Laura Ingraham shines a spotlight on everyday Americans and examines how their lives are affected by politics at the federal, state and local level. when you were chair of the house oversight committee on who wrote the talking points, who were interested in the families might've happened in new york, not to mention the trump organization and the trump foundation. we would have investigations in congress. congress is hapless right now. when you were chair of that committee, you investigated. i think you would be investigating right now. >> jason: you know what. you know why congress is hapless? this attorney general does nothing to provide documents that congress has issued subpoenas for. math, come on in here and give us your perspective. this attorney general is in name only. he i think he's one of the most feckless, ineffective attorney general's this country is ever had. >> jason, i understand where you're coming from. i am a big fan of jeff sessions but i feel it for the last year and a half it's been one of the most painful things to watch. the saddest thing is the president has amazing fortitude and pushing through his agenda, but there's two decisions that jeff sessions made that have really caused all of this drama over the course of the last year and a half. one, kicking rod rosenstein, someone who doesn't believe in the president and doesn't believe in his agenda is the number to manage justice. big mistake. personnel and policy. if he was going to recuse himself. if he was going to recuse himself from this investigation then turning it over to someone like rod rosenstein, you would've immediately known that was going to be a mistake because rod rosenstein by his own voice said i'm not really very partisan. i just want to help you run the agency. those two decisions are why jeff sessions is in the position he's in. jason, it's not fixable. there's nothing they can be done to fix the situation. we need someone running doj who can handle this situation and also have the confidence of the president. >> jason: david, do you believe rod rosenstein needs to recuse himself because his name is on the fisa document, which is the subject of the investigation? number two, do you believe that there should be a second special counsel? >> i believe there needs to be another investigation into what happened within the department of justice and the fbi. peter strzok, lisa page, all of what happened under james comey's watch, you know, how this investigation was dealt with differently than hillary clinton investigation, the double standard in the political nature within the fbi. you could say it but those are the facts. that's with the american people believe. they believe the mainstream media is biased against this president, because they are. just yesterday, 225 times msnbc and cnn talked about impeachment. it's outrageous on its face, where we have gone as a country. >> obstruction of justice and committing felonies are things that the congress should be looking into right now. >> jason: wade, chris. what is it that you think -- >> somebody swearing to it in court. >> no, no, no. >> jason: gentlemen, timeout. one at a time. i assume you're on the bandwagon that says we should impeach donald trump. yes, no? >> no. i believe in justice. >> jason: so you don't think -- >> i believe in getting to the truth, and if we get to a truth that says the president committed a felony, then we can talk about impeachment. until that time, we can't. i also say you can't have a partisan impeachment. it has to be a bipartisan thing. republicans democrats have to agree. >> jason, if i could -- if i could get -- i want to remind everybody. i want to remind everybody how this all got started. it all got started, even if you want to give officials let doj little bit of credit, it was all about finding come as fast as we could, whether or not there was collusion with putin's government. we are talking about the lifestyles of the rich and famous and we are talking about bad stories they can harm a reputation. it has nothing to do with collusion. it has nothing to do with russia. the american people are repulsed by all of this. >> jason: david, david. timeout. gentlemen. are you concerned that immunity is given to a member of the media? people will scoff at the "national enquirer" and say it's the "national enquirer." you don't hear very often and that the department of justice grants immunity to a news organization. there are certain times, when you go and talk to your attorney, you get attorney-client privilege. when you talk to your doctor, you expect those medical records will be -- when you talk to a member of the media off the record, there is some sanctity there, isn't there? they go there absolutely should be. we don't know. it's all i have pathetic or what david pecker may or may not know. usually law enforcement get something in return for that immunity deal. if you look at sharon nelson samuelson. hillary clinton's lawyers. you remember this very well, that they got immunity in their deals and gave nothing in retur return. >> jason: five got immunity. the closest to hillary clinton and they got nothing out of it. >> well, well, i think we all want to know what is in david pecker's safe. it could be interesting to the american people. >> like geraldo. >> jason: gentlemen, thank you. i appreciate the spirit of the debate. chris, i want you to stick around. i want everybody else on this broadcast to stick around because this will shock you. a bombshell report put out by real clear investigations that says despite what james comey said, the fbi failed to look at the vast majority of the emails on anthony weiner's laptop. which had thousands of hillary clinton's state department emails on it. joining me now to explain further is the author of that report, investigative journalism real clear investigations.com paul sperry. thanks for being here. actually, the letter that went to congress explaining this was a letter that came to me when i was the chairman of the oversight committee. tell me what you found out now about the reality. >> that's right. james comey told congress that they had reviewed all of the clinton emails, hundreds of thousands, that were found on the weiner laptop. that was not true. they barely looked at any event. 