tv Special Report With Bret Baier FOX News May 18, 2017 1:00am-2:01am PDT
>> greg: the only polls that matter are on election day. >> jesse: never miss an episode of "the five" ," night. ♪ 's the one good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." we are coming do you live at 11:00 washington time because an awful lot is going on here. for going to be talking to a number of people at the center of it, including cory lewandowski, who may be back on his way to the white house. first, the news, the justice department announced a special counsel to oversee the russian investigation. attorney general jeff sessions has already recused himself from the matter, so from here on out, the entire thing will be led by
robert mueller. "bad idea, good choice." first, to the choice. mueller is an adult. more to the point, he has nothing to prove. that may be the most important quality in someone with nearly unchecked power as a special counsel. he's already overseen complex prosecutions, run the fbi, served under republicans and democrats. he has earned a reputation for rectitude, so he doesn't need to make a name for himself but he has one already. if there is not a crime at the bottom of all of this, he's unlikely to manufacture one in order to save face, so many other prosecutors are tempted to do. mueller is about as impressive a choice as the justice department could have made. now, to the other question, maybe the more important one
about whether a special counsel investigation is itself a good idea. democrats have been demanding one for months, so has their farm team at the news networks. those same groups are to many open borders and transgender bathrooms and elementary schools. not everything the mob wants is wise. in this case, he could prove especially unwise, as the sorts of investigations have a way of expanding far beyond their urgent own charter and consuming entire presidencies. ask anyone who worked for reagan or clinton during their second terms for this is a dangerous move for the trump administration, and they know i it. maybe the democrats will stop posturing for a second. they called for an independent investigation, and they got one courtesy of the administration they have repeatedly accused of fascism. mussolini would never have appointed a special counsel. what is the democrats play? trump can't be impeached at this stage. how can he go on trial before the investigation is complete?
someone better tell maxine waters that her dream has died, at least for the moment unless of course robert mueller is himself part of the conspiracy, yet another agents have the kremlin. could it be that vladimir putin controls every single person involved in this, from the investigator to the investigated? is the conspiracy that deep? if those questions seem insane to you, you have not been paying attention to congress or the other news channels. already tonight, nancy pelosi has issued a statement saying that robert mueller is not "truly independent." though, she didn't explain how she wasn't truly independent. god help robert mueller if he is ever vacationed in moscow or has knowingly eaten caviar. he can find himself at the center of his own investigation. we'll keep you posted. we are joined by corey lewandowski. thanks for coming on.
what do you make of this? >> i think exactly what the president's statement said. two things are important. i think the removal of james comey is important because i hope what happens that any investigation that takes place does not take place on the front page of the newspaper every day. but we have seen, director comey had an agenda which was to inform the public of everything he was doing. it's not helpful if you're trying to conduct an investigation. you have someone moving forward with credibility. i can tell you firsthand because i was on the campaign. never, ever, ever did i ever see anybody have contact with any agent of any foreign government. russia or anybody else grade i've never seen the president or candidate trump direct anybody to have conversations with anybody from a foreign government or foreign agency. it never took place that i'm aware of. if somebody from the campaign had something to do with
impacting the election, that person should be held accountable but it didn't come from the president or anyone i'm associated with. >> tucker: was the president aware that the active attorney general was going to appoint mueller? >> i don't know what the decision process was from the acting attorney general and how it was moving forward. i don't know. i know the president has had a full schedule. he gave a commencement speech at the coast guard. i think with the president is doing is putting people in the justice department who are unquestionably qualified to be in the position they have, both the attorney general and the deputy attorney general, assistant attorney general. unquestionable credentials on his left them the ability to do their jobs. >> tucker: short-term, this seems like good news because it depoliticize is this question, to some degree. i think mueller is widely recognized as a man of integrit integrity. not a political figure. long-term, it's got to be terrifying because previous special counsel investigations have gone into places that no one anticipated, and they've tied up entire presidential
terms. is the president concerned? >> the president has a reason to be concerned. it's amazing. unfortunately, the way the system work sometimes in particular in the mainstream media they want to prove you guilty before you've had anything. they've tried to accuse him of things there's been no evidence of. at least we have now is the opportunity for a clean slate and show nothing to place. i think that's what the president wants. he has said nothing took place, and this is the opportunity to prove it. >> tucker: will he be commenting? >> i don't know, but i think the president is his best messenger, and at the end of the day, whether it's his surrogates or him, he will go directly to the american people and have a conversation with them. when he does that, he is at his best. >> tucker: it seems like it
could be potentially a real problem. if you were advising his communications strategy would you say tweet your feelings? >> no, i don't think so. the difference here is mr. mueller has unquestionable character and if he runs an investigation which is done in the privacy that it should be so that they can do a job up job reportedly to come up with the findings will not be true which was there was no collusion. then that's what the president wants to have done. i don't speak for the president but i'm sure what he wants to be able to do is have an investigation completed hopefully quickly to show that there was no collusion in any way, shape, or form between trump, the campaign, and any foreign government. i think that investigation should be done not on the front pages of "the wall street journal" and "new york times" and the fake media and the mainstream television shows. it should be done in private. >> tucker: i covered many investigation in the clinton administration. i know the clinton people.
