This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," May 10, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JASON CHAFFETZ, HOST: Welcome to the special edition of “Hannity: Justice in America.” I'm Jason Chaffetz, in tonight for Sean.

For the hour, we'll highlight the very worse, bad actors in the deep state that who be held accountable. And we'll start with the fired FBI Director James Comey.

Last night, the unemployed, hyper-partisan former bureaucrat made yet another appearance on CNN, where he continued to impugn the character of the president and float baseless conspiracy theories about Trump and Russia. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN MODERATOR: Do you think the Russians have leverage over President Trump?

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I don't know the answer to that.

COOPER: Do you think it's possible?

COMEY: Yes.

I think the Trump presidency risks sending a message that leadership doesn't have to have a moral component, that it's not important in this country for a leader to have external ethical reference points.

COOPER: Explain how you believe the president of the United States is eating people's souls and how that -- how that process takes place.

COMEY: Yes, it doesn't make me happy to write that. But it's what I believe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Comey is now all but rooting for President Trump to be impeached and locked up for phantom obstruction of justice charges. But in reality, it's Comey who could be in serious legal jeopardy. After all, it was Comey who leaked sensitive government documents after he was fired. It was Comey who first signed off on the Carter Page FISA application based on the dirty dossier. And it was Comey who was the very center of the deep state's coordinated effort to spy on the Trump campaign.

But according to Mr. Comey, using undercover informants to secretly spy on campaign officials in the height of an election is totally normal. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Sending an investigator undercover to meet with somebody who is connected to the campaign, they claimed he was later on just a coffee boy. That is an extreme step. No?

COMEY: No. It's a reasonable -- that was the guy, Papadopoulos, who was the suggest of the information we got from the Australians that he had talked to the Russians.

COOPER: Did you sign off on the investigator going?

COMEY: I don't remember talking about that particular step of my team. I knew they were trying to see if they could check it out. That is a totally normal step.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: No, it's not.

Comey wants you to believe that the American government spying on its own citizens during a presidential election is totally normal and reasonable. According to the holier-than-thou Comey, he can do no wrong. Instead, Comey believes that anybody who works with or supports the president is a morally weak, degenerate. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: I think people like that, like Rod Rosenstein, who are people of accomplishment, but not real, sterling character, strong character, find themselves trapped and then they start telling themselves a story to justify they are being trapped, which is yes, he is awful. But the country needs me.

The Republicans are doing this in Congress now. Yes, it's awful, but if I speak, I'll get defeated. And this nation needs me here right now.

And in the process he has eaten their soul. They are lost.

COOPER: So, Rod Rosenstein, you are saying, is a person not of strong character.

COMEY: Yes, I don't think he is. Accomplished (ph) and very bright, but he's not strong enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: (AUDIO GAP) awfully distressed for someone who claims to have done nothing wrong.

Joining us now is Fox News contributor, former state and the federal prosecutor and former congressman, Trey Gowdy. I had the pleasure of serving with Mr. Gowdy in the Congress.

Trey, thank you so much for being here.

Mr. Comey had another town hall. I think he had more town halls than you did as a member of Congress for eight years.

You know, I got a problem when you have like Comey and Clapper and Brennan, they're all out here having the town halls. They had the mantle of, you know, doing intelligence type of work and then they go to talk to the American people as if they know something that the rest of us don't know. But what is your take on the latest comments from Mr. Comey?

TREY GOWDY, CONTRIBUTOR: St. James Comey, pretty much the same as any other interview. He is always right. He gets to write the moral script. If you deviate from that, if you're Rod Rosenstein, then you lack character. If you're somebody else, your soul has been eaten.

What I kept thinking back to, Jason, was when I asked Comey, how did the Russia investigation get started? Who started it? He didn't know it was Peter Strzok. He never read the initiation document.

Look, you and I served together for a long time. I defend law enforcement as vigorously as any member of Congress ever has, but that does not mean that there are not opportunities for oversight. Comey refuses to believe that any of these decisions should be looked at.

So he is always right. Everybody else is wrong. He and Clapper and Brennan are validating the concerns that other people, including the president, have had about the objectivity by their comments and their demeanor after they left their offices.

CHAFFETZ: Now, Director Comey is saying that, as regards to spying, he doesn't like the word spying but that's essentially what it is. He said it's totally normal to inject somebody into a political campaign and to go and investigate what's going on there. He said it was reasonable to do so.

What's your take on that?

GOWDY: Well, I use the word surveillance. I think they're synonyms. And law enforcement does do surveillance. But you have to do it legally. You have to do it according to policy. And most importantly, there has to be a factual predicate.

