This is a rush transcript from "Justice," June 5, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JEANINE PIRRO, FOX NEWS HOST: Hello and welcome to JUSTICE. I'm Judge Jeanine Pirro. Thanks so much for being with us tonight.

Let's get right to my open.

The big lie started almost as soon as the virus hit. It was a virus that simply jumped from animal to human. We now know Dr. Anthony Fauci, the alleged prince of all things COVID knew of the whispers, but did everything he could to deny that the virus was engineered to infect and kill humans.

And so for 15 months, we were sold the big lie. The one that killed more than half a million Americans, shut down our economy, divided our country. Fauci knew different and proceeded on his deception tour to keep the secret from being uncovered, literally putting America last and exposing her to China as vulnerable, gullible and weak.

This week's June 2021 demand by Fauci that China now release medical records of Wuhan lab workers who fell ill in November 2019 is not only too little too late, it's laughable.

The puzzle became clearer as the Fauci e-mails were exposed this week. We learned that in spite of lies viewed by W.H.O. leader, Tedros, an Ethiopian biologist, puppet, and appointee of the CCP that the virus was not even transmissible human to human. That was a lie.

But why say that when selling it would only cause the virus to spread faster? Fauci even had a direct line of communication with Chinese health officials from early on in the pandemic. They were so close that Fauci told the Chinese C.D.C. Director that they would get through this together.

Curious, the United States has not had access to the Wuhan lab, and yet Prince Fauci is there in black and white assuaging their guilt and anxiety. Why would our agent tell the principal of another country, the Chinese Communist Party, that we will get through this together? What's with the together?

This virus came from China and may very well have been engineered to infect humans. How about for once, Fauci, you stop being a celebrity and be straight with the American people?

In truth, it was China's refusal to provide data that caused so many to suspect that natural jump from animal to human was not true. Now, why would Fauci cover for China? And why for 15 months would Fauci proceed on the theory that the virus simply jumped from bat to human when China refused to give us the data to confirm whether that's even true.

In fact, in April, 2020, Fauci outright dismissed the lab leak theory, also known as gain-of-function where a virus is engineered to infect humans. This, he did at a press conference.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: A group of highly qualified evolutionary virologist looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve and the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to human.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: After that presser, Fauci was thanked by e-mail by the EcoHealth Alliance President. Remember that. This was a nonprofit who actually gave money to the Wuhan lab that our National Institute of Health gave them.

Our grant partially funded research involving bat specimen, and Fauci was so tight with the Chinese that he continued to apologize for them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FAUCI: I think it is quite far-fetched that the Chinese deliberately engineered something so that they could kill themselves as well as other people. I think that's a bit far out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: Really? Who do you think you're kidding? Wuhan was closed off from China, yet that CCP allowed travel of Wuhan infected persons out of Wuhan to Europe and America. But absolutely no travel from Wuhan into China proper that might affect Chinese citizens.

The CCP's actions for truth to the lie that Fauci has been spreading on the Chinese Communist Party behalf that they would never engineer something that could kill themselves.

In the exposed e-mails, Fauci received warnings that the virus may have been engineered and man-made early on in the outbreak. He was specifically told that COVID looked engineered, yet he dismissed it. Why would Fauci go so far to dismiss information he knew to be more than possible, in fact, probable giving money to the Wuhan lab indirectly from the N.I.H.?

But the biggest and the most incriminating question of all is what I asked last week, and that is, how is it that Fauci predicted in 2017 that President Trump would face a pandemic? If he predicted this, why didn't he develop a responsible method for this virus four years ago?

He explicitly said President Donald Trump would face a crisis and pandemic unlike anything we've ever seen. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FAUCI: There is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases, both chronic infectious diseases in the sense of already ongoing disease, and we have certainly a large burden of that, but also there will be a surprise outbreak.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: That comments alone "surprise outbreak" should not only frighten you, but convince you that with his unique ability to predict a future pandemic and predict it during President Donald Trump's term and with all the power and all the money of the United States government, as well as his ability to befriend seven Presidents and be the highest paid employee of the Federal government -- how is it that Fauci was not ready to protect the American public when he knew a threat was coming?