i see them around but i am convinced that hillary clinton, had she become president, would never have allowed an independent investigation of her behavior. with that in mind, do you think it was my at the allowed this? >> i don't think he wants to stop it. he wants to clear his name once and for all. he's been so sullied by the media with these false accusations that there's some type of connection between him and russia. just last week, he sent a letter to senator lindsey graham outlining that he has no business interests and emotion whatsoever. he's disclosing his personal financial disclosure statement. the mainstream media continues to report things that say the president is getting paid by russia. there is no. for the first time that we have is a thorough investigation taking place outside the public sphere, which is the way it should be done. so we can come to the same conclusion, there's nothing there to see. >> tucker: are you going back
to the white house? the president wants you to come back. there are reports you are. >> don't believe the mainstream media. it >> tucker: i believe there is some chaos of the white hous white house. you call over there and it's not clear what's going on. the president is apparently displeased with his aides. would you consider going back? >> i have a great life. i have to be honest. but if the president of the united states were to call me, and he has not, and say i need you to serve, of course i would. i think i could be more effective working on the outside taking sure his agenda is getting done, making sure businesses are getting they need, making sure members of congress are being held accountable. hopefully i will be involved in the elections next year moving forward to the people supporting the president's agenda are going to be successful.
if they're going to be challenging incumbent democrats going to be i can be involved there. it >> tucker: where is the leaking come from? x or some of it is made up but not all of it. people working there are leaking details about what happened eaking come from? why are they doing that. >> it is worth repeating. there are people who work in that building who don't support the president's agenda or art on the president's agenda. if that's the case, whether you're the chief of staff or the personal answers the telephones or anywhere in between, if you don't support this president and his agenda 100% of the time, not only should you not be in the building. he shouldn't be in government. >> tucker: who doesn't? >> i think there are probably people who work in the building and throughout parts of the government that candidly were not part of the president's team as he ran for office they did not support his campaign, didn't take it seriously.
we've seen this with other individuals. i think at the state department it's a great example. we saw the number two person at the state department, he had been very aggressive in calling the president out saying he was unfit to be a candidate, unfit for the presidency. but they try to get their way back in the government. people are so consumed with their own power that they are more concerned with themselves than the agenda of the country. this president was elected to change washington. the only way to do that is have a full team around you every day. if anybody is leaking from the white house and leaks are affected happens every day, those people shouldn't be there anymore. >> tucker: steve bannon, whatever you think of steve bannon, seemed like one of the guys understand why the president got elected, understood the agenda. what happened to him? >> he is still very much involved. as a chief strategist, he is looking at the big picture. if you look at the health care bill which has gone through the
house, going to move to the senate, that's part of the agenda. repeal and replace obamacare. you look at the text always been for -- the tax bill that's been put forth. that's part of the trump agenda. >> tucker: where his immigration? >> you've got to build the wall. >> tucker: where is it? scott has to happened. >> it has to be in the next budget. that's the pledgees made and he said it and it will be there. this president is a man of his word, he keeps his promises great he's going to build a wall. mexico is going to pay for it's pretty have to get congress to get it done has to get done. it's going to get bills. steel and thank you much. special prosecutor caught us by surprise. what was the reaction inside the white house? standing outside the white house.
