Trump is calling to cut off aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador over a lack of help in dealing with immigration
Former North Carolina Democrat Rep. Brad Miller weighs in on Trump’s call for a refusal of foreign aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador.
This is a rush transcript from "Your World," December 28, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
TRISH REGAN, HOST: Police have arrested a men suspected of killing a police officer in Newman, California, authorities saying the alleged gunman was in the country illegally.
And in the last hour, we just heard the Stanislaus County sheriff, Adam Christianson, blame the state's sanctuary law protecting illegal immigrants for this officer's death.
Hello, everyone. I'm Trish Regan, in for Neil Cavuto. And this is a special edition of "Your World."
Let's get right to Fox's William La Jeunesse, who has the latest on this developing story -- William.
WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE, CORRESPONDENT: Well, Trish, police this morning arrested an illegal immigrant, a gang member and two-time convicted drunk driver in the death of the young people police officer Ron Singh.
Now, the sheriff of Stanislaus County confirming also the arrest of two other illegal immigrants, a brother and co-worker who tried to cover up where are -- the whereabouts, rather, of Mexican national Gustavo Perez Arriaga from Mexico.
Police say Perez was trying to flee back over the border when a tactical team from Kern County or Bakersfield arrested him today. The sheriff also throwing gasoline on the already hot immigration debate when he said -- I'm quoting -- "We cannot ignore the fact that this could have been preventable, based on his prior DUI and outstanding active warrants. Law enforcement would have been prevented or prohibited from sharing that information with ICE."
Called out the state of California for those supporting the state sanctuary bill, including the governor, that would have prevented Perez's deportation based on those priors.
He was stopped Wednesday morning. And you see some photos there of Officer Singh. He came to the U.S. legally from Fiji. He was married with a 5- month-old son. He took that photo Christmas Day.
Hours later, he pulled over a gray pickup truck for no plates and possible drunk driving. Moments later, Singh radioed in: "Shots fired. I'm hit." He later died on the roadside outside a convenience store, where security cameras show Perez buying 12 packs -- two 12-packs of beer.
Singh joined the Newman Police Department 11 years ago. He was just one of 13 officers in what the chief calls a family, not a department. Singh worked with his canine partner, Sam, in narcotics. The suspect lived in a local trailer park and worked as a farmworker. He entered Arizona illegally. We don't know the year.
Now, back to that sanctuary debate. Just last week, Trish, in a neighboring county, the sheriff of Tulare complained that he had to let a guy out and could not call ICE. Hours later, that man went on a crime spree and killed two.
Obviously, with this situation now with the national attention it has gotten from the president and others, this will enter the immigration debate over border security -- Trish.
REGAN: William, thank you very much.
All right, so we now know that the suspect, I can tell you, entered our country through our southern border in Arizona, which is part of the reason why Arizona Republican Congresswoman Debbie Lesko says major changes really need to be made. She's living it every day there in her home community.
Good to have you here, Congresswoman.
REP. DEBBIE LESKO, R-ARIZ.: Thank you for having me.
REGAN: What's your reaction to all of this and to the latest comments?
LESKO: Well, it's a very sad situation that that officer had to die at the hands of an illegal immigrant. And it's just another example of why we need to secure the border and change our loose and lax immigration laws.
REGAN: What is it like there where you are in Arizona? I mean, how do people feel overall about this? And what is your concern about the trafficking that's going on right there in your backyard?
LESKO: You know, illegal immigration and stopping it has been the number one issue poll-wise in Arizona for many years. And it was this election year too, especially in my district.
People are compassionate. And that's why we have over one million immigrants that immigrate here legally. But they want people to follow the laws they want to know who's coming across the border. They want things done lawfully.
And that's why, when I was in Congress, Republicans pushed for changing the immigration loopholes, so that it's not incentivizing these cartels to exploit children and women. I mean, this is a bad problem. It's up to Congress to fix it.
And I really hope that the Democrats will come to the table and negotiate, because this is about national security.
REGAN: You know, it goes beyond, I think, the wall, right?
LESKO: Yes.
REGAN: I mean, you need the wall. I think that -- for various reasons, including the symbolism of it, right? I mean, it sends a message to anybody who wants to come here illegally.
And there -- you shouldn't underestimate that. But what you're talking about is something on a bigger level. And I think that this is something that everyone in the country, both sides, could agree on, which is some major immigration reform.
And yet the Democrats, because they're stuck on this wall, because, frankly, let's face it, it's a political issue, they do not want anything that this president has promoted as really a signature issue to seem as though he has succeeded.
So because of that, they're not moving forward on this meaningful immigration reform to get the good people in and keep the bad people out.
LESKO: Well, you're absolutely right.
I voted for legislation that I believed was a compromise, and it would have funded border security and a border fence, but it also would have allowed DACA recipients to stay here legally. To me, that was a compromise.
But not one single Democrat in Congress voted for it. And now, last Thursday, Republicans in the House voted to keep the government open. And so it also included about $5.7 billion in funding for border security and a border fence and for disaster relief in California and Florida.