3,000 of 700,000 were individually -- >> jason: wait, wait, wait. how many? stick with 3,000 out of potentially relevant 700,000 ems were actually individually examined for classified information and incriminating evidence. >> jason: i mean, it did shock us, right? it was days. they told us they were looking into it and then days later they somehow reviewed 700,000 documents? how many people, do you have any idea how many people working on this case looking at these documents? >> i was going to mention that peter strzok, the disgraced agent who was in charge of the investigation into the clinton emails, he personally handpicked the 3,000 sample. with two other investigators, went through the mall supposedln all-nighter, ordered pizza, and said nothing new here. case closed once again. >> jason: i've got to tell you, as the former chairman of the committee, as a former member of congress, i mean, how can that be anything other than the director of the fbi lying to congress and misleading us? stick and he also swore under o, and he had this story that he had this miraculous breakthrough in technology that fbi to process the weiner laptop for evidence rapidly. turns out that doesn't pass the smell test. that didn't check out either. there was a technical glitch that ported the effort. i was going to mention that, jason, when you were on oversight, you're probably wondering the same thing. how in the world can they get through this mountain of evidence in days, after comey gave you the final all clear on hillary? >> jason: now that you have unveiled or figured out what's going on with this information, where does this case go next? does anybody -- is anybody investigating this? michael horowitz, the inspector general for the department of justice, i wonder if he's looking at it. if you have attorney general sessions just today said he's only operates without any political influence. is the attorney general himself looking at this and lying to congress? >> this evidence that is, really has been covered up on this laptop, this weiner laptop, it is still relevant. in the clinton foundation probe especially, which is still ongoing, and you know, the whole thing raises more suspicion that the fbi politicized these investigations during the election. it just begs for an outside, independent prosecutor to go back through this evidence, through these emails, and see if the fbi was trying to cover up material evidence in this case. >> jason: i really appreciate your good investigative work. we were always scratching our heads in congress, the fact that you have unveiled this, it does demand i think the inspector general, attorney general himself, and potentially i would advocate s second special prosecutor to look at this. it creates more legal jeopardy for james comey and it's a second revelation that not only did they use peter strzok to look at that information with his handpicked people and they ordered late night pizza, come on. the disgraced peter strzok at this point, makes absolutely no sense. paul, i thank you for your good work and coming on this program to share this with us. >> my pleasure. thank you. >> jason: the attorney for they'll go and bergen alleged to have murdered mollie tibbetts speaks out. you won't believe it when he had to say. we will play next. we know that what's outside can change what's inside. we know the great outdoors. we love the great outdoors. bass pro shops and cabela's bring you the fall hunting classic with huge savings on the latest gear. like savings of 40% on redhead silent hide camo shirts and pants. and save $130 on this garmin handheld gps. officials are saying their reports indicate. he used a false name to work for an employer. they thought he was somebody else. we know that as well. these are the facts that are being dug up in that case. >> jason: martha is exactly right. joining me there were three actions are tom homan, a fox news contributor, and the former acting director of i.c.e. and immigration attorney alan orr. allen, is it a legitimate question or subject for us to discuss if somebody is here legally or illegally? stick to it is if we are dealing with a matter of immigration. but i think what the family has said in this situation and also with the law bears out in the way the cases being handled, the fact that this person is undocumented is not an essential part of his actual criminal activity. therefore -- >> jason: alan, don't you believe he was unable to get here, if he had come legally and lawfully, he may not ever come here. the fact that he was here and is illegal. mollie would be alive if he weren't in this country. do you believe that or not? >> first of all, it's an absolute tragedy and i offer my condolences to the family. the possibility of changing what actually happened, no one can do those circumstances. i'm not going to play the game of what i have. >> jason: it's not a game. when people are here illegally and they commit a crime, i really do believe that that crime wouldn't have been committed because they wouldn't have