And how did he know this? Did Fauci tell any of this to President Trump? Did Fauci tell President Trump anything about why the Obama administration started funding the Wuhan Virology Institute in 2014?

What did Fauci know about ginning up the animal virus sufficient to make it infect humans?

Part of Fauci's job was to give away taxpayer money through the National Institutes of Health. Most of us don't know that our tax dollars are being used to fund labs outside of the United States. It's akin to money laundering, clearly legal, where the N.I.H. will fund a not for profit, who then gives money to labs for questionable purposes.

By doing so, they have a disclaimer, as well as no oversight requirement issues.

On the basis of the indirect N.I.H. funding to the Wuhan lab, the question remains: why didn't Fauci affirmatively act to determine whether the virus was re-engineered for a bio warfare purpose? His pooh-pooing of the idea that a virus had to be engineered to infect humans is now not only contradicted, but shows that he affirmatively acted to prohibit our knowledge of such.

Fauci should have engaged the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, which is a United States Department of Defense lab equipped to study highly hazardous viruses. But no, instead, he affirmatively acted to prohibit knowledge of such so that the United States was unable to address the eruption.

He had a fiduciary responsibility to institute methods to protect and arrest the spread of the virus. Why wouldn't he protect American interests? All he needed to say was: tell me what's going on to his friends in the Chinese Communist Party, as well as the World Health Organization.

They both received our money, but he was too busy giving money to not for profits, who then gave money to the Chinese.

Dr. Fauci, you work for the United States government. In fact, you've become a fabulously wealthy public servant allowed to sit on the scientific Board of global grant challenges of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. But we have our own U.S. Army Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Why would you not warn and equip them with the knowledge you garnered so that we could have a strategy?

If you have a known pathogen, then we're already steps ahead with the vaccine and antiviral strategies.

In 40 years, you've made millions as a government employee. In 40 years, you've given billions in budget allocations. In 40 years, you've controlled multibillion dollar budgets.

Knowing what was going on at the Wuhan lab, funded in part by money through our Institute of National Health, why didn't you prepare our country for the pathogen that we could respond more quickly to?

You predicted a prophetic disastrous outbreak. You convinced the President against his better judgment to shut down the economy, but nothing -- nothing you did reduced the number of people who died in this country. We have the same death rate as other countries, in fact, the highest in the world.

You have the most equipped government in the world. You predicted in 2017 that this would happen and what did you do? You did nothing to prepare.

Fauci, you are not the knowing Prince of all things COVID. You are an American embarrassment.

And that's why open.

Let me know what you think on my Facebook and Twitter #JudgeJeanine.

Here with a reaction to my open and much more in this developing story is a man who has done his own research and investigation, Senator Ron Johnson, who joins me now. Good evening, Senator. Thank you so much for being with us. I know you have the busy schedule. You heard my open. Am I wrong?

SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-WI): Well, Judge, there is no doubt about it. Dr. Fauci has an awful lot of explaining to do, and you're describing the corruption of the grant writing process, the billions of dollars that we -- you know, American taxpayers hand over to the Federal government and then people like Dr. Fauci in the agencies, they'll sprinkle this money, who knows where.

Right now, in the in the United States Senate, we're debating a bill, a group of Republican senators stopped the passage of that bill last Thursday, but if we don't have a public uprising prior to Monday or Tuesday of next week, we're going to allocate another quarter of a trillion dollars of money we don't have the National Science Foundation, to make grants.

You know let's face it, the National Science Foundation, a lot of those grants have just been the butt end of so many jokes, Tom Coburn's waste book, and we have Republican senators joining Chuck Schumer's priority here. It's supposed to be an anti-China bill. I have my doubts that it was going to do anything that's going to be effectively countering China, but it's a quarter of a trillion dollars of more grant writing authority for the Federal government. On the heels of what we're just hearing with Dr. Fauci's agency. It's madness.