So, I'm sure that crackerjack reporter who hosted the town hall asked Jim Comey with specificity what was the factual predicate? If the FBI ran an informant in on George Papadopoulos, what was the factual predicate for doing so? Did the FBI provide the factual predicate if they didn't try to extract back from George Papadopoulos?

And how in the world did someone with a historical level of animus like Peter Strzok, how in the world did you pick him to lead an investigation in to someone he thought would be destabilizing for the republic? This is what you need to remember about James Comey, Jason, this is all you got to remember -- if Rod Rosenstein had not fired him, he would still be the FBI director. The guy who talks about souls being eaten and the guy who says everybody else looks character, he would still be on the Air Force jet, sipping wine, crossing the country had he not been fired.

So this paragon of virtue, James Comey, self-described paragon of virtue, would still be the FBI director, still working for an administration that he thinks is too good for impeachment had he not been fired.

CHAFFETZ: But Rod Rosenstein, I mean, if Director Comey made a snarky comment about Rod Rosenstein as he's going out the door, I have been highly critical of Rod Rosenstein along the way. I thought he had conflicts of interest and other questions I have had. But at the same time for Director Comey to make those kinds of comments as he -- since his last day of leaving, I thought that was just wrong.

GOWDY: He is always right, Jason, he is always right. He is authored the script of what is right and wrong. There are plenty of days I disagree with Rod. I never called for his impeachment. I never called for John Koskinen's impeachment.

Rod had a really tough job and I appreciate his service to the country, even on the days when I disagree with him. But to take a shot at somebody the week they leave public service and to do it with the moral arrogance --

CHAFFETZ: Yes.

GOWDY: -- that Comey does everything is one reason he is not very popular right now.

CHAFFETZ: Well, Director Comey was actually two years ago was the day that he was fired and I do think that was the right thing. And the Democrats conveniently forget how much they wanted to see him fired by the way he treated Clinton along the way.

But I got to ask you, Director Comey --

GOWDY: You mean those who didn't want him like criminally prosecuted?

CHAFFETZ: Right.

GOWDY: Remember, Harry Reid thought he committed a criminal investigation. And then they wanted him fired, and now, they want him canonized and put on Mount Rushmore.

CHAFFETZ: Yes. No, it's amazing.

Now, Director Comey is actually saying that he thinks that Donald Trump and the Trump family should actually still be indicted down the road. What did you take when you heard those comments?

GOWDY: Just how disappointed I am in any federal prosecutor, former federal prosecutor assigning a presumption of guilt to anyone.

You know, the president is not above the law. I heard Comey say that. But he is also not below the law. He is also not unentitled to presumption of innocence. He is also not unentitled to people following the rules and the policies when they investigate -- just because you're the president, just because you're powerful doesn't mean you treat people however you want to treat them.

If there is a factual predicate for the investigating anyone with the Trump campaign, two points, Jason: number one, tell us what it is. And number two, acknowledge that Trump himself told you Director Comey, if anyone with my campaign was involved Russia, I want you to investigate it. I want you to find out.

That is not what a guilty person says.

CHAFFETZ: No. It's exactly right.

And the fundamental problem I have is, when somebody becomes the nominee for the presidency of the United States, we give them Secret Service protection, we give them CIA briefings. And if there is somewhere, somehow maybe a problem in the campaign, they had a duty and an obligation to tell that nominee that you may have somebody who might be a mole in that, and not just use that as some excuse.

But it started way before them. And that's why this Michael Horowitz report is so important.

I got to ask you two other quick questions and we only have a minute or so.

Real quickly, the national media, you dealt with them. I dealt with them. But the way they are portraying the story and they're rolling it out, is that fair and balanced? Is that the way it always goes down?

GOWDY: Jason, you and I have discussed before, the biggest disappointment in my eight years in Congress is how biased the D.C. media is. Whether it's "The Post", "The Times", "Politico", "The Hill", they never met a Republican investigation that should have ever started. They never met Democrat investigation that should ever end.

The way they view the Holder contempt versus the Barr contempt, the way they view Trump talking about the investigation with Obama. Remember he pre-cleared the IRS. It was absolutely not a smidgeon of corruption. He pre-cleared Hillary Clinton.

There's just a double standard. So I realize Congress isn't popular, but neither is the media. And they may want to figure out why that is.

CHAFFETZ: And the last thing I got to ask you about is Jerry Nadler holding contempt, you know, on our attorney general. I got to tell you, I -- that did not sit well from my perspective. But what was your take?