And, again, not one single Democrat voted for it. And so then it goes over to the Senate, and because of their 60-vote rule, they need Democrat input. Well, the Democrats have -- have just been obstinate. They will not come to the table. It's very disheartening. I hope that they do.
REGAN: All right, so now you're in this standoff, and you got the government in shutdown mode.
LESKO: Yes.
REGAN: How long does that continue?
LESKO: I don't think anybody knows right now.
I'm back in Arizona. I came back last Saturday night, but have my bags packed ready to go in case a deal is made and that we can go back and vote for something that's reasonable. Again, this has been going on for quite some time.
And in Arizona, this is a hugely important issue. Our lax immigration laws are creating incentives for people to come here and for people to bring their children here.
REGAN: I -- no, I hear you. And this is something that really does need to get resolved. And it's coming to a head.
Congresswoman, thank you very much.
I do want to go right now to Bakersfield, California, because that is where the Kern County sheriff, Donny Youngblood, is speaking right now. This is where the man was apprehended. Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, KERN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SHERIFF: ... sanctuary in a house, any of those people would be -- are subject to arrest. And we're committed to making those arrests, if we can prove that someone helped him.
QUESTION: So for those three people, did they help transport or how?
YOUNGBLOOD: I don't -- I can't tell you exactly what their role is.
We're still on scene. This is still an active investigation. And there could be more arrests. But I can tell you, they were -- we believe that they were involved in the harboring or providing sanctuary for this suspect.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
YOUNGBLOOD: If you would like, I can have copies of this made for you before you leave. That would probably be better.
QUESTION: During the arrest, who was in the home?
YOUNGBLOOD: There were five -- six people, I believe, in the home when we made the arrest.
Some, I believe, may be children.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) got arrested?
YOUNGBLOOD: Yes.
QUESTION: A number of your units were seen going north on 99 with lights on. (OFF-MIKE) on his way north?
YOUNGBLOOD: I'm not sure -- as of about 45 minutes ago or an hour ago, he was being interviewed and had our handcuffs, and they were going to replace them with officer Singh's handcuffs and transport him to Stanislaus County.
QUESTION: Any idea, Sheriff, how long he was in Kern County, approximately?
YOUNGBLOOD: I think when Sheriff Christianson called me last night, they had a pretty good idea that he was in our county.
But we knew for sure he was somewhere between there and here. And we -- the information was that we believed he was headed to Mexico. And we -- we wanted to ensure that that didn't happen, because then there's a long process that occurs that's very cumbersome.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
YOUNGBLOOD: I don't have that information, whether -- whether this is a gang-related incident or not. So I really wouldn't want to speculate that either way.
QUESTION: Are the people in the home related to the suspect, or are they family?
YOUNGBLOOD: They're related, in the sense that they know each other. I don't know about the personal relationship. Like I said, we're -- we're still early on in this investigation in completing this
This information just handed to me just a few minutes ago, so that we could get it out to you as quickly as we -- as we could and to be as accurate as we could.
QUESTION: So how many people got arrested in that home? I'm sorry.
In that home. The suspect and who else?
YOUNGBLOOD: Do we have -- we have...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Three other people were arrested.
YOUNGBLOOD: But were they in the home?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who were at that home, yes.
YOUNGBLOOD: OK.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
YOUNGBLOOD: Yes.
Anybody else?
You know, the last thing I will say to you is that, when you use a firearm against a police officer, you can run, but you can't hide. This really, really proves the relationship that we have, not only in this county with my partners who are standing behind me, but with -- throughout the state, that we're committed to providing public safety.
And when you attack someone who's doing an honorable profession, no stone goes unturned.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) One more question. The arrest photo that is out that, that is the arrest photo?
YOUNGBLOOD: I have not seen the photo. So, I can't answer your question.
QUESTION: Will you guys be releasing an arrest photo?
YOUNGBLOOD: No, we do not release arrest photos. But I have seen a photo of him, so there is a photo out there.
QUESTION: But you can't confirm if that is the official arrest photo?
YOUNGBLOOD: No, I cannot.
Any other questions? Thank you all for coming.
REGAN: OK.
We were just listening there to the Kern County police sheriff, who was answering reporters' questions regarding the arrest of that illegal immigrant who killed a police officer. He did point out that they arrested him in a home, roughly six people there. It wasn't clear, he said, whether they were family members, but they did know each other.
And he did point out that there were children in that home. The man was said to be making his way back to Mexico, in hopes of escaping authorities.
So, a continuing story, obviously. We were just speaking with the congresswoman from Arizona, who said that she is aggressively working to try and get the money for the wall. She feels strongly that she needs it there in Arizona, because they're dealing with all the influx of illegal immigrants.
Meanwhile, you have got politicians all over trying to deal with this. Right now, the president says he's not backing down, he needs that money, so he's going to work aggressively and keep the government shut down until he gets it.