been here. is that logical? >> a philosophy major. it's not a logical answer. there are endless possibilities of things that could've happened. it's not a logical answer. >> jason: he would've been in mexico and she would have gone running. >> in this specific occurrence. >> jason: a young woman going to college about to enter her junior year is murdered. you are telling me not relevant? >> i am uncertain if you're asking me if the immigration status is relevant. it is not relevant. what is relevant is the individual and the individual actions which have been discussed. >> jason: his actions of coming here illegally ultimately led to her being killed by this person. that is the allegation. we will see if it's true, but that's the allegation. tom, you have dedicated -- >> is a fallacy of causation. he was here for four years with no problem. >> jason: we don't know that yet. hold on. i want to bring in tom. tom spent a lifetime in law enforcement protecting us and getting rid of some of the most nefarious criminals out there. tom, what is your take on this? >> i think my friend alan is way wrong on this and you are right. fact: he was in the country illegally. fact: if he wasn't here, this girl would be alive today. it's just a fact of the case. it's not a philosophy. this girl is dead today because he killed her and he was here illegally. if he hadn't been here, if we had a border wall and real border enforcement, maybe he wouldn't have been to be here. stone cold fact. >> jason: let me play a clip of a candidate for the united states senate. a person running against ted cruz. sorry. okay, we don't have this clip. you have a lot of people saying hey, we should decriminalize this. essentially open borders. we want to abolish i.c.e. allen, where do you stand on those issues? >> the abolish i.c.e. movement as well as decriminalization of immigration are separate issues and i want to be clear. earlier saying his immigration status had nothing to do with the crime. and what happened in that occurrence. what is not important -- >> jason: i'm going to keep arguing. i'm not going to let you get over that. i'm going to keep arguing. if he didn't come here illegally, he wouldn't have committed this crime. and you think that's a philosophy? i think it's a fact. >> it's a fallacy of causation. you are saying that because he was illegal, he committed the crime. not the case. >> jason: if some in your home and then murders you, what do you think would happen if he didn't break into your home? >> right, so if these -- these equivocation's, the strawman arguments aren't useful to the conversation. >> jason: it's not a strawman. we have a dead woman. >> and it's a tragedy for the family and they've asked that her death not a political issues based on this because -- >> jason: it's the number one issue facing voters. tom, jump in. >> an's actions is not represent illegals in this country. >> jason: i'm not quite a lot you get away with that. there's difference between immigrants and illegal americans. tom homan explained the difference. >> low, immigrants are here legally. illegal aliens are here illegally. the comment allen made about the family. illegal immigration has been a political issue for decades. it's emotional. fact: about two hours ago, i got a text, actually an email from don rosenberg in california. he talked about this case and talked about an l.a. editorial where they talked about politicizing the death. don rosenberg reminded me. he said tom, everyone of us, we want the president to speak about this. we've been speaking mothers for a long time that we never had the voice of the top president trump got to be president. he created the voice. victims of immigration crime at i.c.e. here is an angel dead. saying we want a voice. want at the american people to understand the tragedy. children killed by illegal aliens and we need to talk about it. >> jason: let me -- alan, i've got to show some video. there are those of us to believe in the wall and believe we should lock down the border. on the southern border, there's a video which hopefully will come up on the screen, of what was going on at a kfc. there was a tunnel going into this kfc which was providing a conduit. this is the kfc. reminds me of breaking bad and how they they are moving drunk through. this is the tunnel moving through. do you advocate for open borders or do you think we need more resources, more fun, more resources to lockdown the border, particularly the southern border? >> i don't think anyone is arguing for open borders. the point, i'm glad we are talking about this story that's exactly the issue. i.c.e. should be focused on these types of issues rather than separating families and children at the border. [all speaking] >> border patrol separating families, not i.c.e. i support the border patrol during that period numbers were down by 20%. should have stuck with it another 30 days of the problem would be solved. decriminalizing illegal immigration is going to result in more illegal immigrants coming to this country. >> jason: gentlemen, thank you. the reality is if you put up a wall, you're not going to separate families because they are not going to get into the country the first place. well, i appreciate you being here. more left-wing outraged night, this time over a report the trump administration is considering using federal funds to help armed teachers in the classroom. we will debate it next. the closer you get to home, the more you know the commute is worth it. you and that john deere tractor, you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive, but just like a john deere, it's worth it. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach. >> jason: according to "the new york times," secretary of our education betsy devos considering a plan that would provide federal funding to help arm teachers. predictably, the left reacted with outrage. >> teachers don't want guns. they know it makes them a target of god forbid a comes into the school. ed now betsy devos wants to take federal funds away from instruction? so that the school district can buy guns for teachers? what is that all about? >> jason: senator schumer knows not what he says, nor is he giving a proper representation of what the secretaries trying to to do. joining me now for debate is guns down executive director igor both he and laura colonel, founder of faster color. thank you for being here. igor, i get the idea that you advocate and don't want any guns at any schools. i wish the bad guys wouldn't bring guns into schools or really anywhere. >> we are on the same page. we should have a country with fewer guns in a country where guns are significantly -- >> jason: we are on a different page. >> look at us, same page, jason. >> jason: i think your utopia you describe is just fiction and it's not reality. let's pretend that somebody does bring a gun into school, then what do you advocate? >> well, i mean if somebody brings a gun into a school, that situation should be dealt with. what we know is -- >> jason: how? >> it depends on what happened, if somebody reports the student come he's going to be dealt with that way. if he starts some kind of incident, certainly police are going to be called. in terms of arming teachers, which is the question here, but we have seen time and time and time again is that individuals who are carrying firearms do not respond well and active shooting situation. the adrenaline that run through your body in those moments, without the proper training, that professionals have in the field, you're not going to be able to handle this well and often times oftentimes innocent people get hurt. this correlation between -- >> jason: do you think more innocent people would get hurt if there is nobody -- wait, wait. is there more people getting potentially hurt if there is no resistance? or if there is somebody who is there to protect may be themselves and their kids. >> the fbi looked at this question. they looked from 2000 to 2013 in active shooting situations and they found unarmed individuals were far more successful at disarming the intruder -- >> jason: if i've got a guy with a gun in my school, i want to have a gun with me too. laura, let's go your per trade faster colorado, you dedicate a part of your career and efforts to help engage teachers. how do you see this working? >> it's working today. we've got hundreds of armed school staff already in colorado and thousands across the country. what it comes down to is these are school staff, teachers, janitors, however. they would die to protect their kids. in these school shootings, you see they are dying to protect kids. they can protect kids and live and be able to save kids and go back to their own families. we hear a lot of statistics. they are not completely accurate. what we do know is that when somebody is there on scene to stop the killer as close as possible to where he starts his crime, fewer people are hurt or die. the alternative, you have to wait for law enforcement. if it's even 3 minutes, most of these things are over in 3 to 5 minutes. it's a lot people dying with nobody there to stop a shooter. >> jason: igor, this is where i think you're wrong. it will take law-enforcement even just a few minutes and the carnage that can ensue is wrong. when i went to school in colorado, i had coach schmidt. coach schmidt knew more about guns than probably anybody i've ever met. his wielding a gun or having a sidearm, i think it would have made us a lot safer. guns aren't for everybody. you have to have an aptitude and a desire but nobody is suggesting that every teacher do this. what's wrong with coach schmidt having a gun? they got that coach has the right amount of training community we can think about it. i think we can agree that guns are too easy to get in this country and we should work on making sure -- >> jason: know, i disagree with you. >> make sure the guy never gets into the school. we need guns harder to get. all the data shows us that fewer guns means safer communities. you talk a utopia. all other high income countries -- >> jason: look at what's going on in chicago. some of the toughest gun laws. >> i'm happy to talk about chicago but you are the one who brought up a utopia, this idea that you can live in a gun violence free world. i'm telling you nations around the world are living that utopia and they living it because they have fewer guns. >> jason: okay, laura, how do we best protect our kids? what is the right thing, what's the right policy for schools? >> we protect our kids the way we protect our families. people can make decisions to have a school that doesn't have armed staff and does have armed staff and parents can choose. for my kids, my grandkids, i want someone there who can stop whatever happens, whether it's a fire, whatever other danger, including active killers. what we know about active killers, jason come is that the next one is out there. he's already planning his crime. no amount of gun control is going to stop him. what are we going to do when he comes to the door of the school, gets into the school, like we keep seeing? somebody has to be there to stop him, or we are going to see more kids die and more school staff die. you are right. we've got janitors who are all over the school, coaches, they are all over the school. there are lots