GOWDY: Only that there must be two Jerry Nadlers, because the old Jerry Nadler opposed contempt on Eric Holder. Remember, he walked out of the House because he was in a violent protest of the fact that Attorney General Holder would not produce documents. And then the duplicity of thinking the Starr report should be treated one way, but the Mueller report should be treated another.

Again, when the Republicans engage in the duplicity, we ought to be called out for it. They should.

CHAFFETZ: Yes.

GOWDY: But so should the Democrats and the D.C. media just never does it.

CHAFFETZ: No, no. There's such an imbalance there. But it was an honor and privilege to serve with you in the Congress. So, I appreciate you coming with us on this beautiful Friday night, on HANNITY tonight.

Congressman Gowdy, thank you.

With the inspector general's investigation into FISA abuse ongoing, tonight, we are learning new details about Comey's former top lawyer, James Baker.

Joining us now with more is Catherine Herridge -- Catherine.

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, CHIEF INTELLIGENCE CORRESPONDENT: Congressman, while the national security court was not explicitly told that the DNC and Clinton campaign connections to the anti-Trump dossier, today, the FBI's former top lawyer said the bureau provided the court with sufficient warning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES BAKER, FORMER TOP FBI LAWYER: My assessment was that the information set forth in that gigantic footnote was consistent with the type of information and the way we would phrase things to basically, effectively be the red light on top of the, on top of the document.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HERRIDGE: And now, another challenge to the warrant's integrity, citing newly released records three Senate Republicans now question whether a senior State Department official warned the FBI before the FISA warrant application about the anti-Trump dossier's author, former British spy Christopher Steele and his apparently political motivation.

Senators Johnson, Grassley and Graham write the State Department official Kathleen Kavalec notes show the opposition research firm Fusion GPS led by Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch were deeply involved. Still and possibly others were, quote, keen to see this information come to light before the election.

On October 13th, 2016, just three weeks before the election, Kavalec sent this e-mail, but the publicly released version has redacted the attachment, the subject, as well as the recipient -- Congressman.

CHAFFETZ: Catherine, thank you.

This program has long sounded the alarm about FISA abuse. And this morning, the ranking member of the House Intel Committee had this to say about James Comey's potential illicit behavior. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DEVIN NUNES, R-CALIF.: There is no question as it relates to the FISA on Carter Page that nothing was done by the book. In fact, it was all done, it was all very irregular, in fact. So, this is the whole idea that you could take the Clinton campaign dirt and use it.

To -- remember, when he came before our task force at the end of the last Congress, this is a man who couldn't answer a question. I think of over 100 times he said things like, "I don't recall." So, whenever put under oath on a body like the legislative body of Congress, the guy couldn't answer a question. He can do a town hall and make a lot of things up. But, look, I think Mr. Comey is in a lot of trouble and he should be. He made a mess of the FBI

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: I think he's right.

Joining us now is Fox News contributor, Sara Carter, the author of "Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice", Sidney Powell, and Ohio Congressman Mike Turner.

To all three of you, thank you for joining us tonight.

Sara, I want to start with you. The latest on the Steele dossier and these documents that are now coming to light. You have done some of the best reporting on the issue. Give us your perspective on the latest.

SARA CARTER, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think these documents are incredible. They really lay out the case that the FBI -- now, these are Kathleen Kavalec, this was her -- this was her handwritten notes from her meeting with Christopher Steele, Jason.

And, basically, what she got from that meeting, this was in 2016, October 2016, before the election, was that Christopher Steele was doing this for political purposes. She knew the information that he was providing, a lot of it was just false on the face and he was trying to leak it to "The New York Times", to "The Washington Post".

And he specified that he needed to get it out before the November election. So, you see the political bias. Look, what's happening now with James Comey, the former FBI director, James Baker, the former general counsel, Andy McCabe and the others, they are trying to gaslight. They're trying to make everybody think like they are crazy to think that the folks had spies inside the campaign, that they were trying to set up Trump, which is exactly what they were doing.

If you just look at the facts which is what the attorney general is going to be looking at, the facts, and Michael Horowitz, they lay out a very strong case that the FBI and those people within the FBI that were working on the investigation into President Trump had enormous knowledge of what was going on and they violated the rules set under the FISC court, that's the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

So, Jason, they are going to have a lot to answer for. And Devin Nunes is 100 percent right here when he says Comey better watch it because he is going to be at the center of this because he signed those FISA warrant applications.