Let's go right now to Hillary Vaughn at the White House with the very latest.
HILLARY VAUGHN, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Trish.
Well, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney saying that Democrats are not talking to the president. He says that the president put his last offer on the table on Saturday, but Democrats walked away.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICK MULVANEY, WHITE HOUSE BUDGET DIRECTOR: Can't understand is, the folks who are from heavily Democrat areas who around this area are home and not talking to him.
We made an offer last Saturday night. They told us that they would get back to us by the end of the week. They got back to us last night and said, we're leaving. That's it. No more discussion. So the discussions have broken down. We do expect this to go on for a while.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUGHN: Lawmakers were back on Capitol Hill yesterday for just six minutes and 36 six seconds before gaveling out and going home.
But a House minority leader spokesman says they have given the White House three different paths to end the shutdown, and the White House is the one that didn't take it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM MCGOVERN, D-MASS.: I think it's an embarrassment anytime the government shuts down, and this being no exception.
But we ought to work at it until we get to an agreement where a majority say yes, but -- and I think we had that, until the president went off his meds and who the hell knows what happened?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VAUGHN: While White House waits for Democrats to give a counteroffer, the president is raising the stakes, threatening to shut down the southern border and call off trade agreements with Mexico, tweeting: "I would consider closing the southern border a profit-making operation. We build a wall or close the southern border, bring our car industry back into the United States, where it belongs," and says: "Either we build, finish the wall or we close the border."
Now, the White House says the president canceled his Christmas and New Year's holiday. He's been at the White House today making calls and is at work, but most of Congress is out of the office. And some, like Nancy Pelosi, are on vacation in Hawaii today -- Trish.
REGAN: Must be nice.
All right, thank you so much. Good to see you, Hillary.
Something we haven't seen for stocks in quite a while, and that's a whole lot of green for the week, right? Did we just get news out of China that could be a green light for more buying soon? We're going to talk about all that.
Plus, more than 4,000 flight delays reported today, as severe weather strikes. If you're heading somewhere or heading home, we have what you need to know. Don't go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: Here's something we haven't seen in a while, right, some good news. Positive week for stocks. We like it, the Dow, Nasdaq, S&P 500 all higher, after a wild -- it was a very wild and volatile week of trading.
It's all coming with China now allowing U.S. rice imports for the very first time ever. Maybe a bit of a thaw perhaps in those trade tensions? Could that actually help get stocks back on track as we head into the new year?
We're asking our market watches right now for you, Melissa Armo, Alan Knuckman, and Jim Lacamp.
Good to see all.
Jim, starting with you, what are you thinking? I mean, it's been really volatile and pretty scary for some people. But is it going to change come January? Because, let's not forget, the economic fundamentals are pretty good.
JIM LACAMP, UBS: Economic fundamentals are pretty good.
Good to see, Trish.
Look, the loan officer surveys at the banks say that things are going pretty smoothly there. Retail spending is on the upswing, after many years of doing nothing. Business spending is still pretty good. Leading and lagging and coincident economic indicators are all pretty strong.
So the economy's doing pretty good. We're going to probably have a 2.4 percent GDP quarter, which is not as strong as the first six months, but it's still a pretty good quarter.
And we are going to have the end of tax selling, which is now officially -- well, we have maybe another half-day, but it's pretty much over now.
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: Do you actually think that that's one of the big reasons we have seen some of this downside?
LACAMP: Yes, so, listen, we had all these stocks that made these big multiyear moves, whether it's Facebook, Apple, Amazon.
I mean, you can name them all that had these really big multiyear moves. People held them, oh, for two or three years, and then they finally sold them this year. So they were incurring massive capital gains at a time where the market really wasn't doing anything. So you had a lot of tax selling to offset those gains.
Now you overlay that with a Fed that pretty much spit the bit, in many times people's eyes, when they -- when they came out for the December meeting and the press conference, which didn't help either. You have what seems to be a presidency that is even more unpredictable than we thought in the first place.
REGAN: And it makes people worried, OK. And so that's why you're seeing that volatility.
LACAMP: And it's too many uncertainties overlaid with that, yes.
REGAN: Let me go over to Alan for a second, though, because Jim just brought up the Fed.
ALAN KNUCKMAN, BULLS EYE OPTION: Right.
REGAN: And here's what I would say about that. Sometimes, I think there's too much of a concern or a focus on the Fed, when there should actually be a bigger concern on the Democrats coming into the House, because, look, if our economy is strong, and we're doing well, I think we can handle a quarter-point.
KNUCKMAN: Right.
REGAN: I mean, it may not be ideal, right? But we can handle it.
What I don't think that we can handle is Maxine Waters going after all the banks, as she's promised she will. We don't want to hear more of this rhetoric from the likes of Nancy Pelosi. And we don't want more investigations that are on their road to nowhere.
But yet that is what we're going to get. So could the change in House leadership, in your view, Alan, be affecting the markets?
KNUCKMAN: Well, anything's possible.