of folks. in my training program, we see them. they are all volunteers. they raised their hand and they say pick me to save kids. that's what we should be looking at. >> jason: we've got a lot of former military people. we have a lot of former policeman that should be involved and engaged. i think the right answer is not for everyone, but those that are trained and those with an aptitude i think should be in those schools and it will make the schools safer. i think you for your passion on this issue and coming on the air to discuss it tonight. some troubling new data about well for use in this country, plus hurricane lane is barreling into hawaii, one of my favorite places on the planet. we have new development on its track. that's coming upro next. on the shelf... or even... out in the field. your mom knew she could always count on us... and your grandma did too. because for over 150 years, we've been right by your side. advancing the health of the people, plants and pets you love. so, from all of us at bayer... thank you for trusting in us. then... and now. already. a lot more rain to go. a while, kauai. people getting in on it. you can see the center of the storm. the center of the storm likely won't cross landfall. i say likely. he can't fully rule it out. because of the trajectory, it's going to be impacting hawaii for a long time. came south, made eight northerly turn anti-western turn likely before moving across parts of the island, at least the center of it. that means we have a long time, it's a long duration stronger because its longer duration, with the rain, rainfall totals will pileup as will the flooding. down to a category 3. the center of the storm doesn't have as strong winds as it did before. we expect that to happen. the farther north, it's going to break apart a little bit. take a look at this. friday morning, saturday mornin morning. somewhere here passed a while who by sunday morning. likely pass the island chain by sunday. two and a half more days of rain that we have to deal with. these are models we look at. notice all of them moving towards the north and all of them eventually making a westerly turn. does that get a little bit closer here maybe around a while who -- oahu or maui. the impact will be there with all of the rain. this is the wind shear. the farther north a ghost, interact more with that. that's my will eventually see awakening storm which is good news but the impacts are going to be the same nonetheless. you will it's primarily on the eastern side of the island. the big island where we still are going to be looking at another 18 inches of rain, same goes up around maui, a little bit less likely once we get towards oahu and kauai. that's tropical storm force winds for the overnight hours, will be dealing with that across parts of the big island. much of the day tomorrow and saturday. across parts of the central islands. a long-duration storm, and because of that, that's why we are so concerned about flooding and it's going to cost quite a bit of damage. >> jason: thank you. an amazing amount of rain. good luck there in hawaii. we are thinking about you and praying for you. democrats are flirting with socialism, and if you look at the latest census data from 2016, it's not hard to see why. a whopping 52% .1% of americans under the age of 18 lived in a household that received at least one type of welfare. it begs the big question, are we breeding a new generation of dependency on government? joining enough for analysis are david burstein, the founder of run for america. and doug schoen, who is the potable analyst and fox news contributor. gentlemen, i think you both for being here. david, where is this taking us? is this new generation just going to assume that government is going to be there to bail them out the rest of their lives? >> look, i think we have to look at these numbers, and these are not good numbers because what they underlie is that there's some fundamental problems in our economy and the way that it's working for people. i don't think the biggest problem here is the government dependency that's been created, but the reality of the economy that most young people are growing up in, which does not spell a tremendous amount of opportunity for them going forward. when we think about the economic policy -- >> jason: but come on. every story we have had over the last six months to a year is about record low unemployment levels. speak of the economy is working for a certain set of people, -- >> jason: unemployment near 3.0% as it is in utah, then i mean come on. why so many people still dependent? >> these are people, as you know, they are not counted in those numbers. people under the age of 18 are generally not counted in on employment numbers because they haven't reached full maturity in the labor market yet. these are people who are beginning their career and beginning their lives at a huge disadvantage to everybody else. >> jason: let me -- i want to have -- >> we haven't created a fair economy people. >> jason: i want to talk about the minimum wage. let me put it this graphic and show how the growth has happened. this is this is households withn under the age of 18 receiving government assistance. 