PIRRO: Well, you know, it is madness. You know, a quarter of a trillion, I mean, it's crazy. But the idea that they would give -- the N.I.H. give to a not for profit, so that that not for profit could then give to the Wuhan lab or whatever in China for re-engineering for bio chemical purposes, whatever the purpose might be and then they have deniability, complete deniability, no oversight requirement, no requirement to monitor what's going on, and no requirements and tell us what's going on.

But Senator, you have written a letter to Dr. Fauci, which I would love to have read as an open, I think, it's an open in itself and kudos to you for the fight that you've been engaged in for the last six months in terms of what Fauci has been doing. But you basically say, you appear to be dismissive of the idea that the virus was re-engineered to infect humans.

And you asked for what evidence he made that original decision and why all of a sudden now, after he was so certain that it jumped automatically from animal to human, he is somewhat hesitating now. What are your thoughts about what he knew and when he knew it?

JOHNSON: Well, since we wrote that letter, we've seen this treasure trove of e-mails that have an awful lot of redactions. So the first thing we need is we need all those e-mails un-redacted. We need to be able to review these things so we see exactly what was going on behind the scenes, but it sure looks like he was engaging in an immediate cover-up because he knew what he had been doing for years in terms of gain of function research, what he had been funding.

And you know, maybe he has got some plausible deniability in terms of exactly what funds were transferred from EcoHealth Alliance to the Wuhan lab, but he was fully aware that Dr. Shi, the researcher from the Wuhan lab was working with Dr. Ralph Baric from University of North Carolina Chapel Hills on this type of research.

And of course, Dr. Fauci has been very lawyerly in his answers to questions for example to Senator Paul, so what we're trying to do with our letters, is just ask the basic questions that, you know, how did he -- you know, what evidence did he base his initial assessment on? What caused his opinion to all of a sudden shift? Now, we want to have specific answers to specific questions.

Like you said at the beginning, he's got a lot of explaining to do.

PIRRO: Well, I think Senator Johnson that cover up is that term is just the beginning and it is very disappointing, but it's about time the American people understood what's going on and Senator Johnson, I can't thank you enough for all the work you've done, not just for coming on JUSTICE, but for everything you've done.

You are truly to be admired. Thank you for being with us tonight.

JOHNSON: You keep up the good work, too. Take care.

PIRRO: Thank you. And still ahead, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, Tomi Lahren, and Leo Terrell and Charlie Kirk, but next, did Dr. Fauci lie to Congress. Nobody fought harder to find the truth than Congressman Jim Jordan and he is next. Don't go anywhere.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): You don't think Americans liberties have been threatened in the last year, Dr. Fauci? They've been assaulted, their liberties have.

FAUCI: I don't look at this as a liberty thing, Congressman Jordan.

JORDAN: Well, that's obvious.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: That's Congressman Jim Jordan demanding answers from the nation's top infectious disease specialist, Anthony Fauci, in an explosive exchange back in April.

Now, as the new e-mails and information continue to be uncovered and exposed, we can't help but think more Members of Congress should have been fighting just as hard for the truth.

Congressman Jim Jordan joins me now with reaction to it all. All right, Congressman, thanks so much for being with us this evening.

JORDAN: You bet. Good to be with you.

PIRRO: You know, I've got to tell you, you know, so many people say to me, you know, with such an overwhelming scenario, a pandemic, a global pandemic, why did we rely on one person? Why didn't we have a Manhattan- style setup where we had professionals who got together and went back and forth? Why is this one guy the emperor of all things COVID?

JORDAN: Yes, no kidding. I think it's because the press made him that individual and you know, it was like Reverend Fauci, St. Fauci, call him whatever you want, like he could do no wrong and "Time" made him Person of the Century or something, you know, it just -- when the press does that, those people get attention and they -- you know, and of course, Dr. Fauci seemed to like it all.

But obviously now while learning some things that he said may not be as accurate as they seemed or he wanted us to believe they were when he said them.

PIRRO: All right, specifically, we're talking about gain of function, which is the ginning up of an animal -- a virus to go through a bunch of petri dishes or sequences so that they can infect humans.

Why was he so against it in the beginning when he was constantly being bombarded with information that that was just as possible and never got information from China, which would have confirmed that it jumped from human to species?