I focus more on price than politics, which is hard to do these days. I really liked the price action this week. We made new lows, and we had a higher weekly close. So that's a positive. And we're 7 percent off that bottom.
To get back to interest rates, we're still at extremely, extremely low levels, at 2.5 percent. So, yes, we have moved up.
REGAN: So, you're not that freaked out by the quarter-point move here, quarter-point there?
KNUCKMAN: No, not at all.
And if you look into the future, that's what these markets over my shoulder do. There are no rate hikes into all of 2019. So I think that issue can be set aside and we can focus on what's important, earnings growth, and we're looking for about a 13 percent earnings growth.
It would be the fifth quarter in a row of double-digits earnings growth coming up here very soon.
REGAN: So who wants to complain about that?
I mean, Melissa, this is good stuff, right? I mean, there's a lot of fundamental economic growth going on. It looks like we're going to continue to see a rise in quarterly earnings. So why is everybody freaking out?
MELISSA ARMO, THE STOCK SWOOSH: Everyone's freaking out probably because of the reasons that you mentioned, Trish.
On your show last night, you talked about it. The Democrats are taking over the House in January. So are they going to get rid of the tax cuts that are in place for corporations? Is there going to be more regulation?
And not only that. Are they going to attempt to impeach Trump? And I think the market is scared about that. Now, I still am bullish on the market for 2019. But you have seen a lot of selling for many, many reasons. And part of it is what you had mentioned on your show last night.
I definitely think that people are either taking profits or selling out of their losers because they don't know what to anticipate with 2019. Long term, I do believe the market makes brand-new all time highs again. But we're staging a late rally here. I call it a New Year's Eve rally.
I thought we would have this. But we fell off so much in the last two weeks, that we're not going to even come back neutral before where we started and opened on the year, which was about 24800 on the Dow. We were about 23000 around today, where I don't -- we're not going to make it in a half-day.
The market is trying, but we're really running out of time.
REGAN: All right. All right.
Well, I got to commend you for watching the show. Thank you so much, and for agreeing with my opinion. I do think that that's going to have an effect on things, even bigger than the Fed.
Anyway, Melissa, good to see you. Thank you so much, Jim. And, Alan, always a pleasure.
ARMO: Good to see you. Happy new year.
REGAN: Happy new year.
KNUCKMAN: Thank you.
REGAN: Blizzards, flooding, freezing rain, you name it, it's all out there. We're going to catch you up on this crazy weather. See you here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: Oh, my gosh, this is not good.
We are learning that there are already 5,700 flight delays right now. So if you're going anywhere this weekend, flying anywhere this weekend, it could be challenging.
Wild weather is going on throughout the country right now.
And FOX News meteorologist Rick Reichmuth is here to give us an update on all of it.
Hello, Rick.
RICK REICHMUTH, METEOROLOGIST: Hello.
So it gets a little bit better this weekend, but today rough, yesterday really bad. You can see the cold air has settled in behind this storm that brought blizzard conditions cross parts of the Northern Plains.
And then it's really warm out across a lot of the East, with a warmer side to this storm. Temps have really dropped here, you see, since yesterday, 26 degrees cooler in Kansas City than you were your 24 hours ago, New York City 18 degrees warmer than you were 24 hours ago.
And that's all part of the storm. Big delays in the Philadelphia airport, as well as all the New York City airports down across the Southeast. Airport delays haven't been that bad. But the roads have had lots of problems with flooding.
We had over 11 inches of rain overnight in Louisiana. And it's a really slow-moving storm with a lot of moisture. That combination means for flooding, as well as all of the rain we have seen this year. Atlanta, now the second rainiest year you have ever had.
And a lot of places across the East, the rainiest year you have ever had. This rain will continue to pull off towards the east very slowly, more across the Mid-Atlantic, in towards the Northeast, eventually even across parts of Maine. That will turn into some rain as this front moves through.
Here's how this plays out. This moves on through for the most part overnight tonight. And we also are watching a weak storm across parts of New Mexico, blizzard warnings in the Albuquerque area right now.
But take a look at what happens over the weekend. We just kind of see this continued flow of moisture across parts of the Southeast, so a very gloomy one. But anywhere, say, north of the Tennessee Valley, you're OK, and the Pacific Northwest, more rain and moisture comes in and some more mountain snow.
Take a look at where we are windchill-wise right now. You see these kind of purples? That's really cold Canadian air, and sometimes you get that, you think that's going to invade across a lot of the U.S. It's not. Tomorrow, it starts to retreat a little bit. It goes back towards Canada, where we like to see it, and we get those temperatures going back a little bit better.
One last thing, Trish. Times Square New Year's Eve, not a cold one this year, temps into the mid-40s and rain, which is going to feel cold if you're standing out there for all that long.
REGAN: Yes, but, still, at least it's not below whatever.
REICHMUTH: Exactly.
REGAN: That's good news for our colleagues that are out there on New Year's Eve.
REICHMUTH: Yes, right.
REGAN: Thank you so much, Rick. Good to see you.
