Transcript for Trump Jr. defends tweeting article that alleges whistleblower identity on 'The View'
has welcomed thousands of guests with incredibly diverse points of view. After all, that's what the show is called, and we always have one goal in mind, to engage in passionate, hopefully productive conversation, and with all that in mind, please welcome the son of the gentleman in the white house, D.J.T. Now there's a lot to say, so let's go. Yeah. Always is. Banter in the front. All right. We have got to stack the deck a little bit, right? Well, you guys are here. We're going to get to "Triggered," the book in a moment and your relationship, but you did something that triggered a lot of people yesterday, including myself by releasing the name of the whistle-blower. The whistle-blower whose complaint has led to impeachment hearings. The whole point of releasing a name is to intimidate someone, to threaten someone, and to scare other people from coming out. That's something that dictators do. I have lived in China. I have seen that first hand. That's not what America does. We stand by our people. Why did you want to release the name? I think the reality of the answer is the whistle-blower's name was on a little website called thedrudgereport a couple of days ago. I literally quote tweeted an article that had the guy's name in the title of the article. Does that make it right? I wish the outrage would be equal. I mean, there was no outrage when, you know, my family got an exploding letter of, you know, with white powder substance in it. They're protecting a guy, you know, in the CIA and there's great outrage, but when your family gets something, and that's a big part of the book which is, it's not a level playing field in terms of outrage. We live in an outrage culture. He has to be anonymous. Your family did not. There were millions of people, and for days he has been out there in the media. Does that make it right -- What's the difference? I'm a private citizen putting this out there. I don't see any difference whatsoever. The reality is -- it seems to me, and my point of view on this, it seems to me that everyone is outraged that his name is out there because now people are saying, okay. He's tied to Joe Biden. Joe Biden was working in the white house. He has ties to Brennan who was leading on trump. Let's be honest about what it is. That's not why I'm outraged. I'm outraged because I care about diplomacy in this country. I care about how we protect the people when they see a wrongdoing, and they go through the proper political channels and they are protected for doing Let's not kid ourselves. The name has been out there for five days. That doesn't make it right. But nevertheless -- NBC is right now chasing down a whistle-blower about all of the Epstein stuff because those stories were killed. If we're going to have the conversation about the outrage about whistle-blowers -- Can we stay on the -- You work with CBS who oust the whistle-blower to come up with a story. We ask one question and we stick to it. You work with them. That broke this morning. Can we stick to what she asked? If we start getting off on different tangents -- that's what I'm saying. It's hypocrisy. A big part of why I wrote the book is because there's so much hypocrisy out there. The mainstream is left leading and I don't think anybody doubted thatter if a long time, but they have gotten rid of the pretense of objectivity. We're just going to be the marketing wing of the other side. If you talk about hypocrisy, you seem fine with people leaking information if it makes you and your father look good because Wikileaks and Julian assange is a cyberterrorist, right? I think a Russian puppet. You were fine promoting his stuff, and your dad praising him on the campaign trail. It makes you look good. How is this person who went through the right channels. You're putting his life in danger, but Wikileaks was doing the right thing? First, thank you so much. Thank you for the opportunity. Here's the thing. There's a lot of context, and I hear what you are saying. It's a fair enough question because he may be a private citizen, but nevertheless he is the, you know, son of the president of the United States. And a campaign surrogate. Skpl and somebody who works as a campaign surrogate, but not officially with the campaign. Neverthelesses when you look at the facts and the circumstances, you look at facts even on this show the first day after the election, it said, now let's start with impeachment. This has been something that's going on. It's a concerted effort by people disappointed by the results to of the election to undo it. That's not true. It was on this show on November 9th. It wasn't. We have been -- we have been -- we have had all kinds of -- now see. I listened. I'm asking for the same. Sure. We are an opinion show. That's what we do. Correct. What you seem to have done, and feels very disingenuous because you can't say, I'm a private citizen, and yet you're in the middle of all of this. You were brought to the FBI folks. Everybody talked to you, you know, you're part of this. So when you release a name like that, even if it was out for ten days or 20 days, you have to know that people -- if you were talking about the white powder that your family got, this guy's family is getting the same thing, and why is it okay for one and not both? People shouldn't be doing it. I don't know if that's happening to him first and We don't know if it happened to you. We're taking your -- It was recorded. It was a case. I'm sorry. Stop yelling. Stop yelling. It's like a miracle ear for Christmas. You're a lawyer. Yes. We have known each other. I'm a former prosecutor. Did you advise your boyfriend that it is a federal crime to out a whistle-blower? I didn't advise him I'm a federal crime? I said, I left you alone for ten what happened? It's only a federal crime for the ig to do it. That's a lie. That's not true. Okay, stop. It's hard to hear. So finish that. It is a crime. It's not accurate. My law degree says it is, but nevertheless -- He's not the individual who put it out there. You did speak to him about that? Not prior to. After I said, what happened? He said, they're saying I released this, and I outed. But if you look at the facts and if facts are that the name was out there. I'm not saying, I understand what you are saying that perhaps okay. It wasn't the most prudent decision to retweet an article, but I want to tell you something. We talk about transparency. The president of the united States released the transcript of exactly what happened in that the whistle-blower is giving his opinion or her opinion of what transpired. I want to talk about that actually. He's not trying to hide anything. He transcribed it. Now we know the truth. Do you regret -- Why does he hold his tax returns? I don't want to create hysteria. The name is out there. I didn't even realize this is some sort of big secret. Do you regret doing it? I don't regret doing it. I shouldn't have to forego my first amendment rights. I saw it on the drudge report. Because it's Donald Trump, and he's an outspoken guy -- This isn't a rally, okay? Why was there no outrage when the drudge report, probably the largest a gator of media news, he puts it to it there, and crickets. No problem with that. Because probably not a lot of people knew that it was out there, but once you put it out to there -- Millions of people see it a day. Listen, man. I don't know how many people here read the drudge report. I don't know, but I'm saying a lot more people know your name than know the drudge report. That's a fair point. Let's move on. I want to talk about the memo of the call because I don't believe it's a transcript. In the memo of the call that was released from the white house between your father and the Ukraine president, your father said, I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot, and Ukraine knows a lot about it, and we have the entire part of the memo here. The other thing -- there's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that. So whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. This is the basis of the impeachment inquiry. Why is that a sham? Which is what you are calling Nothing was withheld. The other guy on the other side actually said, I have no idea what you are talking about. Nobody knew aid was being withheld. What guy? The guy in Ukraine. That's not true. That's a lie. Military aid was withheld. Nobody knew about it in the Ukraine. There was no quid pro quo. That's a lie. It was withheld. There's no prima fascia case. The witnesses are coming forward. We have a lot of opinion. The military aid was withheld. But not because of that reason, and the nexus of the top line has that. That's a lie. There have been several ambassadors that have testified that the military aid was withheld. Let me ask you this. Did Gordon sondland lie then? He's afraid of perjury. Or he's afraid of being attacked like so many of us have by a vicious left that's running a one-sided campaign. Let's go to break. Children. Children. Children children. Children. Stop yourselves. There will be more with --
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.