JORDAN: Yes, I mean, look --

PIRRO: From animal to humans.

JORDAN: I think there are a couple of key things. Yes, I think there are a couple of key things we need to understand. Look, we don't know if the origin of this virus was from the lab, but it sure seems to be and the evidence seems to point in that direction.

We don't know if this lab was actually doing gain-of-function research. Dr. Fauci says they weren't, but lots of other doctors say, yes, that's what was going on there. That's why we need Dr. Fauci and others to come in front of the Select Committee on Coronavirus, the Democrats will have them, if Democrats will look into this, come in front of our committee and answer some tough questions.

What we do know is Dr. Fauci approved $3 million going to EcoHealth and then EcoHealth sent some of that money to this lab in Wuhan, China. And Dr. Fauci knew all that when he approved the taxpayer money of American citizens going to this lab.

It sort of raises the obvious question, why are we sending money to a lab in China in the first place? Don't we have labs, great labs and great work here that we can do it right here in United States?

So those are the kinds of questions we need answers to. But frankly, we need Democrats in the Congress who are willing to actually do the investigation and to date, they are not willing to do so because we've asked for it, and so far, they've not taken us up on our request.

PIRRO: Why? But why do you think that Fauci was so committed to not even making that possible? Why was it in his interest that that not be out there? He could have said, look, I still don't know whether it's animal to human because China won't give us the data. Maybe it was this. There is bio warfare stuff going on all over the world and they were funding it indirectly.

JORDAN: Right. But we don't know. We don't know for sure, Judge. But we do know that as you as you rightly point out, he downplayed it last year. He downplayed the idea that it could have originated in the lab.

Now, it is interesting, he downplayed that after he had given the $3 million to Mr. Daszak at EcoHealth after Mr. Daszak had given some of that money to the Wuhan lab, and after Mr. Daszak -- after Dr. Fauci downplays it, he gets an e-mail from Mr. Daszak that says, oh, thank you for saying what you did.

So again, we don't know. But it all seems like too cozy of a relationship between these folks who are again, using our tax dollars in the way that it was used. We don't know the answers to all those specific questions, but that's why we need an investigation. That's why I want Dr. Fauci in front of our committee, this Peter Daszak guy in front of our committee, and that's why I think also Chris Hassel, the individual who oversees this Board, who is Chairman of this Board that's supposed to review any, quote, "gain-of-function research grants."

PIRRO: You know what it's called, Congressman, it's called a circumstantial case and it is slowly and quietly building up. Congressman Jim Jordan, we always love having you on JUSTICE. Thanks so much.

JORDAN: You bet. Thank you, Judge.

PIRRO: All right, and just ahead. We all know Big Tech makes billions off of you and your information, but now, new allegations against one tech giant in the spy game they are accused of will blow your mind.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich is next with the details you need to hear.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JACKIE IBANEZ, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CORRESPONDENT: Welcome to "FOX News Live." I'm Jackie Ibanez on this Saturday night.

G-7 Finance Ministers agreed to back a global minimum tax of at least 15 percent on multinational companies, a move to discourage American companies from booking earnings abroad.

The Ministers also reaching a historic agreement on taxing multinational companies. The agreement will ensure that tech giants like Amazon and Facebook will pay more tax where they generate sales.

Meanwhile, an open casket memorial service today in California for six-year old Aiden Leos. He was fatally shot in a road rage incident little over two weeks ago. The young boy's mother honoring her son in a very emotional tribute saying the joy he brought into their lives was insurmountable.

A reward leading to the arrest of a suspect has grown out of $500,000.00.

I'm Jackie Ibanez. Now back to JUSTICE WITH JUDGE JEANINE.

PIRRO: Last May, Arizona sued Google saying that the tech giant continued to track their users' locations even if they had opted out of sending them that information. Just recently, the lawsuit uncovered that even Google employees voiced concerns over this morally bankrupt practice.

How has Google responded? In a statement to FOX News, quote: "The Attorney General and our competitors driving this lawsuit have gone out of their way to mischaracterize our services. We have always built privacy features into our products and provided robust controls for location data. We look forward to setting the record straight."