Some of the holiday travelers are going to be heading to Times Square, as we said, for New Year's Eve, where New York City's getting ready for crowds of nearly two million people, my goodness
FOX News' Bryan Llenas, he joins us right now, with more on how the city is preparing for it all -- Bryan.
BRYAN LLENAS, CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Trish. Well, the New York Police Department spends all year training and preparing for New Year's Eve here in Times Square. And on Monday night, some two million spectators will be standing out here for up to 12 hours to watch the ball drop and usher in 2019.
Now, the New York Police Department has taken all the security measures one could imagine. Take a look at this list. Thousands of officers will be here in Times Square, 200-plus blocker vehicles will be used, sniper teams and NYPD drone and canine bomb units.
Now, roads will begin to close at 4:00 a.m. on Monday. Then they will start moving in sanitation trucks and police vehicles strategically placed in and around Times Square to prevent a vehicle from ramming into the crowd.
Sniper teams will be placed throughout where crowds will be standing. They're going to have a 360-degree view of Times Square. They will be paying especially attention to the 35 hotels in the area and looking at anything suspicious there.
Now, new this year to the NYPD force are drones. And, weather permitting, they will be flying this unmanned aircraft above Times Square for the very first time. DJI M210 Quadcopter will fly from the roof a building in Times Square, and it will be tethered to a power source line.
It's equipped with a live video camera and thermal imagery, providing a close-up view of the crowd below. Now, also new this year, well, they will be using explosive odor pursuit dogs. The NYPD started using these types of dogs back in November.
And this is 6-year-old German shepherd canine officer Frankie and his handler, Scotty. Frankie is specially trained to be able to sniff out explosives from some 70-yards plus away and to hunt down where that explosive is coming from. Again, that is in defense -- for defense of a potential suicide bomber.
But the NYPD says this is the safest place to watch New Year's Eve. And, again, back to what Rick said about the weather, I'm really happy it's not going to be negative-4 degrees like last year.
(LAUGHTER)
LLENAS: But the bad news is, for those folks out here that will be in the rain, you can't bring an umbrella.
REGAN: Wow.
LLENAS: So, again, they love to make it as hard as possible for folks to stand out here and watch the ball drops.
REGAN: All right. That makes sense. Oh, my goodness.
All right, well, good luck to you, Bryan. Thank you so much.
Those drones are pretty cool.
LLENAS: Thanks, Trish.
REGAN: House Democrats, everyone, reportedly beefing up staff to launch probe upon probe upon probe into President Trump when they take over.
But do they risk going overboard? We're going to debate it.
Also, Central American countries where these caravans are forming, are they risking their foreign aid right now? The new threat coming from the White House.
I will see you right back here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: All right, we told you about stocks rallying for their first positive week this month. But it turns out we're still way down from the all-time highs we hit earlier this year.
We're going to be back in 60 seconds. I will see you here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: A new report that Democrats are hiring a team of lawyers for likely investigations into the Trump administration when they take over control of the House next week has hit.
Well, is this what we're going to see come next year from the Dems?
Trump campaign advisory board member Madison Gesiotto, Democratic strategist Rochelle Ritchie, and Spectator USA contributor Kelly Jane Torrance.
Good to see you all.
Gosh, I hope not, Madison, because I think it's a complete distraction for the country. But, nonetheless, the Democrats seem to like this kind of thing for political reasons. So does that mean lots of investigations?
MADISON GESIOTTO, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: You know, I think very similar to what we have seen in the media over the past two years, we're now seeing with Democrats specifically in the House.
They're letting their hate for this president cloud their judgment and cloud, of course, their judgment of what they're supposed to be doing in the position they were elected to do.
One of the things that concerns me the most here is when we look at the subpoena power. It's something I have written about for a few months now, and a quote specifically coming from Nancy Pelosi talking about it's a great arrow to have in your quiver, in terms of negotiating on other subjects.
That's very concerning. That's not a proper constitutional use of the subpoena power. That's something I think we need to be watching moving forward to make sure they don't use the subpoena power in an inappropriate way, just because they hate our president.
REGAN: Rochelle, would that backfire? In other words, as a Democratic strategist, do you worry at some point they're going to get a little too rabid here and it's going to backfire, and Americans are going to say, OK, now you're just getting silly?
ROCHELLE RITCHIE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, Trish, I think it's no surprise that the Democrats actually are hiring a staff to -- new counsel, I would say, to possibly look into Donald Trump as far as his tax returns, his relationships with Russia.
That's not a surprise to me. But I do think that Democrats have to be careful.
REGAN: My gosh, isn't that what Mueller is there for, Rochelle? I mean, he's been doing it.
RITCHIE: He is there for that.
REGAN: I mean, he has been doing it, and so far, we don't have anything.
RITCHIE: He is there for that.
But the members of Congress, the Democratic members of Congress, and really the Republican members of Congress are there to protect our democracy, not protect an investigation necessarily.
