tv Maria Bartiromos Wall Street FOX Business December 8, 2018 8:00pm-8:31pm EST
[laughter] >> yes. lou: doug wead, it's always good to see you. that's it for us tonight. thank you for being with us. have a good evening and good night from new york. mug. ♪ ♪ night from new york. trish: we have details pouring in after special counsel robert mueller issues a series of memos in connection with his russia investigation. but so far no apparent proof of collusion with russia. robert mueller alleging former trump campaign chairman paul manafort repeatly lied about a variety of topics. federal prosecutors coming out swinging against michael cohen. recommending he receive four years in jail, even though he cooperated with prosecutors. here is mueller's so-called
biggy. the filing says that michael cohen provided crucial information about new contacts between the trump campaign and the russians, including outreach as early as november, 2015. joining us, mercedes colwin, and curt selector. the filing reads 2015. cohen got contact information about a russian national that could offer campaign synergy on a government level. the person was talking about a possible meeting between mr. trump and mr. putin. but here is the thing. that meeting never happened. it never happened. and cone never even reached out to arrange a meeting. we live in a global economy.
and this is disinformation. speech that wasn't acted on. why was mueller wasting taxpayer dollars suggesting a level of guilt because someone has a contact in their rolodex. >> i don't think the special counsel has much interest in cone. he came in with a recommendation he get jail time. i think cohen misrepresent and overstated we had. and was the only person saying he had anything at all other that mainstream media. trish: do you think that's why they are giving him such a hefty sentence? >> he was promoting himself because he wanted a deal. he was auditioning for a deal through the press. i don't think mueller had much interest in him at all. they didn't go to bat for him
today. trish: misty, having read through all these documents, do you see anything in here that really shouts out russia collusion to you? >> nothing. yet again, this is the next set of the documents where there are some facts thrown out there. new information. but nothing that links trump to russian collusion. with respect to' michael cohen. the federal prosecutors from new york take a hard line. though mueller a little kinder to cone. he didn't recommend anything. he didn't say that there shouldn't be leniency. he said it should be a mitigating factor. but look for something, anything against the trump administration. trish: don't drink a white russian. don't be caught drinking a white
russian. i'm making light of it. but in all seriousness. i get, you can't lie to prosecutors. you cannot lie to the doj. you can't lie under oath to congress. all that stuff is serious stuff. but when we try and piece together what happened in 2016 and the theory going into this from the left that donald trump worked deliberately with the russians to steal the election from hillary clinton, i don't see it when i read over what came through today. >> michael cohen was supposed to be their shining star. here so is one who flipped -- here is someone who flipped. he's trump's lawyer. the fact that he was given the maximum under the recommendation tells you he wasn't giving all that information to demonstrate collusion.
he didn't give information to the point that prosecutors would say of course we have to be lenient. his level of cooperation would influence the sentencing. he didn't help in terms of moving the ball along in establishing collusion. >> i served under mueller. i think what gets people upset is the contrast between his aggressive investigation and the non-investigation of the clinton foundation and the hillary clinton emails. i don't think as many people would be complaining about the special counsel if i'm had gone over the emails and the foundation with the same enthusiasm and hard approach to it, but within the bounds of the
law. i think mueller is moving towards something. it might just be another reports or indictment. it would be hard to believe as an investigator that so many deals would be cut and so much cooperation solicited not just from man form *. trish: you worked so closely with mueller and misty morris here on set. when somebody is put in charge of something like this as robert mueller, there is a desire to come forward with something. the public has said go for it. and you have a blank check to go for it. but if you don't come back with proof of collusion and conspiracy between the russians and donald trump, do you feel like you failed? there is pressure for a prosecutor? >> is that for me? trish: yes, chris. you worked with mueller. >> i serve directly under him
for 2 1/2 years. i'm as conservative as anybody. i don't want to see anything bad happen to this president. but i will tell you mule per is a fair man. he's a marine. somebody gives him a mission, he'll go after that mission with everything he has. trish: mercedes, i'm wondering what happened with the russian dossier and how the heck did hillary clinton and her cronies paid for research that ended up in the hand of the fbi that was good enough to get a files ra warrants. and they never told the judge where that research actually came from and it was funded by hillary clinton and her team. why isn't robert mueller looking at that, mercedes? >> frankly as a federal prosecutor, we represented clients in the throes of a federal investigation.