Here to share his side of the story and then side of the record straight, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. All right, good evening Attorney General, now, they say they're going to set the record straight. How about you tell us how did this lawsuit start? And what is it that you're objecting to?

MARK BRNOVICH, ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Judge, it's as simple as this, we allege that Google is violating our Consumer Protection Act by basically engaging in unfair practices and deceiving Arizona consumers. But really, this is not just about Arizona consumers.

What we've uncovered is Google systematically is collecting as much information about you and everyone else in this country without you having the ability to essentially opt out. You refer to the e-mails and some of the notices or some of the stuff we've gotten in the discovery.

Internally, Google employees themselves are talking about the fact that they don't want this ending up in the front page of "The New York Times" and they don't want the public knowing about what they're doing. And the reality is, they can issue those statements all they want, but what they've done is they've hired a phalanx of lawyers and lobbyists to push back and undermine us.

And quite frankly, our lawsuit is not even completely unsealed yet, Judge, because they don't want this information getting public. So we've been able to release some information and un-redact some parts of our lawsuit, but there is still more out there.

PIRRO: But what are what are they doing? What are they doing? What do they do?

BRNOVICH: Essentially, essentially, every time you are using your phone, they are tracking everything you're doing. They're collecting every amount of information. They essentially know more about where you've been than your spouse does, and more about where you're going than a travel agent.

And what I mean by that is that they collect massive amounts of information through essentially an advertising company, most of the revenues generate about $135 billion in 2019 alone, through advertising. And what they do is they've kind of weaponized that so they collect as much information about you as possible, where you're going, how long are you in the shoe store, whether you're going to a doctor, what you're searching for online, and then they're able to use that in order to, you know, send you advertising or even manipulate search results.

And so that's part of the problem, is that --

PIRRO: Let me just jump in here. I wonder how many people object to the fact like, I'm looking for boots, they're going to send me boots. But the idea of the location of where you've been, where you're going, then why does the Federal government have to, you know, get a court order to get this information if Google has it? What do they do with this information?

BRNOVICH: Well, Judge, once again, Judge, excellent point. You know as a Judge, me as a prosecutor, if I want to get a search warrant or to track someone's location, monitor their communications on their phone, I would have to get a warrant and get a Judge to approve that. Google doesn't.

Essentially what they argue is by -- when you agree to the Terms and Conditions, you're agreeing to sharing all of this information. I do believe that we all have dignity as human beings. I believe in a right to privacy and if Google wants to collect all this information and use it and even manipulate with you, they should tell you that's what we're doing.

We know that of --

PIRRO: But is it easy to opt out? The problem is --

BRNOVICH: It is not.

PIRRO: How easy is it to opt out?

BRNOVICH: It's almost impossible. We know that even -- this is part of our lawsuit -- even when people have opted out of location services, Google is still tracking you. That's what the internal documents show.

So if you have apps, if you have an Android phone, it doesn't matter. You may think you're opting out and you're not. And we also know there's some research that shows that it basically require a university level education, and about 75 minutes just to go through the terms and conditions, just to read them, to understand them.

And so when people think they're opting out, they're not and that's the problem. They are making misrepresentations to consumers.

PIRRO: Well, I think the problem is everybody feels, if they do it, I do it, and it really is the advent of Big Tech controlling our life. Just another piece of it. It's all coming together.

Attorney General Mark Brnovich, we always love having you on JUSTICE. Thanks so much for being with us.

BRNOVICH: Thanks, Judge.

PIRRO: And next, why is Dr. Fauci held on such a high pedestal by celebrities and the mainstream media? Leo Terrell and Tomi Lahren join me next with their opinions.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JULIA ROBERTS, ACTRESS: How rad that we have maybe the coolest man on the planet right now, and there's the room. This is intense, isn't it? Does anybody else -- oh --

FAUCI: Hello.