But I will say that I think that the Democrats have to be careful. And here's why. They only control the House, right? And we know that they have talked about impeachment in some circumstances. And you have to be careful with this word impeachment, because they -- the American voters are really split on that idea.
And they only control the House and they don't control the Senate. And in order for an impeachment to happen, obviously, they would have to have two- thirds of the vote from Republicans. And, obviously, I don't think that they're going to get that.
So I think they have to be very careful with that.
REGAN: Aha. So, then they would just -- like they're spinning their wheels into nothingness.
RITCHIE: They're spinning their wheels, but they still have to work. I mean, they're still going to be able to do this investigation, and focus on health care and immigration.
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: Kelly Jane, she makes a very good point, Rochelle does, in that they're -- they're going to need to thread this needle.
So they want to appease their base. And, of course, they want to appease themselves. And the way they do that is by attacking this president. But, at some point, American say, guys, this is getting just ridiculous. We have nothing from Mueller still. There's no proof any kind of Russia collusion.
And yet you all are pursuing a narrative that you somehow wish was true. At what point do American say, I'm sick of it, I'm tired of it, and because of your behavior, I'm not going to vote for a Democrat?
KELLY JANE TORRANCE, SPECTATOR USA: Yes, Trish, I think you're right.
And I think a lot of people vote for their member of the House of Representatives to send to Washington to do something. So I actually have a few mixed feelings about this.
I mean, if they spend all their time focusing on investigating the president and trying to get rid of him by any means possible, does that mean they then spend less time on, say, Medicare for all and abolishing ICE, right?
So I have got mixed feelings. But, no, I think most people don't want, say, a doubling. And that's what we have been hearing, that they're going to double their staff. That's a doubling of Democratic bureaucrats in Washington. I'm not sure that's why people sent the Democrats to Congress.
REGAN: And where does it get them, right? I mean, Madison, where does it leave them, ultimately? Because if they don't have the votes in the Senate to impeach him anyway, I guess maybe they generate a few headlines out of it, which is their goal, in the mainstream media.
But, other than that, I do think that people are getting fatigued by the whole bit.
GESIOTTO: You know, Trish with everyone and their brother in the Democratic Party wanting to run for president in 2020, I think it would be very unwise for them to go after the president for no reason, as many people claim that they're doing now.
I think one of the things they need to be doing is producing direct, identifiable, quantifiable results for their constituents. And going after the president, investigation after investigation, with absolutely no evidence coming forward, I don't think would be a great use of taxpayer money or time.
These people are elected to produce results. And I advise that that's what they should be doing, if they -- if they have hopes of staying in office or if they have hopes of maybe rising to a higher office in the future.
REGAN: But one of the concerns I think everyone has right now, Rochelle, is that Washington is just broken, I mean, really flat-out broken because of this division...
RITCHIE: Yes.
REGAN: ... and because everyone's pursuing something for political reasons, as opposed to reasons that are substantive. We're bogged down in a situation where nothing's getting done. Just look at it . The government is shut down.
RITCHIE: OK.
Yes, obviously, Washington, D.C., is divided. But let's be clear. The Mueller investigation is not over. And from the last report, we have seen two things as far as Trump, being called Individual 1, directing Cohen to use campaign funds to pay off his infidelities.
And, two, this alleged meeting that was supposed to happen between Trump and Putin, which would have resulted in phenomenal -- which was the word in the report, when it comes to businesses and his political advantages for...
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: Yes, but the sourcing on that report is not great. I think that's just a...
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: ... McClatchy story. And I spoke...
RITCHIE: It's not great, but it's not over, Trish.
REGAN: ... exclusively with Kimberly Strassel from The Wall Street Journal, who's been all over this from the very beginning. And she really poked holes in the sourcing of that story, which are relevant.
And it's something that would have come out probably a whole lot earlier.
Anyway, it's, I'm sure, fascinating for the Democrats to stay on this trail. I just wonder if it's, in fact, destructive for them, ultimately. We will see.
Thank you so much. Good to see you guys.
Is today the day we say goodbye to Sears? The deadline for anyone to save the company, it just passed minutes ago. Were there any takers? We will talk about it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: Is it time to say sayonara, adios to Sears?
Anyone who wanted to buy the troubled retailer out of bankruptcy had until 4:00 p.m. Eastern to place their bid. Were there any takers? Doesn't sound like it.
FOX Business Network's Jeff Flock is in Niles, Illinois.
Too bad. I mean, Sears was such a part of American history.
JEFF FLOCK, CORRESPONDENT: You said it, Trish.
We have been checking the SEC Web site, staying in touch with Sears. They have been tweeting today some sales. The auto center tweeted a few things. And Twitter has been blowing up, so many people commenting about Sears.
The deadline, though, passing. This is a Sears store that has closed. Perhaps you see the orange sign in the window there, "Store Closed."
Before today is over, it may be all of the Sears stores. Hundreds have already been closed. It may be that all of them are closed. There was the potential of a bid by Eddie Lampert, a fellow who was the CEO of Sears, who tried to save the company, some people quite critical of his tenure.