CHAFFETZ: Now, Congressman Turner, I had the pleasure of serving with you as well in the Congress for a number of years. You have been on the Intel Committee for a number of years, too. Your perspective is important. I know it's somewhat limited because of what you can share publicly.

Nevertheless, John Ratcliffe, your colleague, is also on the Intel Committee has said that that application at the very top, it says, "verified application". I mean, that's how it's titled, "verified application."

So, what are we to read in all this new information and the new news and what Devin Nunes is telling us as well?

REP. MIKE TURNER, R-OH: Well, what's interesting about this publicity tour that you're seeing from all these characters is, certainly, Baker's statement to put something in a footnote is a red light, it's just laughable. As we know, putting something in a footnote is how you bury something.

And the fact he says that the wording is what they'd normally use -- you know, a judge would have wanted to know that this is an application to spy on one campaign based on material that is paid for by the other political campaign. That information was not contained. It was not clear to the judge. It's incredibly important.

And also, as we all know, it's not verifiable information. So it goes right to the inception. Comey has been saying that, no, this was a rightly opened investigation. I got the opportunity to question him in March of 2017.

He says the open investigation at that time, he said you need credible information of wrongdoing. Well, clearly, we know that both Clapper had said, there was no evidence when he left in 2017 of collusion, and Mueller certainly has found no evidence of collusion. They had nothing and they went ahead anyway.

CHAFFETZ: No, it's absolutely right. Now, Sidney, you know, James Comey has gone around saying he does everything by the book but this is the same James Comey who in order to put the special prosecutor in place, what did he do? He actually leaked information, right? I mean, are we supposed to believe that James Comey now who is on this publicity tour, as Congressman Turner called it?

SIDNEY POWELL, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No. There is nothing that was done by the book here and the FBI they broke every rule and every protocol from the beginning of this so-called investigation, from sending an agent to foreign soil, to interact with an American citizen, from enlisting the help of the British. Everything they did, using the Steele dossier which Comey has admitted repeatedly was unverified yet he signed the FISA application that says it's verified.

And please remember, the Carter Page FISA application was not against a member of the Trump campaign. Mr. Page had not been a member of the Trump campaign for weeks when they got that FISA application.

CHAFFETZ: Now, Sara --

POWELL: This was all to cover up the illegal surveillance that had gone on for God only knows how long before they got that FISA application.

CARTER: Uh-huh.

CHAFFETZ: Now, it was James Baker, he's the general counsel there at the FBI, who said it would be gratuitous to actually name the Democrats. As Congressman Turner said, it would probably be easier in one sentence say this is paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

But do we believe Baker now? I mean, he --

CARTER: No.

CHAFFETZ: He has been behind closed doors talking to Congress for a long time now.

CARTER: That's right. I mean, I think, Baker right now realizes he is in jeopardy as well. That he was part of this process. He even admits to the fact that it was he that oversaw a lot of this, the FISA application that went before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

And it's also Baker that's under investigation right now. Remember, Baker, I think that was the first to report that nearly two years, that Baker is actually under investigation for leaks. So, we have a number of high-level senior officials at the FBI under investigation right now for their failure to adhere to the law.

And what Sidney says is absolutely true. They violated everything in the book. But, Jason, this goes far beyond this. What we are seeing now is just the tip of an iceberg. Remember, the iceberg below the water is much larger. And I think that's the reason they are fighting back so hard.

So, when we see them on these tours, when we see them gaslighting the public, when we see them pooh-poohing like what they did as nothing more than, oh, well, we put a siren in the footnote, you know, we let the courts know. They didn't. They withheld exculpatory evidence. And I think that the more we see, the more we will realize how far members of the Obama administration went, not only with surveillance, but with unmasking and far beyond the Trump campaign.

CHAFFETZ: Real quickly. Congressman Turner, Nunes says that Comey is potentially in trouble. Is there really legal jeopardy for Mr. Comey?

TURNER: Well, I think whenever you abuse power, you certainly subject yourself to risks and certainly, that could be a legal risk.

But, Jason, I think one of the things that's most important is what you said in the beginning in all of this, is you've got Comey, Clapper and Brennan all making the statements that wish this president ill-will, that are clearly biased statements at this point, and that are clearly pronouncements that there's going to be something that is terminal to the president, or his presidency. But yet, we are supposed to believe that when they all started this investigation, they were unbiased and they were professional and they didn't have any of the characters that they are parading across TV showing us.

CHAFFETZ: Yes. No, I think what they are doing is projecting right now. But the evidence is going to come out with that inspector general report.

Sara, Sidney, and Mike Turner, Congressman from Ohio, we thank you for being with us.