>> good to see you. they are just about to turn off the lights. the lights in the resident still on. maybe the president and other advisors still awake at this late hour because, as you say, this changes the calculus for them to might bring what i'm hearing from some people outside the white house friendly to the president is they are taking heart with the fact that an open investigation by the special counsel does two important things. it walls at all from the white house having to deal with it day by day. now it is robert mueller, highly respected former fbi director, respected by leaders in both parties was going to be focusing on this and maybe, maybe this president can get back to what corey lewandowski was talking about. the other thing i am picking up from people outside the white house is that this line in the justice department released something to pay close attention to. robert mueller will be tasked
with investigating russian interference in the last election and other matters. a lot of the president's critics jumped on that side this can go, as you've heard many times, in many different directions against the president. there are people friendly to this president saying other matters could also deal with some of the leaks of highly classified information by some of the president's critics inside the government. we don't know if robert mueller will go in that direction but since he has this wide berth to look at "other matters," some of those leaks event talking about, highly classified information that could be illegal could be looked at. >> tucker: ed henry waiting for the lights to go out on the lawn of the white house. thank you. what can we expect from robert mueller as special counsel? we will talk to someone who once worked for him. congressman jason chaffetz, one of the members of congress with
marine-like way over the time i've worked for him and his tenure in the fbi. he saw similar behavior. straight, by the book, no nonsense. >> tucker: you worked for a rare special counsel investigations that stayed to its charter and wrapped up at a certain date and didn't find anything. >> not only did we conceded but we apologize to janet mullins, saying she was improperly targeted with an investigation. >> tucker: i don't think it's ever happened in the history of special counsel investigations. is that good news for the trump administration? >> in the sense that i think bob mueller is the same type of prosecutor that we were on our investigation. if there is no "there" there, he will say it. he doesn't need a career enhancement for some kind of
tangential crying. he has made his reputation. if there is nothing there, he will say it. he will close the lights good. it's good for america, it is good for trump. depending on how it turns out, everyone gets to know this was a fair and honest investigation and whatever the findings are, they can be relied upon. >> tucker: i don't think people understand just how much power a special counsel has. i'm not sure where the oversight comes from. the budget seems to be unlimited. the time frame is whatever you wanted to be. what are the limits? >> the limits are his mandate. there is a mandate that the deputy attorney general gave him which is to investigate matters related to the campaign and any collusion with russia and matters that are directly attributable to that. of didn't catch any of the things they may find relevant.
this is the rub where many independent councils have gotten themselves waylaid. they have gone off into other tangents and we haven't heard from them for years and years and years with millions and millions of dollars spent. that is not mueller. he's going to say this is my mandate. four or five things i'm investigating. whether there was interference with the election, whether there was collusion with the russians, perhaps whether or not there was obstruction of justice. between the president and mr. comey. whether or not paul man dealinge financial transactions and whether slain, with his failure to disclose his dealings with turkey and others. those are probably the five mandates. >> tucker: that is a lot. i want your assessment. if this turns political, if democrats start attacking mueller, if the president starts attacking him via twitter, these things get political sometimes.
how will he respond? >> i think it -- i don't think it will faze him one bit. he has the courage of his convictions to do his job. independent of what the politicians want him to do. i think you will do his job, issue his report, there are indictments, he will indict. if there are no indictments, he will issue his report to rosenstein and say this is why we are not going forward. >> tucker: seems like the ideal guy. >> i think both sides benefit. democrats get their guy. they can calm down a little bit and let processes go forward. trump has a guy he can trust will do the right thing based on the evidence. >> tucker: i hope you are right. that would be really good. michael zeldin, thank you for joining us. up next, reaction from jason
his credentials are impeccable. he served in the bush administration, the obama administration. he is unassailable in terms of his credentials, his background. your point is well taken. he is in the latter part of his career. he has nothing to prove. he's been silent politically. it doesn't get any better than robert mueller. i also agree i don't think they should have appointed somebody. >> tucker: why did they? >> i think they are feeling the political heat. maybe they are watching too much television and reading too many newspapers. i have not seen any evidence of actual collusion. where is the actual crime they think they need a special prosecutor to prosecute? i haven't seen that. there's been a lot of flailing but that flailing started before january 20. >> tucker: did you expect this? >> i'm very surprised by it. no heads up. i don't think the speaker's office get got a heads up.