Thought about a bid from him of $4.6 billion. He needed to secure financing. At this point, it seems clear, unless there is an extension in this, that he has not secured it and will not. And that means liquidation for all of the Sears.
The company announced an additional 80 stores today would be closed, whether there was a bid or not. And now it appears no bid, and so no more Sears. What can I tell you? The Amazon of its day replaced by the Amazon of today, and Sears no more.
Sign still up on this one, but that may be liquidated soon as well -- Trish.
REGAN: All right, thank you very much, Jeff Flock.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump renewing a threat to Honduras, to Guatemala and to El Salvador. You don't stop those caravans, we will stop sending the cash. Will this work?
We're on it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: President Trump calling to cut off all aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador over a lack of help dealing with illegal immigration, tweeting out -- and I quote -- "Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador are doing nothing for the United States, but taking our money. Word is that a new caravan is forming in Honduras, and they are doing nothing about it. We will be cutting off all aid to these three countries, taking advantage of U.S. for years!"
Former Democratic Congressman Brad Miller joins me right now on the issue.
How do you feel about it, Brad, no aid for anybody who's not willing to take some kind of role in stopping the caravans?
BRAD MILLER, D-N.C., FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, the money is not going to the governments for the most part.
The vast majority of the money that we provide in foreign aid to those countries, maybe all of it, goes -- is administered by the USAID, the United States Agency for International Development, a U.S. government program, or through charities, NGOs, like Catholic Relief Services.
There is not funding provided to those governments. And the circumstances in those countries are desperate, which is why people want to leave. We have not in the past come down hard on countries for trying to keep -- for not trying to keep their people in.
I remember when Reagan said, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: We're not coming down very hard on any of these countries whom we give hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to, to try and make sure that they actually improve circumstances there, so that these caravans don't form and start.
MILLER: Again, the money's not going to the -- to the governments. It's going to aid directly to the people of those countries.
The vast -- the greatest single piece is agricultural assistance.
REGAN: Via the government, though. The government does have a role in distributing the money, sir.
MILLER: Very, very little.
REGAN: So the government has a role in all of this. And -- and -- and you're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars that are taxpayer dollars.
And the idea being that, if they can't get their act together, these governments can't embrace a more fair system of government that is more equitable and that actually ensures that the proper people are going to be getting the right kind of aid, then why the heck are we giving them money in the first place?
MILLER: I don't think the money is going through the government.
As I said before, it's largely administered by our own government, USAID. I traveled on congressional delegations in the decade I was in Congress. I saw USAID's work. They do it directly. It is not government -- money given to the government.
REGAN: Well, even that said, that said, regardless, this is still a government, sir, in each of these various countries that hasn't been able to get its act together enough to actually create a prosperous enough environment so that people want to stay, nor have they bothered to shut down the caravans that are attempting to make their way north to our border.
MILLER: No, they haven't gotten their things together, their stuff together, their mess together. Those are -- those are societies in which the wheels have come off, which is why people are leaving, why people are fleeing.
REGAN: OK, but don't you think that there should be some accountability and some pressure put on the governments themselves, some kind of consequence if you don't actually try?
MILLER: Again, the funding, which is for nutrition where there are severe food shortages -- the food insecurity problem has been called grim.
Food insecurity means you don't know where your next meal is coming from. There's..
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: ... poverty. There's violence.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: What?
REGAN: People have lost -- Venezuela has the exact same issue right now. And we have been reporting on it regularly on my show every single night. But you have a system of government there that has not done enough itself to actually improve the circumstances for people.
As far as all of this money and all this aid, yes, we're all for helping people. But what -- what should be done in the way of helping those to help themselves? In other words, can some of the individuals really start to put some pressure on the governments themselves to make changes?
I just don't know why you keep on giving money, giving money, giving money, and there's no actual results.
MILLER: We're giving money to Catholic Relief Services to provide nutrition to people who would otherwise starve to death.
I don't see that -- how that particularly is something that -- turning it off would come down to those governments.
REGAN: Well, from reports that we have put forward, sir, a lot of this money is going to places it shouldn't.
And even though you intend for the money to go for nutrition and to people that need it, often, these goods are smuggled out of the country. We have shown repeated video of food trucks being looted by people who, frankly, are being victims of effective starvation because they don't have enough nutrition.
But they're looting the food trucks, and the government can't do a darn thing about it. So you have got total chaos in this region. And we just keep giving money.
MILLER: There is total chaos. That's why people want to leave.
That's why people seek asylum, because the wheels have come off those societies.
REGAN: So, what's your answer? We just keep giving more money?
MILLER: If you cut off humanitarian aid, it's only going to get worse.
REGAN: You just keep giving more money?
MILLER: To Catholic Relief Services? Yes. To USAID? Yes.
Giving money to corrupt governments? No, I don't favor that.
REGAN: And what about the people that are trying to leave? You think that they should just continue trying to leave, and we should perhaps open our arms and welcome them here?
