and brandon being with us. I got to ask you, to the president Do The Right Thing today honoring those federal employees, the i. C. E. And Border Patrol agents . Jason, there are currently over 500 children who are separated from their parents because of the policies of this administration let me finish jason no, jose, i want you to answer the question that i asked, not what you want to go off and talk about. The question is, its a simple one. The president i got a simple answer but you gotta let me answer the question. If you interrupt me, i cant speak. Let me finish. I will interrupt you. Did the president Do The Right Thing . He did not do the right
thing, jason. Jason by honoring i. C. E. And Border Patrol agents . Absolutely he did not Do The Right Thing. We should be looking for things to reunite these children. We know that i. C. E. Agents right now are not using its resources the way its supposed to by enacting this senseless and antiimmigrant zerotolerance policy. Jason wait, wait, wait. Timeout. Jose, this is an important point. Dont say that we are antiimmigrant. We are antiillegal immigrant. Dont leave the word illegal out of the statement. Undocumented, jason. Its undocumented. Jason its again