we don't know what maneuvering this mueller is doing for the background. but to your point, he should be looking at everything. anything that can establish innocence and anything that can lead to further investigation and information. but to ignore information -- trish require's trying to prove someone on trump's team is talking to the russians. but he's not looking at that other stuff. i feel as an america we all deserve answers. i just want to know why the fisa warrants are based on opposition research. this is a slipper irslope for americans and our privacy. >> that's why there seems to be such a dichotomy here. why aren't we going down that road? let's go back to what this is
supposed to be. this is supposed to be an investigation on whether there was foreign interference in our'' election. how are we not looking into fisa warrants based on information that is fictitious. that's something we should be. trump temperatures new nominee that may take over for whitaker may go down that road. he has spoken about that before. there are other avenues that aren't being explored. trish: i'm going to talk about this coming up. you have the house dems saying they are going to look into some of this stuff. they are not so underred in having investigations into whether there was bias at the fbi. and we know there was. we have only to look at lisa and peter's romantic or not so pro man particular texts. just piling on how much they hated trump. there was bias and the democrats don't care.
was there a political component. i know you worked for bob mueller and you think he's a stand-up guy, but is there a bias that's dangerous? >> under comey it was. there was bias that was corrupt to the core. inspector general i think is looking hard at fisa abuse. i think he produced credible report on mccabe, i think we'll see mccabe indicted for lying and try toition frame others through his lies and leaks. and democrat horowitz, i have got to think he's looking hard at the fisa abuse. we aren't heard anything about it. if i would be surprised if he didn't find fisa abuse. the dossier forming the basis for fisa.
opposition research. improper, inappropriate, and does taint the fisa. trish: i don't care what side of the aisle you are on. somehow a judge is presented with this dossier and nobody bothers to tell the jingt was funded by hillary clinton and her team. i mean, that's not the america we know and love nor want to live in, right, misty? >> you got it, trish. mercedes, good to see you. fresh intel on the breaking news we brought you. whistleblowers revealing the clinton foundation misused funds. the quid pro quo promises made to donors while she was secretary of state. straight ahead, newly elected democrat socialist alexandria
ocasio-cortez thinks renewable energy can be the vehicle to establish economic, social and racial justice. why the left continues to ignore and outright deny any acknowledgment regarding all that bias at the fbi. i am going to set the record straight. i'll be right here the after i'll be right here the after this. i'll be right here the after this. our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. holiday inn express. book now for at least 20% off during our annual sale. if these packs have the same number of bladder leak pads, i bet you think bigger is better. actually, it's bulkier. always discreet quickly turns liquid to gel,
trash * three whistleblowers coming forward with allegations of quid pro quo promises made to donors while hillary clinton was secretary of state. congressman mark me do is set to hold a hearing on this next week. joining me, ned ryun and mallory hagan. the allegations of impropriety that have been out there for years and years. all kinds of stuff. the premise is you could pay for
access. if you just turned over a nice check for share the to the clinton foundation, suddenly things were getting easier for you. >> we talked about uranium one situation. but between 2010 and 2012 the clinton state department approved $165 billion in thunderstorms deals to the nations that had given donations to the clinton foundation. that doubled the sales to these countries from the bush's second term. when you look at the 2014 audit of the clinton foundation it had $235 million in assets. they only gave out 3% in grants. trish: mallory, what's your defense as a democrat to these
charges? >> my reaction is that this isn't a partisan issue at all. if there is wrongdoing and there has been commingling an investigation needs to take place. if the allegations are true, the clintons should be held accountable. but it seems like this is a well-timed allegation and investigation of the club on foundation based on what's happening with your president. so i will be interested to see what happens. trish: i'm surprised it took so long. one of the things that irritated me. there was a report in "the atlantic" that talked about the speaking fees her husband received that coincided with the state department letting ubs
clients off the hook for tax evasion. you pay bill clinton one big check and mysteriously dozen of your clients get off the hook for tax evasion in it seems inappropriate. there is something known as the chinese law in some households for reasons. >> the fact they are raising so much revenue while she was secretary of state for the clinton foundation and last year dropped 26 million. i think the biggest question of all this is this. do we believe there are institutions and individuals who are too big to fail or do we actually believe in the rule of law? this is the big question. i believe that the clinton foundation is a charity fraud. people go to jail for charity fraud. congressman steve stockman got 10 years for charity fraud. trish: if in fact it is or was,