Directly ahead, the Democrats' hypocrisy is on full display in their renegade effort to hold A.G. Barr in contempt. We'll show you the shocking video when this “Hannity Special” continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this “Hannity Special: Justice in America.”

The collusion-obsessed House Judiciary Committee voted this week to hold A.G. Bill Barr in contempt for declining to hand over the completely unredacted Mueller report, despite the fact that top Dems now have access but two full, and seven partial lines of the Mueller report. But they are redacted in accordance to the federal law.

Not a single Democrat, not one, has bothered to read it. And talk about the hypocrisy, let's not forget how Democrats reacted when Obama Attorney General Holder was held in contempt over his handling of the Fast and Furious scandal. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: To bring this contempt of Congress against the attorney general, the Republicans are contemptible. The rush they are putting on it is just inexplicable. What are they doing? What are they doing? The American people want jobs and they are going on witch hunts.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: The Republican majority intends to bring a contempt resolution to the floor against the attorney general. To say that this is a terrible use of Congress's power and time is an understatement.

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, D-MD: This is not about the facts. This is about politics.

REP. MAXINE WATERS, D-CALIF.: They have not found any evidence that this attorney general was hiding anything. That he had lied to anybody. They still do not have any facts to support this illegitimate investigation.

REP. STENY HOYER, D-MD: To our Republican colleagues, shame on you.

CROWD: Shame on you. Shame on you. Shame on you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Wow.

Joining us now with reaction, American Conservative Union Chairman Matt Schlapp, Judicial Watch President Tom Fenton, and Fox News contributor Tammy Bruce is joining us in studio here in New York.

I want to thank all three of you to be here.

You know, the Fast and Furious thing is very close to my heart. I was there in Congress when it first started, Matt. I got to tell you, they were knowingly and willingly the government gave 2,000 weapons to the drug cartels, and we have a dead border patrol agent and yet these same people - - I mean, compare and contrast the reaction to that versus what's going on today.

MATT SCHLAPP, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION CHAIR: Yes, people get killed in these terrible circumstances, like Fast and Furious. The A.G. was compelled to turn over records which he stone walled Congress over. For the first time in over 200 years, the house has moved to condemn the attorney general for not willing to be scrutinized by a staffer on the committee, which you know is an absurd criteria we haven't done for two centuries without some negotiation. He is willing to testify.

By the way, on the Mueller report, he doesn't have to turn it over to congress. It's at his discretion. He chose to turn it over to make it public. He chose to make an almost unredacted copy available to the leadership of the Dems and the Republicans in Congress.

And the Democrats don't even want to read it, because you know why? They know there is no collusion or obstruction in this report. It's just politics. And they want to continue to play politics.

CHAFFETZ: No, and this is the thing. Tammy, it's there in black and white. It's right there in front of them. All of the report except what is required by law. I liken it to the Supreme Court. You know, when they come out with a ruling, they don't hold a press conference and answer questions. It's just there to review.

How in the world do the Democrats have any credibility on this issue?

TAMMY BRUCE, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, they don't. They are effectively attacking the attorney general for following the law.

CHAFFETZ: Right.

BRUCE: Now, I think it's perfect for the Democrats, because they hate that. They hate that law. But this is really - when you've really ginned up your base on something as ridiculous and hyper absurd like saying that the President of United States is a Russian stooge or a Russian spy - what - how can you top that? And you've got to top it, and the only one thing you can say - I guess, now the line is that there's a constitutional crisis.

But the American people, they're smart. They're - this is also an indication of the contempt with which the Democrats and certainly Nadler, in particular, hold of the American people in. That you wouldn't be saying this if you had any respect for how the American people are viewing this and what's at stake and how you would be viewed.

You think everybody is just a dumb rube, and they're not going to be figuring this out. They can - I think actually you would know like walk across a couple hallways to see this, they don't need to jump through hoops to see it. And the American people want them to do a job. I don't think they had this in mind when they voted him into power in the midterms.

CHAFFETZ: No, I - look I think the Attorney General is doing an absolute fantastic job. No nonsense, been there done that. He's doing exactly what he want who wants - what he's supposed to do.

Tom, judicial watch is just - I mean they have led the charge to trying to expose what our government is doing and compare and contrast for us your experience with the Obama administration. Because it's not as if they were open transparent in complying with the law along the way, were they?

TOM FITTON, JUDICIAL WATCH PRESIDENT: No. And the Justice Department, especially in the Obama administration, led by Eric Holder for a good period of time, was a black hole in terms of transparency. Unfortunately, as you know Jason, it continued under Jeff Sessions and the Justice Department still.