ROBERTS: Oh, you've been this true north, I think for a lot of people and it's so deeply, deeply appreciated. Golly, you're really like my personal hero right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: Oh my. That was quite the Fauci flashback of actress Julia Roberts fawning over the Prince of COVID in an interview a few months ago, even calling him her personal hero. So will celebrities and the media continue their infatuation with Dr. Fauci despite the facts?

Here with reaction, FOX Nation host, Tomi Lahren, and FOX News contributor, Leo Terrell.

Now, before I go, I think I'm going to start with you, Leo, I think last time, I started with Tomi, but I've got to tell you, I don't expect a lot from someone who reads what other people write for a living and then just says what they already said. So Leo, hit it. I'm disgusted, are you?

LEO TERRELL, FOX NEWS CHANNEL CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I am totally disgusted. I heard your opening statement. And Julia Robert should hide.

Look, Dr. Fauci has been exposed, Judge, as far as being a Little Napoleon. He has lost the trust of the American people. Those e-mails have exposed him and what has actually happened is now, we know that he has been conflicted.

His number one obligation was to America, but apparently his number one obligation was to China and to write a book deal and to make sure he kept President Trump in the dark.

Dr. Fauci's 15 minutes of fame, long over. He should no longer be in charge. He should be removed immediately. But he is being used by the Democrats as an operative to push their program to try to keep us dependent and scared that the COVID-19 still exists. It does not exist.

PIRRO: Okay. All right, Tomi, what do you say to this -- first of all, I mean, Julia Roberts and she's got to be a bright woman. She is a very wealthy woman. I mean, do any of these people in Hollywood, I mean, really try to figure out what the truth is or do they just follow the narrative of what people say on the left?

TOMI LAHREN, FOX NATION HOST: Listen, the golden rule should be anything that a Hollywood elite says we should do the exact opposite because everybody that they fawn over turns out to be horrible.

It was Obama, of course, Joe Biden, Andrew Cuomo, they were fawning over him and his COVID response, too, you know, the nursing home grim reaper that is Andrew Cuomo. And of course, they were fawning over Fauci. was really anybody that mounted a challenge or just a dislike in general to Donald Trump, they fawn over, but everything they do, they get wrong.

That's why as you said, we should just leave them to repeating lines, dancing, singing, playing sports, maybe stay out of politics, maybe stay out of health. You know, we're told time and time again to listen to the experts. I don't think anybody in Hollywood is a real expert, and it turns out those of us that were labeled conspiracy theorists for talking about Fauci and others, it turns out, we ended up being right all along.

So maybe, it is we, conservatives that have gotten it right and they have a hard pill they're going to have to swallow in admitting that one.

PIRRO: you know, I have to tell you, there's a part of me that wants to ask, Leo, why is it that we listen to them? And then the other part of me comes back and says, Jeanine, why do you talk about them? Answer that. That's a conflict.

TERRELL: Well, I'll tell you, right now. We want to believe in people who we unfortunately idolize. We want to believe that they're telling us the truth.

We believe that they have a focus, a medium that would rely on giving us the truth, and then we get destroyed, we get hurt. We get angry when we find out that they are not telling us the truth, that they're lying, and that Dr. Fauci, what he has done, it has been horrific as far as his inconsistent statements.

And Julia Roberts, she should be totally embarrassed. She should never utter the word "Dr. Fauci" again, because everybody's going to play that video tape where she just drooled over him. It's embarrassing, but it's less than the American public in confidence with these people.

PIRRO: But you know, Tomi, do you think she really cares?

LAHREN: Well, no. But listen, if all of these infringements and the lockdowns and shutdowns, if they actually impacted the Hollywood elite, I don't think that they would have been so in line with it. But it's pretty easy to be on what was essentially soft house arrest when you live in mansions, when you're still able to travel, when you're able to get the best of healthcare, when you're not out of a job, where you're not sitting there wondering if your business is going to be closed.

It's pretty easy to idolize someone like Fauci and others that were committed to control and committed to closing down our economy. It's us little people that were so frustrated with it, and it's us little people who are so angry now because we're the ones that took a loss and millions of Americans took a loss because of the instruction of this man.