it cost us out of the blue. >> tucker: we were supposed to have someone from the white house on site from on anr topic, and they canceled. i tried to call over there. you have seen other special prosecutor investigation go far afield from where they started and tied up an entire presidency. it happened to president reagan, president clinton. >> nobody knows what the lanes of the special counsel are going to be and my understanding, they don't need to publish. they don't need to share it with congress. they have wide latitude to go wherever they want to go. i don't know what lena they're going to be an other than i have a great deal of trust that director mueller has the discipline to hopefully stay within the lane but i don't know what they are. >> tucker: you mean you're not
sure what the investigation is about? i will concede i'm not exactly sure what the investigation is about either. >> is it about, it appears to be about russian influence on the election. and then there was any collusion? but is that does it seep out to? in the oversight committee, we are interested in whether these so-called comey memos or letters, and we are trying to invite dr. comey to testify. does it involve that? i don't know. i don't know where the lanes ar are. >> tucker: i don't either. we likely won't find out for some time, is that your understanding? i don't suppose mueller is going to be given weekly updates. >> part of the challenge here is that i think he will lien on the department of justice and fbi what they have done to date.
he gets a little bit of a head start but this could go on for years. there could be long periods of silence and i worried the democrats are going to politically exploit this on a daily drumbeat, making up theories, making up stories, trying to get somebody to grab onto a piece of meat and say this is true. when you don't have the definitive order from someone who's going to be silent over the next i don't know how long. >> tucker: i would say if mueller is keeping the best interests of the country at heart, he will not make statements and won't allow information to leak from this investigation. it doesn't serve anybody. back to something you said a second ago, about trying to get former director comey to answer questions, why would it be difficult? >> i don't have his number. i used to be able to talk to him on the phone every once in a while.
we issued the letter lastly to the department of justice. i'm not even sure that these memos exist. i don't even know that they are real. >> tucker: purportedly took notes along the way over his years as fbi director. why do you doubt their existence? >> i just don't know. even the reporter who wrote the story has not physically seen them himself. i think it's worthy of investigation. i do think we should pursue it. but i'm also not presupposing the outcome, and i don't even know that they exist and where they exist bread we have asked the department of justice for the documents, but i don't know if they have them. we give them a week to find them and provide them and i said if need be i will subpoena them, although i think the department of justice will be cooperative. they be director comey has them himself. i don't know. you can't run an investigation on anonymous sources in "the new york times." that is not conclusive evidence.
>> tucker: the story that kicked off this story which is the biggest story in the world, as you know, suggested that director comey had written these memos. and that he had showed them to his colleagues. he had passed them around internally. and that he had done so on a bunch of different occasions going back a while. so if that's true, would those be subject to subpoena from you? >> well, they seem like they would be actual government documents. meeting with the president on federal grounds, showing them at his colleagues. they seem to be federal records. so that's why we believe we have some jurisdiction to see if this is reality. again, this is all the unknown. it is the very beginning. >> tucker: do you think the appointment of robert mueller as special counsel to look into this russia question, whatever that question is, will stop the acceleration we've seen in the
last week. talk of impeachment, of removing trump somehow from office. >> no. now they are going to change their talking points, the democrats. by the way, i love their commitment to openness and transparency. january 20, they were all for it. they are going to change their talking points and say this administration is in chaos and it is under investigation itself. it had to have a special counse counsel. you can already hear them in advance. it's an insatiable desire. they have no ideas, they have no policies. it is their scorched earth mentality and approached her just say let's burn it to the ground and that's their approach. >> tucker: do you think, since you worked there and you are with them in the gym or at lunch, do you think the democratic members we see on television alleging a conspiracy involving trump and putin believe that there was actual collusion between the two?
>> if they do, where's the evidence? i'm happy to pursue it but i don't have anybody actually presented me any evidence, and that we are this many months in, come up with something. last week or so, maxine waters saying somehow i was suspect. are you kidding me? i live in utah. >> tucker: you can't see russia from utah. >> it is just over the great salt lake. >> tucker: i know there is no evidence. i don't even think we know that the russians hacked john podesta's emails. i have talked to people who say there is no evidence of that but i wonder if the people alleging this conspiracy have bought into it themselves. i know we are getting to motives but i can't resist asking, do you think some of them are sincere? >> i think some of them probably want to believe it even absent evidence.