So I've recognized do you have these fights between the legislative branch and the executive branch about documents. But this is a trifle of a fight. This material was essentially being made available within a few - the last few weeks and they immediately rush a contempt resolution against the Attorney General.

To me it's an abuse of power and it fits in perfectly with what happened during 2016 when the Democrats abused power through the FBI and DOJ to target President Trump and continued through the Mueller operation and that smear of a report.

And now the cudgel has been picked up by the Democrats who don't want to talk about the criminal conspiracy their party was involved in in 2016 and '17 to target President Trump with illegal spying. They'd rather talk about this pretend fight and with Attorney General smear - with Attorney General Barr who they are smearing.

And you know this this awesome power they have to hold someone in contempt. It's pretty darn serious when they start invoking it lightly, because they're effectively saying Attorney General United States need to be put in jail over a few lines of text that we're fighting about.

It shows you where the Democratic mentality is here, that they just want to jail their political opponents, the rule of law, it doesn't matter.

CHAFFETZ: And Matt it did Tom's point, there are they just trying to distract from the fact that we have a pending Inspector General report and that the Attorney General is looking into spying and other types of things that the Democrats may have been doing previously?

SCHLAPP: Yes, if you actually think about it, because the Democrats played stall ball and had this 22-month, $35 million investigation on this ridiculous and ill-founded charge of collusion.

Now we're back into the election season, think about it Jason. They raised it so long that now it's about their wrongdoing and that's what we're going to be talking about when this IG report comes out.

You know it all points back to? You know what I want to know? What did Joe Biden know, that's what Republicans need to start asking.

CHAFFETZ: No it's a good question. Really I have 30 seconds left but Tammy and Tom where do you think contempt goes, next real quick?

Bruce. Well, I think obviously they're they've got the votes to be able to do it. I will see if any Democrats have any courage to sit to admit that this is ridiculous and there are some in some vulnerable districts, so maybe not every Democrat will vote for it.

FITTON: It's a distraction, it's going to go nowhere I think politically nor legally.

CHAFFETZ: Thank you all for joining us. We really do, appreciate it. Next if you can't beat them try to impeach them, the Democrats impeachment hysteria is reaching new heights. Rachel Campos-Duffy and Kayleigh McEnany will be here next on this “Hannity Special: Justice in America.”

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity Special: Justice in America.” Now the Democrats continue to stoop to new lows in smearing President Trump and Attorney General William Barr recklessly calling for impeachment, even jail time, all while fueling chaos across Capitol Hill. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RASHIDA TLAIB, D-MICH.: You know what I think it's important is to recognize that 10 million people said that we need to hold this President accountable. I think that speaks volumes.

Like my friend Reggie said, the impeachable process was created for someone like President Donald Trump.

REP. AL GREEN, D-TX: I say that we have a duty, a responsibility and an obligation under the Constitution of the United States of America to do our duty. We must impeach. Let the Senate do what they may. We have to do what we must.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: Now, I will say having obstructed the Justice Department, the investigation and now obstructing Congress the case for impeachment gains weight.

REP. HANK JOHNSON, D-GA: To ensure that we get that report because we have lawful responsibilities - constitutional responsibilities to engage in, one of which is possibly impeachment. How can we impeach without getting the documents?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: And like clockwork, the media is doing the democrats bidding along the way. Here is just a small sample. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST MSNBC: You're defending the most corrupt Attorney General, I mean, since John Mitchell, like he is bad.

Your article is going to look extraordinarily stupid and you're going to look like - sycophant. It's really embarrassing--

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHAFFETZ: Joining me now reaction. Fox News Contributor, Rachel Campos- Duffy and Trump 2020 National Press Secretary, Kayleigh McEnany. Thank you both for joining us.

Rachel, I want to start with you. The topic here in the special is "Justice in America". Mueller does a report the Attorney General puts it out with everything except what's he's supposed to you know prohibited by law and they want to hold him in contempt, they want him to go to jail, essentially they might impeach the President is that justice in America?

RACHEL CAMPOS-DUFFY, CONTRIBUTOR: It's not and you had Joe Scarborough there saying that it they look - that the Republicans look incredibly stupid. Well the Democrats are going to look not only incredibly stupid, but incredibly corrupt when Barr gets to the bottom of how this investigation started.

Because we know that that the dossier was dirty. We know that that was used to spy on the Trump campaign. And now we're hearing that the FBI knew that it was dirty before they gave it to the FISA judges.