They never lost anything. They're still living the same life they always live, so it's easy for them to applaud and to gush over people like Fauci and others.

PIRRO: All right, Leo and Tommy are sticking with us. Next, California Governor Gavin Newsom yucks it up with celebrities, while ignoring the real problems facing his state. We have the tape, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, TALKS SHOW HOST: Tonight, we are joined by -- what is your name, sir?

GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): My name is Gavin.

KIMMEL: Hi, Gavin. How are you?

[CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

KIMMEL: Thanks for being us. Great to have you here.

NEWSOM: It's great to be here.

KIMMEL: What is it -- what do you do for a living, Gavin?

NEWSOM: I hate to admit this, in politics, Jimmy.

KIMMEL: You're in politics.

NEWSOM: Yes, in politics.

KIMMEL: Really? What do you do in politics?

NEWSOM: I'm a Governor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: Hopefully not for long. That was California Governor Gavin Newsom, finding time in his day to chat with Jimmy Kimmel, while his state and its residents continue to suffer under his weak leadership.

Leo and Tomi are back to react. Okay, Leo, I'm going to go to you. I mean, here's the Governor. They're recalling him, but he's got time to go to Hollywood and sit there with Jimmy Kimmel and have a few laughs. What do you think?

TERRELL: Well, I'll say two things, Judge, one, the worst governors in this country are Democrats and two, Democratic politicians are not funny. This is another situation of left-wing progressive Democrats and Hollywood working together to keep us down, to keep us dependent on the government.

You know, Judge, in this state, the homeless issue, the failure of kids being able to go back to school, trying to keep us down with the pandemic scare -- and that's what it is. The pandemic epidemic is over, we should be allowed to open up this economy. But he's still got us hunkered down.

We've got to get rid of Gavin Newson. We have to get rid of him immediately, to send a message to California and other blue states that bad Democratic governors who ignore the people have to be replaced and removed from office.

PIRRO: You know, Tomi, I was in California during the pandemic and I must tell you, it was frightening. I mean, I've spent months there living there doing different things, and I'm just stunned. It's such a beautiful state and how everybody is locked down. No one is allowed to go out. It's crazy. It's dystopian.

LAHREN: Yes, people are not free here, and I'm actually back in California. I fled this state about a year and a half ago to go to the Great State of Tennessee, but I'm back now and I'll tell you, walking through Venice yesterday, I'm a little confused why the state is spending $116.5 million on a vaccine lottery complete with gift cards and 50K Friday giveaways to push the vaccine propaganda and they're not dealing with the filth and the mess that I'm seeing all over California.

Santa Monica, Venice, people are paying incredibly high amounts of money to live in these places. It smells like pee. It smells like worse than pee. You've got needles around. You've got trash. You've got this state that is supposedly an environmental state with absolute trash and filth like I've never seen before.

It's only gotten worse, so I would say to Governor greasy Gavin Newsom, stop hanging out with Jimmy Kimmel, maybe go to Venice, where I was, see the failed leadership that you've created in the state and understand why you will be recalled and why you will be replaced.

And this is a message like Leo said, to all the Democratic governors, you are replaceable, and you are not untouchable.

PIRRO: Oh, there's no question. And Leo, you know, when you look at another Democrat, Governor Whitmer from Michigan, I mean, that one has decided that what she wants to do is she wants to be able to continue to give insurance to people who are actually returning to work. I mean, they go to work, but she still wants to give them unemployment insurance. I mean, hit it. Go ahead, Leo.

TERRELL: The fact pattern, Judge, bad governor happens to be Democrat, more Federal dependency. How in the world are you going to motivate people to go to work when you're paying them to stay at home? It's a mixed message.

But yet, the Democrats, Judge, wants to keep people dependent on taxpayer dollars, my taxpayer dollars, your dollars, to keep them at home and keep them voting Democrat. If you live in this country, you want to work hard. If I use Joe Biden's phrase, "a job is dignity." Apparently, the democrats don't believe in dignity and respect in working.

PIRRO: Yes, all right, Tomi -- and Whitmer, what do you think's going to happen to her?