then they deserve to pay the price for it it's been out there for so long. i have covered some of these cgi events, and then the international one they hold in new york city and i'm always truck by how much sort of other sort of sketchy folks are there. i have never met so many nigerian billionaires. you somehow get this sort of free pass. if mallley are you is still with us. do you have perspective on the cgi event and the money they charge and people coming from all over the world. then suddenly you are getting the stamp of approval you paid for from the clintons? >> i think that's how charity
events work. people pay astronomical amounts of money to have dinner with people who are important. but ned mentioned the rule of law and people not being about of. the one event that takes place today, people are saying donald trump shouldn't be held accountable but hillary clinton should. if people are doing things that are wrong, particularly people in positions of power. trish: mallory, you think he should be held accountable. i am trying to figure out what exactly the left really thinks happened. what is your gut feeling mallory? and maybe it's not yours. maybe you can speak for your party as for what donald trump effectively did with the russians that mueller is so key to investigate right now and as we get all this news as memos
regarding sentencing recommendations are quite relevant tonight. >> well, i think what he has done is he collude. what we'll see. trish: what do you mean excluded. >> proof, give me proof. >> whether it's the clintons or donald trump an investigation has to take place. trish: what does that mean? you can talk to anyone you want. it's a free world. we live in a global economy. if you are a business person and building real estate or licensing your name for real estate projects, moscow is a great place to be. that's the reality of the global world we live in. it's a global environment. i am losing you. i think you are coming in and out. darn. ned will be let's finish this off with you. mallory says collusion is the
problem. what is collusion? what exactly does that mean? >> the basic argument the left has been making for over two years is somehow donald trump, the duly elected president of the united states colluded with russia to win the president of the united states. we have seen nothing over the last two years with the mueller investigation that pointed to prove of collusion. i think it's just a fairytale. i have had this conversation with you. trish: maybe if there was some conspiracy to commit a crime, then we would be talking about something. but so far no evidence of that and no evidence tonight of any of that. >> alan dershowitz said the only thing that has been found guilty because of the mueller investigation process crime, no crimes in any way point to collusion. i don't think you will ever see evidence because it never happened. trish: ned ryun, and mallory
hagan, thank you. we have fresh evidence that jerry nadler vows to end investigation into the fbi and doj. the democrat claiming there are no political biases at the fbi. right? yeah. congressman nadler, did you see the hundreds of text messages between former lovers -- i hate that word -- boyfriend, girlfriend. peter strzok and lisa page? the ones that clearly display their hatred for president trump? how are you out there saying there was never any bias. the ones where they vowed to make sure the president, now president would never make it to the oval office? there is a whole lot of bias there. i'm setting the record straight for you on why these probes must continue. don't go anywhere. [ telephone rings ] [ client ] - hey maya.
>> the entire purpose of this investigation is smaller. there is no evidence whatsoever by the fbi or any of this other nonsense they are talking about. trish: come on, really? incoming house judiciary chair jerry nadler saying he will dismantle the investigation into the department of justice's actions in 2015. lawmakers have been trying to figure out of course whether there was a deliberate effort to undermine candidate and then president trump and as i reported last night for you the fact that the fbi investigators never told the judge the dossier was paid for by hillary clinton and the dnc when they went to get the warrant, that is kind of a problem, very big problem and understandably should be investigated.
the public has a right to know what the heck happened. mr. nadler and other house democrats say nothing to see here, just keep on going. they actually are insisting there is no bias at the fbi, none. that really takes some gumption to sit there with a straight face and tell america there was no bias at the fbi. tonight i'm setting the record straight. i don't care what side of the aisle you are on here, there is no possible way you can sit there and say that there was no bias at the fbi unless of course you don't know what the word means. look at the text between peter strzok and lisa page who are looking into trump's ties and russia. it will take you down memory lane here. omg trump is an idiot.