i think their sincerity is probably there but a lot of them, i just don't -- if you tried to go even an inch deep into what sort of evidence they have, they've got nothing. nothing. >> tucker: you would never know that from the press conferences they hold. congressman chaffetz, thanks for joining us. >> tucker: earlier tonight on our first show, we debated a democrat who said congress sought to impeach president trump right now without waiting for the speetwelve investigation. she will be back to tell
talking about impeachment since roughly about the time donald trump got in the presidential race, but of course tonight they said we don't need to impeach him here we have an actual investigation run by a career prosecutor. we're going to wait to find out what that tells us. actually, they didn't say that. instead, they said this. congressman maxine waters of l.a. >> i am convinced that if we follow the tracks of those who have been involved with the kremlin, those who have been involved with ukraine, those who have been involved in the circle that i called the kremlin clan, we will get the truth. i believe the truth means we will get to collusion and collusion will lead to impeachment. >> tucker: krystal ball is a former democratic congressional candidate. she was here earlier and graciously agreed to return once again, after thinking through her position and perhaps
changing her views. before we get to your change of heart, i want to ask you to try and translate, since you did run for congress hoping to join maxine waters. you have on the one hand, she says it's a conspiracy involving russia but also involving the ukraine which i think is at odds with russia. but then the kkk is also in there too. maybe only maxine waters can bring together the clan, putin, and ukraine. how do they fit together? >> i think that you're going to have to ask her. >> tucker: as the standardbearer of the democratic party, don't you think maxine waters speaks for a lot of democrats? 's she's all over television. >> i think it is surprising, given the force of the evidence in terms of trump and impeachment, it is surprising there aren't more democratic leaders who are out ready to call for him to be impeached. you have more folks out saying let's wait and see what develop
develops. i personally think there is more than enough there, not on russia but on other actions since he's been in office to say now is the time for impeachment. >> tucker: don't you think there is a -- whatever you can say, and saying he has mended high crimes for which he ought to be removed from office. it's a different standard. >> we wouldn't do it for something as trivial as lying about sex. we would wanted to be more serious. you think about obstruction of justice, the first articles for nixon and clinton, this man, first of all, he wanted comey to take a loyalty pledge. then he seemed to pressure him over the michael flynn investigation, totally inappropriate. and then he fired him. if that is not an obstruction of justice, then words don't have
meaning anymore. >> tucker: firing comey was an obstruction of justice? >> after pressuring him over the investigation of flynn and apparently demanding whether he was under investigation. >> tucker: this is like debating someone's religion. you are probably not going to make a lot of headway. if you believe ukraine, russia, and the clan are in a conspiracy, i'm not going to change her mind. impeachment is a legal process. you have to articulate the specific crimes they committed. if you will excuse me as i push you to describe how what you just have is criminal. >> it constitutes obstruction of justice. you are right about something. it's a legal process and a political question, a political process. it is fairly subjective. you also have to consider whether this was a person who was fundamentally fit to execute faithfully the office of the president.
when you take not only what we know about the actions of comey but there is new information coming out tonight about mike flynn. they knew when he was given the job as a top advisor, he knew he was under investigation by the fbi. this man shouldn't have been working in the white house laundry, let alone as a top national security advisor. >> tucker: part of what you are saying is player. i wouldn't have hired mike flynn for that job. the fact that he took money from turkey is appalling. not only took money from turkey secretly but he also advocated for, against military policy that turkey was against. >> tucker: i am against that policy too. here's the point. there is a difference between behavior and calling it criminal. are you saying it's a crime to
hire someone who is under fbi investigation? >> when you take these things together, there's no question there's enough there to impeach this president. >> tucker: what is the crime? democratically elected president. >> he throughout sensitive classified information to the russians seemingly carelessly and he has the nuclear codes. >> tucker: so you don't like him. >> you talk about the seriousness of impeaching a president. i am talking about the seriousness of the office of the presidency. >> tucker: i get you don't like the guy. you are looking at the people who voted for him and saying i don't care that you voted for him. i don't like this guy, i don't thinks a good president. >> no, no. that's not what i'm arguing. it is not just democrats making this case. >> tucker: i don't care what people have said. party label is irrelevant. people --
that has no value. >> you don't think every republican leader right now is thinking this through and wondering when is he going to cross the line? >> tucker: that's not a real argument. i don't care what the republican leadership thanks for the only goal of the show is to figure out what is true and right, that's it. i think you have not described a single actual crime and i don't think it's fair to say it's a crime to hire someone who is under. simple question. >> nixon. we impeached clinton over lying about sex. it >> tucker: i'm not here to defend the clinton impeachment. i'm here to ask if we need another impeachment. why didn't the director report the obstruction of justice? >> that is the different question. >> tucker: no, that's the central question. >> we have a president who has
obstructed justice. >> tucker: you can say it's all you want. we are out of time. i don't think you had enough time to think this through. >> you're going to have to have me back. >> tucker: james comey's memo is being used as proof that the president tried to end his investigation into michael flynn. you just heard that argument. what about comey's sworn testimony saying he never faced pressure from the white house. that is on ..