LAHREN: Well, hey, listen, I think this is exactly her plan is that she thinks if she keeps giving people that free money, incentivizing them to only go back to work part time, she thinks that that's going to save her because that's what Democrats think. They think that giving away free things is what people want in this country.

They think the dependence on government is the almighty, and that's what's going to save her from having the same fate as someone like Gavin Newsom, but she is so wrong.

And again, to sit back in that state and watch the tyranny and the infringements and now you just want to hand out money and incentivize people to be lazy? That is not the American Dream. That's not the American way. People in Michigan understand that.

PIRRO: Well, I know they understand it because she locked them down then doubled down on the lockdown. So I don't think she's there for long.

In any event, Leo and Tomi, thanks so much. We love having you on JUSTICE.

And next you won't believe the Dems new plan to deal with surging violent crime in the cities. They actually have a plan. Let me give you a hint, it doesn't involve jail. Charlie Kirk joins me to react.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PIRRO: Crime rates continue to soar in Dem-run cities across the country, but don't worry, AOC as a plan. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): If we want to reduce violent crime, if we want to reduce the number of people in our jails, the answer is to stop building more of them, it is the support communities, not throw them away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PIRRO: Wow. So let's stop jailing criminals so they can continue to murder and violently attack innocent people whenever they want. Unbelievable.

Turning Point U.S.A. founder, Charlie Kirk joins me now with the reaction. All right, good evening, Charlie. I mean, you know, if we just start building the jail, we will save money, and then and then crime will be down. She believes that it has to do with some public policy, we have to go deep down into public policy and find out what people are concerned about.

I like shoes, let me go, you know, that's my policy -- public policy issue. I'll go rob a shoe store.

CHARLIE KIRK, FOUNDER, TURNING POINT U.S.A.: You know, what's so funny about this, Judge, and thanks for having me on -- is that this is exactly what they teach in colleges and universities.

AOC views this issue of crime as not as a problem of the criminals, but that society must be rearranged. I think she thinks that human nature is perfectly fine. It's not a matter of that people are stealing or rioting or raping at record numbers in New York City. The issue is society.

The fact is that we have prisons at all, like why would we ever penalize anyone for doing anything wrong? And what she eventually gets at obviously is a wish to abolish private property. But this is really something, Judge, that goes down to the fundamental core of the radical nature of the Democratic Party.

They think that our entire system of markets, private ownership, freedom of speech, must be completely rearranged if not destroyed altogether. And then she tries to say that it will make communities safer by getting rid of jails and prisons. Well, maybe someone should tell her jails and prisons were built to actually keep communities safe.

And you know, better than when else, Judge, some people have done something so unspeakably evil they should never see the light of day again.

PIRRO: Well, you know, you don't apologize when people commit a crime. They apologize. We don't apologize for punishing them, you know, for not following the laws that society has created. But where is she getting this from? I mean, does she -- do you think she believes this stuff?

KIRK: I do. And it's hard to believe, but a lot of university professors are pushing this forward. This is something we're obviously dealing with at Turning Point U.S.A. where they think that if anyone does anything wrong, it's not that you did that. No, no, it's not that Charlie Manson or it's not that Eric Rudolph actually committed these awful crimes. No, it was that society was not properly arranged to the liking of the professor philosopher kings to condition them to not want to do violence and do evil.

We know, Judge, because we have commonsense or practical wisdom that human beings are always going to do things that are in our nature are evil, and that we need to have systems to hopefully teach right from wrong and hold those people accountable.

PIRRO: Absolutely.

KIRK: And you said it best, it is not the us that we need to apologize, they need to apologize if they commit a crime against society.

PIRRO: You've got it. Charlie Kirk, thanks so much for being with us. And thank you for watching.

Don't forget to set your DVR so you never miss a show.

And there's a special sale over a judgejeanine.store. Get a bundle of three of my latest "New York Times" bestsellers for $50.00 as well as new products that have become available.

Don't forget to check me out at cameo.com/judgejeanine.

Thanks so much for watching. I'm Jeanine Pirro advocating for truth, justice and the American way. See you next Saturday night.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, 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 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.