So this is very serious stuff and I think part of this is not just to sully the President and make it look like he's hiding something, because they're still clinging to this collusion and obstruction stuff, but also to get to sully Barr, because they know something's coming out.

And it's not just what's happening at the FBI or the corruption at the FBI this goes all the way at the top. This goes all the way to Obama, Biden, Valerie Jarrett, the White House, that's what they're really worried about.

CHAFFETZ: Rachel, I think you're right. I think they are so worried about the Inspector General report and Attorney General Barr is coming with. But Kaylee we had Adam Schiff, he's on the cover of Newsweek for goodness sake. And he's out there saying that it gained weight - the idea of impeachment gained weight are you kidding me?

This guy shouldn't even have a security clearance. I can't believe he's even in Congress, the way he told the American people for two years what the molar report was going to report and then it didn't.

KAYLEIGH MCENANY, TRUMP 2020 NATIONAL PRESS SECRETARY: Right and this is the guy who said he had ample evidence of collusion. We've yet to see that and we've yet to see him held to account. It's absolutely laughable, the notion of impeachment. That montage of clips you played also laughable because Democrats are out there saying, "Oh president Trump is goading impeachment".

What in a what an absurd assertion the only ones goading in peace impeachment are the very Democrats that you saw say impeachment over and over and over again. It's absurd the American people know it.

It's why 65% oppose impeachment according to Harvard Harris, so they're going to go down this road and they're going to do so at their own detriment as we approach the 2020 election and Trump has so many great results to sell and all they have is investigations that are meritless.

CHAFFETZ: You know earlier in the show Trey Gowdy said that one of his biggest disappointments in his eighth year in eight years in Congress is the way that the national media treated the imbalance. I mean they just they looked at Republicans and treated them totally different than Democrats. Rachel what's your take on how the national media is covering this story and the reaction of how a Barr has handled this Mueller report?

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Absolutely proof that the media is in the tank with the Democrats they're bias is on display. But Kayleigh hits a really good point. I mean if you think back Jason to the midterms they weren't talking about impeachment at all they were to focus on issues and that's why I think they won.

But now they're back to impeachment and I think this is very risky because it is going to certainly rev up their base and it's also revving up and angering the Republican base. But what's left is the swing voters. The swing voters in the states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in Ohio, places where the President has absolutely delivered on jobs on the economy were energy independent.

We're so strong we're finally after decades taking on China, these giant cheaters, and we couldn't do that if we weren't in this strong economic position we got all right now. So this is a time for the country to unite. The American people know that we're stronger fighting China on these tariffs when we're united and they see the Democrats focus on this.

And when the elections come along Jason they're going to go - especially these swing voters they're going to look at the Democrats and say what have they done, for me stupid investigations that they said Mueller was the final word - the final word comes out and now they're they're going to keep going or Donald Trump who has delivered in spades to every promise.

CHAFFETZ: Kayleigh impeachment in contempt is that the winning message for America real quick we've only got about 20 seconds left.

MCENANY: Absolutely not. Look I go to all the presidents rally 75% of the registrants firm are El Paso rally where Democrats or swing voters that's amazing. When I talk to them in the lines they talk about health care they talk about the economy, they talk about the issues, impeachment is last on their radar.

CHAFFETZ: No I think you're absolutely right. Kayleigh and Rachael, thank you very much for joining us tonight. We do appreciate it.

When we come right back a major update on the Jussie Smollett case will there ever be justice? Full analysis with Emily Compagno and Pam Bondi is coming up next on this special edition of "Hannity: Justice in America" Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity Special: Justice in America.” The Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax saga is still ongoing tonight. Joining us now with the latest live from our Chicago newsroom Fox News National Correspondent, Matt Finn. Matt.

MATT FINN, NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Congressman today here in Chicago a Chief Judge was set to decide on whether to assign a special prosecutor to investigate Kim Foxx, but this Chief Judge very reluctantly agreed not to make a decision in the case, because it was revealed he has a son who works for Kim Foxx.

So now another veteran judge here in Cook County will decide on whether a special prosecutor should lay fresh eyes on the Jussie Smollett criminal case and also investigate why Kim Foxx's office quietly dropped 16 felony charges against the actor, hearing is scheduled a week from today.

This all began last month when former Illinois Appellate Justice Sheila O'Brien filed a petition for a special prosecutor to investigate Foxx arguing the public deserves the entire truth. Justice O'Brien also submitted a line of questions for Foxx, asking Foxx why she did not comply with Illinois law which indicates Foxx's recusal required a special prosecutor be appointed.