so how old do you want to be when you retire? uhh, i was thinking around 70. alright, and before that? you mean after that? no, i'm talking before that. do you have things you want to do before you retire? oh yeah sure... ok, like what? but i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement? we're absolutely doing that. but there's no law you can't make the most of today. what do you want to do? i'd really like to run with the bulls. wow. yea. hope you're fast. i am. get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade.
mike flynn, and it's being held up by many, including what you just heard, as evidence the president ought to be impeached. two weeks ago in sworn testimony before the congress, then fbi director james comey said this. >> is the attorney general or senior officials of the department of justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt the fbi investigation? >> in theory. >> has it happened? >> not in my experience because it would be a big deal to tell the faa to stop doing something. we are often times, give us opinions that we don't see a case and use -- ought to stop. if we were told to stop something for a political reason, it will be a big deal. it's not happened in my experience. >> tucker: he said under oath in front of congress and on television.
but he is apparently saying something different. what is true? lisa boothe, charlie hurt. they both join us. charlie, which is true? >> i think without a doubt, the testimony he gave, i think it's crucial testimony because not only does it suggest comey does not think anything like this happened but also, andrew mccabe is someone who would have been a recipient of the memo he wrote. of course andrew mccabe himself also testified under oath that up to that point, no one had tried to impede any investigation. one other thing that's important is, you know, what donald trump supposedly said to jim comey and again, jim comey apparently didn't think it was an obstruction of justice when he said it. donald trump has said this
publicly, how mike flynn shouldn't be investigated and he didn't think he did anything wrong. why was that not obstruction of justice? it is no different than behind closed doors saying he's a good guy. he didn't do anything wrong. >> tucker: that's a good point. comey presumably was behind the leak of the memo he a wrote, a memo we have not seen, whose contents we can only speculate about. but if he did leak it, why would he do that? >> i think to undermine the president, if he is behind the leak. obviously that testimony seems to contradict his recent memo. as charlie pointed out, also andrew mccabe. in "the new york times" article, it mentioned that comey had mentioned this memo and this meeting with the president in february 2 senior fbi officials. guess what, mccabe is the acting fbi director.
i think it's fair and reasonable i needed for everyone to be skeptical of what everyone is saying regarding this, because you've had so many untruthful actors in the sense of one, comey has taken so much heat from the left and right, given his handling of the clinton investigation. you have the media who has been wrong about so many things, even regarding the comey firing and saying he was fired because he asked for additional resources which turned out to be true. there's also reports rosenstein wanted to quit which was not true. basically there is no credible sources left. >> tucker: everybody is lying. we are almost out of time. charlie, obviously the mueller appointment seems like a good one. would you be worried if you were the trump people? >> yeah, absolutely. in the near term, it's a good thing. i would be worried, but i would also be
and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long.
counsel is named to oversee the russia investigation into familiar face swearing the actual crime. >> i have not seen any evidence of actual collusion. where is the actual crime they think they need a special prosecutor to prosecute? i haven't seen it. >> live in washington for reaction pouring in tonight. >> tulsa police officer cleared in the shooting death of an unarmed black man. how the city is reacting. >> american hero hassles, outrage after an american soldier is charged hundreds of dollars for his overweight military duffel bag coming back from overseas, find out which airline. "fox and friends" first starts right now. ♪
♪ >> good morning live at fox news studios in new york city. you are watching "fox and friends" first, it is thursday. rob: donald trump slamming the russia collusion investigation is a witchhunt. colin kaepernick heather: but they are appointing a special counsel to take over. rob: we start the day with breaking news. >> reporter: robert mueller will