1998 22013. up to 51.8%. doug, what is your read? >> i was one of those people advising the clinton administration, and as you want to remember, we did work requirements, time limits for welfare. while i agree that there are people who need assistance, the disabled, absolutely. we have -- what we need to do is encourage a culture of independence, not dependence, te encourage people to take advantage of the resources our society offers to get ahead. those that can't come i need help. i really think as a society, we need to encourage working. it's worth saying unemployment in the african-american and hispanic unities is now at record lows. we are making a lot of progress, but there's obviously more to do. >> jason: david, what is your take on minimum wage? you have kids turning the corner, 15, 16 years old and then when the minimum wage because our quality thing happens to the employment of those young teenagers trying to get their first job and get the experience? >> look, the reality that we have to look at here is that these people who are 18 and starting out. >> jason: that's not what i asked you, david. i asked you about the kids were 15, 16 years old trying to get a first job. what do you think is the effect of arising minimum wage? >> the children that we're looking at in this report, you know, many of these people are going out and they are getting the same kind of jobs that people have gotten -- >> it's very simple. >> jason: david. >> i am one who believes in work programs. i believe in incentives for job training. minority business and the like. but if you do not allow younger people to get below minimum wage jobs as a first opportunity to get in the workforce, all you do is hurt poor people. i don't want to sound or conan or tough or harsh but that's just a statistical fact of life. >> you are my hero of the moment. i think you're absolutely right. one of the good things i thought happened with bill clinton's years, along with newt gingrich, a lot of these work requirement requirements. david, i've got to tell you i really do believe when you see rising and employment levels, guess what. they hire less young people. they don't have experience and learn the value of a dollar, guess what. then they start on this cycle. >> we want people in the workforce, period. i do it myself my own business. i am proud of it. you know what -- >> jason: i did it. my kids did it. i wish we had more time. dave and doug, thank you very much. appreciate you coming on tonight. former congressman accused of spending taxpayer money to fund a lavish lifestyle says the charges are bogus. aaron shocked is here and he will tell us how he is fighting back. while i was in the navy, >> jason: aaron schock was once a rising star on the republican party. i served with him in congress. he liked it when he was just 27 years old, he joke on an almost celebrity status. even appearing on the cover of men's health, something i could never do. six years ago -- after six years of his time in congress, there were allegations of misdeeds regarding the decoration of his office and the potential misuse of a campaign vehicle. according to his attorney, 30 federal agents were involved. there were two grand jury is convened. he was charged with 24 felonies, two of which have been dismissed. and he faces 80 to 100 years in prison. four years later, the prosecutor was reassigned after lying to the court. he says he has spent nearly $3 million defending himself. yet he is still never had his day in court. it is time to hear aaron's side of the story kemeny joins me here today. aaron, tell me, why are we in this situation for years after the fact he left congress. >> thank you for having me on, jason. anytime you're involved in a legal matter, your attorney say don't say anything and justice will prevail. i've always believed in our criminal justice system, that they are interested in truth. but sadly, it became very clear that over the two years that they were investigating me, that they were on a massive fishing expedition. they went so far while i was still in office. the obama justice department to much to wire up the low-level staffer in my office and directed that staffer, without a search warrant, to steal documents in my office and attorney-client privilege material and even still records of the house of representatives. then they were forcing court to admit they didn't find anything. of course natural -- >> jason: let me put up this graphic. one of the things that catches my attention, the house counsel is there to protect the institution, not necessarily the members of congress. i want to put up on the screen what he actually has said. this is the house counsel. talking about the fbi and the department of justice. "such conduct likely constitutes a federal crime on the part of the fbi. on the part of federal agents who induced the commission of an underlying crime." he has taken the position knocked against aaron schock but in support of aaron's be 26. >> supported me, into your point, support of the institution of the house of representatives. the government has repeatedly infringe on the separation of powers of the institution of congress, and unfortunately that letter has never been responded to by the justice department. they infringed upon the constitutional rights of congress as well to make and interpret its own rules. anyway, they charged me the suppose it felonies is almost laughable when you understand them. let me give you two quick examples. one, i purchased a car with campaign funds, which is perfectly legal for the use of driving on my district. we submitted to the fec the purchase of that vehicle and payments to the dealership as a transportation expense. the government now has charged me with a false statement to a federal agency. they believe it should have said vehicle purchase. >> jason: as opposed to transportation expense. >> 20 year felony. >> jason: as i recall, they were, the news article initially said you had run out more vehicle miles and when he sold it for, where there were multiple vehicles involved. >> of course them as you know when you drive