Kim Foxx has argued that the special prosecutor should only be appointed if she became sick or unable to fulfill her duties. While Justice O'Brien argues Kim Foxx admitted she was unable to fulfill her duties when she recused herself. Congressman.

CHAFFETZ: Thank you. Matt we do appreciate it.

Joining me now with reaction Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and Fox News Contributor and Attorney Emily Compagno, who's joining me here in studio. So Emily I'm going to start with you tell us the significance of this movement with the judge and how that's going to play out?

EMILY COMPAGNO, CONTRIBUTOR: Right, well the judge that transferred the matter to another judge he said look to quote Justice Scalia in a dissent sometimes the appearance of justice is equally as important to justice itself.

So he essentially said look this isn't necessary and it's not a full recusal. I am merely transferring in the matter notably to another judge who has done this twice before, dealt with a special prosecutor. The issue of one should be - whether one should be assigned. In one instance he agreed in the other he declined.

And the other argument is, we'll look you're just duplicating the efforts in the investigation of the Inspector General of Cook County, let alone the federal government that is also investigating this Cook County. So I think there's an argument to be had that potentially a lot of tax dollars are going toward this whether justice in fact is being served.

CHAFFETZ: There's no doubt there's already been a lot of tax dollars there was with the just the investigation itself. But the Attorney General Bondi, you've had a lot of experience I can't imagine things they came across your desk when you were the Attorney General. But tell us the significance for those of us that don't watch this every day when a judge makes a move like this?

PAM BONDI, FORMER FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well I haven't seen anything quite like this in my career - my very long career as a prosecutor. So the judge did the right thing by taking himself off the case, because basically Kim Foxx signs his sons paycheck every month.

So he's saying - and he said the right things he said. "Hey I could be fair and impartial however it's the appearance". So he should have recused himself just based on the accusations alone he did the right thing. He had no reason to keep it. So now we have a new judge on the case.

CHAFFETZ: But continue on with you at 30 general Bondi, I want to ask you the idea of a special prosecutor to be put in place how does that play out at a state level like in Illinois?

BONDI: Well how would play out is, they're basically policing the police. Policing her, who's going to look Kim Foxx is elected, so who's going to police if she did something wrong a special prosecutor. She's sure not going to look at herself. She never truly recused herself off the case to begin with when that's all she had to do.

She had to take herself off the case, she could have been out of it, but she meddled in a case. The case was dropped at her direction we're hearing. And so I think it does need to be looked at by all fronts. The police they deserve that money back for the cost of investigation.

And a Jussie Smollett could have stepped up to the plate and said - he's got the resources. Hey I'm going to pay all of the cost of investigation. Yet he's still refusing to do that. So we have a mayor who's furious, we have a Police Chief who is rightfully furious as well. And now it's being looked at, as Emily said, on many, many fronts - and I hope the Chicago Bar takes a very, very good look at her.

She's elected so it's going to be tough but she may very well lose her post after this investigation.

CHAFFETZ: Yes, she brings up a good point I didn't think about this before Emily, and that is the Bar we're going to find out whether or not the Bar actually holds some weight will actually hold people accountable.

But can Jussie Smollett it can he still be prosecuted with all the fiasco and the turbulence and the text messages are another factor in this and how Ms. Foxx was dealing with this. But at the end of the day can there still be justice and could Jussie Smollett still be prosecuted?

COMPAGNO: Well, I will say most importantly it will be the result of the federal investigation and whether charges are brought on that hoax letter he sent. That might actually be the final nail in his proverbial coffin, because that was a significant deal.

And as Cook County has said in and Foxx has said numerous times, well this was just a public nuisance, essentially right it's a bunch of misdemeanors. "It's no big deal". But it really is and that hoax letter certainly was.

So I think the actual opportunity for justice to be served in terms of consequences. for incredibly selfish thoughtless actions that would be on the federal side.

CHAFFETZ: No, this case is such a mess, but we do appreciate both of you and your perspective and sharing it with your here tonight. Pam and Emily thank you very much. We're going to be right back with some final thoughts on this important Friday night. Thanks for joining us. Stay tuned.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHAFFETZ: Welcome back to this special edition of “Hannity Special: Justice in America.” Unfortunately, that's all the time we have left this evening. Thank you so much for joining us tonight. Sean is going to be back on Monday with his special guest Reince Priebus. We haven't seen or hear from him for a long time. That will be good interview as well as Karl Rove.

We hope you can tune in. Have a great weekend. Happy Mother's Day, especially to my mom who I miss, who passed, and my wife, Julie, love you. "Ingraham Angle" is up next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.