Juanita Broaddrick and Paula Jones speak out

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," November 17. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, "THE INGRAHAM ANGLE" HOST: Good evening from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California. Democratic women and their condemnations of convenience. That's the topic of tonight's Angle.

New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand now says that Bill Clinton should have resigned over that Lewenski scandal back in 1998.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is it your view that President Clinton should have stepped down at that time given the allegations?

SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D-NEW YORK: Yes. I think that is the appropriate response. But, I think things have changed today and I think under those circumstances there should be a very different reaction.


INGRAHAM: Let's face it, the reason Kirsten Gillibrand has suddenly found sense is that she is positioning herself for a 2020 presidential bid. She wants to run for higher office. And it's interesting by the way how she mentioned Lewenski but conveniently forgot about all the other women who accused Bill Clinton.

Juanita Broderick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and yes, there were many others. When Gillibrand was running for office in 2006, whom did she call to help her raise money? Bill Clinton, of course.

And she, like many Democratic women before her, had no problem at all turning a deaf ear to the complaints of sexual harassment that had dogged Clinton for decades. And you know why? Because, let's face it, he was an uber fundraiser.

He was fantastic at it. But, with sex pigs now being called to account for their misdeeds in the wake of the Weinstein scandal, well, Democrats have suddenly discovered a moral conscience. And now they even see their former heroes with new eyes.

Bill Clinton wasn't a degenerate when he appeared at every Democratic convention since he left office. And I guess, he wasn't a bad degenerate sexual harasser when he was feted in New York at the Clinton Foundation galas.

He wasn't a sex pig last month when he campaigned for Phil Murphy in New Jersey. But now that his wife has lost the presidency and Bill is under new scrutiny, he is suddenly a leper to the party that enabled him for decades.

Sell it somewhere else. None of us believe it. The truth is you have to question how seriously these Democratic women take sexual harassment. These are some of the same women who held a pep rally for Bill Clinton in 1998 after his impeachment.

I love that photo. A Mount Olympus female Democrats were in attendance, Feinstein, Pelosi, Boxer, McColski (ph), all of them standing and clapping like a bunch of seals for Bill Clinton. The only thing was the fish.

Now this new-found courage among Gillibrand and the rest is a little more than political expediency. The Democratic Party knows what we all know the Clinton brand is over. It's damaged. The Clintons have outlived their usefulness and the usefulness of the party is nil.

So, it's safe to throw them under the bus. Safe to look away. Safe to say that he should have been canned when he was found out about Lewenski. So, enough with all the glowing praise of Gillibrand for her brave stand and the Democratic truth tellers who are now coming around to acknowledging Bill's past. They were opportunists then and they are opportunists now. And that's the Angle.

Joining us now from Van Buren, Arkansas is Juanita Broaddrick, who accuses Bill Clinton of raping her in a hotel room in 1978, and from Little Rock, Arkansas, Paula Jones, who sued Bill Clinton for sexual harassment. He settled with her for $850,000.

Paula and Juanita, it is great to see both of you. I'm just delighted that both of you are here and Paula, I want to start with you. What went through your mind when you heard Kirsten Gillibrand today and basically, Mica Brezinsky on MSNBC both saying that Bill Clinton should have resigned after the Lewenski affair.

PAULA JONES, SUED BILL CLINTON FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT: It's a little bit too late for that now, isn't it? It makes you wonder if they really truly mean what they say because us women did not get any kind of help whatsoever from any of those liberal women. They ridiculed us. We were called all kind of names. We were not believed, and I hope that it's true that they think that now, but I don't know that I believe it.

INGRAHAM: Juanita, what's happened between now and 1998 when your accusation really got a lot of attention, when Lisa Myers bravely pushed NBC to get that on the news. I mean, what's changed except Hillary is not president. She is not in the cabinet. The Clinton Global Foundation is frankly has been exposed as a fraud that it was with the pay-to-play that was going on there. And so, the Clintons aren't useful anymore, so now suddenly oh, he was -- he shouldn't have done that he should have resigned.

JUANITA BROADDRICK, ACCUSES BILL CLINTON OF RAPE: I know. It's absolutely disgusting, Laura. This great epiphany that should have occurred 20 years ago, coming about now is -- I should feel ecstatic about it but I don't. I feel very disappointed that they waited two decades to do this.

INGRAHAM: Were you surprised, Juanita, that Kirsten Gillibrand didn't mention you? I mean, she mentioned Lewenski because that was the subject of the impeachment proceeding, her relationship led to the impeachment because he lied under oath.


INGRAHAM: But he didn't mention you. He didn't mention Paula. He didn't mention Kathleen -- she didn't mention Kathleen Willey. It was only Monica Lewenski. I wonder why.

BROADDRICK: I think it's too dangerous to bring this back up again. They do not want to hear from us, Laura and that's the crux of the matter. They do not want our names to be brought up again and we're being brought up by everybody else. So, I can't understand why she didn't include us.

INGRAHAM: Paula, and Juanita, I want you to listen to something that Hillary Clinton said today in an interview with our friend, Rita Cosby on WABC. Let's watch -- listen.


HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (via telephone): Every situation has to be judged on its own merit and there were allegations that were disproved. It's unfortunate that people are either misrepresenting or misinterpreting history.