around your district, you're not always in the same vehicle. my staff and i were estimating my mileage as we went around the district, which the house finance office excepted. the government now comes back and says you can't. >> jason: let's go to your office. one of the criticisms is you use this extravagant amount of money to decorate your office. "downton abbey" was the thing that was tag to your office. with your viewpoint? >> first of all, that's not true. the truth of the matter is i've never seen the show "downton abbey." i had never even heard of the show "downton abbey" until "the washington post" ran that story. the next day i did an interview with "cbs evening news" where i said this is not true. the decorator who did the office gave an interview to "the huffington post" -- >> jason: where did the money come from? >> the money came for my budget, my office budget. i spent $25,000 my office budget on my office. >> jason: members are given what's called a member's reimbursable allowance. roughly $1.4 million. you spent money, $25,000 or so of that office budget, on your office. >> [laughs] yeah, exactly. >> jason: what were you charged with? >> one of the items we've purchased, they decorator purchased a light fixture. according to the house rules can you can buy fixtures but not furniture. and so the government has committed said that's not a fixture. that's a piece of furniture. again, a false statement to a federal agency, 20 or felony. >> jason: you are facing 20 years because they say you put it on your forms saying it with a fixture as opposed to a piece of furniture even though it's a piece of lighting. >> correct. >> jason: you are facing 20 years. why has this taken so long? i have seen multiple different prosecutors. i believe you are now on your third judge. >> typically the justice department, this is my first rodeo, my first time. typically the justice department he first told the local attorney's office. they defer to their judgment. what has happened over the past four years at the local u.s. attorney's office, the obama holdover justice department in central illinois, has proven a lack of judgment frankly. first, not only did they wire up my informant illegally and still documents of mine. it's produced so that didn't happen with the department of justice in washington, d.c.? >> no, it's a local office who saw me as a rising star in the republican party and their ticket to move up the ladder within the justice department. after they wired up my informant and didn't anything, they then, during the grand jury process, used my fifth amendment right to not appear against me. when we heard about it, we call them out onto the judge. the judge asked to prosecute his office, were you doing this question might be emphatically denied it. three months later they had to admit to the car they lied and they had used my fifth amendment against me 11 times on 11 different occasions. yet the case continues to move forward and finally just a couple weeks ago, we found out that the same u.s. attorney's office was engaged in communication with the judge in my case about another criminal matter and that's why we have now got a new judge. >> jason: do you think -- you are charged two days after donald trump was elected. do you think that's a coincidence? >> no. this u.s. attorney we know contacted members of congress advocating for help becoming the next u.s. attorney because again, he was the guy who was prosecuting aaron schock. we know he was a finalist, one of the finalists -- >> jason: i've got about 15 seconds. the case camino have paperwork with the supreme court. what are the possibilities? >> we hope these are dream court except our hearing because it is important constitutional concerns about allowing the justice department to reinterpret the house rules, which are -- >> jason: thank you for being here and explaining it. a lot more to thisto case. this could mean fewer refills of toujeo. all that and a $0 copay! that's something to groove about. ♪ let's groove tonight. ♪ share the spice of life from the makers of lantus®, toujeo® provides blood sugar-lowering activity ♪ baby slice it right. all day, all night, and beyond, proven blood sugar control all day and all night, and significantly lower your a1c. toujeo® is used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes. it contains 3 times as much insulin in 1 milliliter as standard insulin. don't use toujeo® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you're allergic to insulin. get medical help right away if you have a serious allergic reaction such as body rash, or trouble breathing. don't reuse needles, or share insulin pens. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which can be life-threatening. it may cause shaking, sweating, fast heartbeat, and blurred vision. check your blood sugar levels daily. injection site reactions may occur. don't change your dose of insulin without talking to your doctor. tell your doctor about all your medicines and medical conditions. check insulin label each time you inject. taking tzds with insulins like toujeo® may cause heart failure that can lead to death. find your rhythm and keep on grooving. ♪ let's groove tonight. ♪ to experience toujeo, ask your doctor. bring you the fall hunting classic - with great deals. like savings of 40% on redhead silent hide camo shirts and pants. and save $130 on this garmin handheld gps. >> jason: many thanks to laura ingraham for allowing me to sit in and host her show. i really do appreciate it. hope you're able to check out a book i've written. it's called "the deep state: how an army of bureaucrats protected barack obama and is working to