MILLER: Well, we have asylum laws. Those are in place. Everyone who comes to the United States and claims asylum is -- has the right to claim it and to have that...
REGAN: Even for just economic reasons, huh?
MILLER: Well, whatever the law is, they have a right to claim asylum, to ask for asylum, and to apply.
REGAN: Well, the law is that they can't, actually.
MILLER: What?
REGAN: They can't actually claim it for economic reasons.
MILLER: I didn't say that they did. I said that the law is what it is. And they're entitled to apply.
(CROSSTALK)
REGAN: But they're applying for economic reasons. And that is part of the problem.
MILLER: And most of the people have legitimate fear of violence.
REGAN: I just have a question, because, I mean, what's the thinking here? You just open it up, and we will say, hey, whole Western Hemisphere, come on in?
I mean, economically speaking, sir, it doesn't make any sense, because you know what? We can only do so much. And we're struggling to take care of the people that we have right here in the United States. How do you just say, OK, we're going to do everything we can for every region down in Latin America, and anybody who wants to come here and apply for asylum, go for it?
MILLER: Well, people are allowed to apply for asylum. That doesn't mean they have a right to get asylum.
I mean, we have had that law on the books for some time. And the circumstances are desperate.
REGAN: Right, but the challenge of that -- and you know this as well as I do -- is the loophole is that you run the risk of losing people into the country. And this has happened over and over again.
We have just had reports of 1,000 people being dropped off near the border in the Texas community. Why? Because they could not be held in the detention center any longer. And so they have just been released into the United States.
Hopefully, they will come back for their asylum hearing. But who knows.
It doesn't seem like a system that works.
MILLER: Our immigration system has had problems for a long time. It needs a comprehensive solution. And, unfortunately, the politics gets in the way.
REGAN: On that, you and I, sir, definitely agree. Thank you so much. Good to see you.
MILLER: Thank you.
REGAN: All right, with no signs of progress, this government shutdown will be punted into the new Congress. Why that may not be good news for either side of this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REGAN: White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders hinting that the president's being flexible on a dollar amount for the wall. So what's that mean?
Meanwhile, the partial shutdown is about to go into its second week.
Let's go to Peter Doocy on Capitol Hill with the very latest.
Maybe some room for negotiation. Hey, Peter.
PETER DOOCY, CORRESPONDENT: Trish, we have been wondering the last couple days, where are these lawmakers who are most responsible for ending the government shutdown?
Well, now we know one of the key players is on an island in the Pacific. Nancy Pelosi has been spotted vacationing in Hawaii, and she's certainly not the only one who left town during the shutdown. But she is among the furthest away from the House. And she's also among the most influential in terms of telling a new crop of Democratic congress men and women what they should and shouldn't vote for.
While she's away, a member of her leadership team, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, is making crystal clear what the Democratic Caucus wants. He tweeted this: "Day seven of the Trump shutdown. Republicans continue to hold the American people hostage. We refuse to pay a $5 billion ransom note. In other words, take a hike."
In the Senate, the polar opposite message is coming from a Trump ally, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.
He wrote this today: "To Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats, no wall money, no deal."
The White House says that they cut their request for border wall money from $5 billion down to $2.5 billion, and Democrats rejected it, and then never made a counteroffer. And, again, based on where we know some of these lawmakers are, it doesn't sound like any of these negotiations have been bearing any fruit.
But, then again, it doesn't sound like there have been any negotiations, period, any time recently -- Trish.
(LAUGHTER)
REGAN: Yes, and they're all on vacation. Nancy Pelosi is in Hawaii.
Thank you, Peter. Good to see you. Happy New Year.
All right, I am going to see you all tonight, where I see you every night, at 8:00 p.m. Eastern on FOX Business, the FOX Business Network, for "Trish Regan Primetime."
We actually have more of my exclusive interview you with the vice president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodriguez. You know I have been reporting on Venezuela so much. You just heard me talking to the former congressman about some of these Latin American countries that are so challenged.
Venezuela is really, I would say, the biggest challenge right now. And the danger for us is that the likes of Vladimir Putin are now in there. The Russians have been buying up oil fields. They have been buying property, all in an attempt to have access, frankly, to us.
So I talked to the vice president about that very issue. And we also get into it on the whole socialism vs. capitalism thing. You know where I am on that.
Anyway, I will see you tonight at 8:00 p.m., "Trish Regan Primetime."
And do make sure to catch "Cavuto Live" tomorrow 10:00 a.m. right here on FOX News, a jam-packed show, including former Acting ICE Director Tom Homan, who's giving his first comments about the illegal immigrant arrested for allegedly killing a California police officer, former Whitewater special counsel Ken Starr on calls for the Mueller probe to wrap up in the new year. Don't miss it.
And do not miss me at 8:00 p.m. on FOX Business Network. I will see you there tonight with the vice president of Venezuela.
"The Five" starts now. Happy New Year.
Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.