JONES: I'm not -- no, no, no, no. That is so ludicrous what she just said. I mean, seriously, I cannot believe that that lady would say that, and nothing was misinterpreted. I know what happened to me in that room that day.

And I also know that there was some lady from the New York Times that had quoted some Miss Goldberg lady said that she believed Juanita was -- believed Juanita she should believe me, too. She said that was not true about me.

How would she know unless she had some kind of relationship with him? She has been looking at his private parts? How could she say I was discredited when I was not discredited?

You know, I mean, the Eighth Circuit of Appeals was going to take it all the way to trial and then Bill Clinton settled. Why would it settle if had had been thrown out at lower court? People don't do that if you are not guilty.

INGRAHAM: Hillary Clinton's title of her book "What Happened" should apply to her husband.

JONES: We know what happened exactly. We know exactly.

INGRAHAM: Juanita, could you go back to that horrible encounter that you with Bill Clinton, especially after he pushed you and your lip got, you know, bitten, basically or hurt and what he said to you in that room?


INGRAHAM: We have the sound there so we are going to play that again from your -- let's play it from your original interview. Let's watch.


BROADDRICK: The second time he tries to kiss me. He starts biting on my lip. When everything was over with and when he got up and straightened himself and I was crying at the moment. And he walks to the door and calmly puts on his sunglasses and before he goes out the door, he says, "you better get some ice on that." and he turns and went out the door.


INGRAHAM: Put some ice on that.

BROADDRICK: Yes, it's still, you know, it's so painful to hear it now. You know, even after all these years it's disgusting and painful.

JONES: You know, I want to know why Hillary would not want to come to us. I'm sorry, I just want to know why Hillary wouldn't want to come and talk to us women. If she believed it's not true, then why wouldn't she talk to us? Talk to each one of us or talk to us together and then she can come to a conclusion herself.

She never even was asked about us women during her campaign. Isn't that ironic? Isn't that funny that none of this come out about her womanizing predatory husband who did these women so wrong, all of us, and it's just beyond words that nobody. Isn't that funny that none of this come out about her womanizing predatory husband who did these women so wrong, all of us. And it's just beyond words that nobody.

BROADDRICK: Paula, she did talk to me.

JONES: Why wouldn't she want to ask us? She threatened you. You know, but she could have at least have talked to us and at least found out for herself, I mean, and talk to us to see how credible we were, but she didn't want to. Do you know why? She knew. She knew -- she had been enabling him for years.

She has been enabling him for years. She has been hiding this stuff for him for years. If you are married to a man and you don't know that your husband is doing this, something is wrong. And you know they claim to have such a wonderful marriage and she stood by her man but, let me tell you, she knew what he was doing. And the only reason why they ever stayed together was because it was a political marriage.

INGRAHAM: This is what Philippe Reines, who was one of Hillary's former campaign chiefs said this today. Let's listen.


PHILIPPE REINES, FORMER HILLARY CLINTON ADVISER: There is no human being in the United States whose personal life, their infidelities were looked at more than Bill Clinton. His accusers were afforded the opportunity to confront him. He was afforded the ability to defend himself.


INGRAHAM: Juanita, were you afforded the ability to confront Bill Clinton?

BROADDRICK: Oh, gosh, I think I will just laugh out loud right now.

JONES: Yes, that's hilarious, isn't it?

BROADDRICK: It's disgusting. No human being was protected more than Bill Clinton was. They built this wall around him.

JONES: Absolutely.

BROADDRICK: And no human being was more harassed and ridiculed and trashed as Bill Clinton's victims were. I did get a time to speak, but it was only because I had Lisa Myers. She was one of the very few who believed in me and just stayed on that story until we got it through and I commend her for that.

INGRAHAM: NBC was forced to air it. NBC did not want to air that report. Paula, I will let you close this out, Paula. So, these women now, Mica Brzezinski from MSNBC and Gillibrand and others, who are now these late hits against Bill Clinton. Do you think there might be any credibility to what they are saying? They now see the horror of sexual harassment and sexual assaults or is this all politics?

JONES: It's probably politics. I mean, I would imagine that it probably was. I just wish that these people would mention our names, you know, when they are --

INGRAHAM: You are real people.

JONES: -- yes. We are absolutely real people. What gets me, too. They only mention Monica Lewenski. She was consensual person was that doing stuff to Bill Clinton under the oval office desk. We were not. There is a different, different take on that so --

INGRAHAM: Do either of you expect that Kirsten Gillibrand might call to you talk to you and do you expect a call from her?

JONES: Oh, surely not. I'm sure.

BROADDRICK: Do you really think that's possible now? No. I absolutely do not.

INGRAHAM: Hey, ladies, ladies, she is posed to be the be all and end all of sexual harassment on Capitol Hill given the historic nature of the Bill Clinton assaults on women. She should call you up and she should apologize on all of those so-called feminists --


INGRAHAM: -- who covered for Clinton all those years.

JONES: Absolutely.

INGRAHAM: Thank you both for joining us tonight. I know it was really, really a pleasure to see both of you and we really appreciate your voice. Thank you so much.

JONES: Thank you.

BROADDRICK: Nice to be here.

INGRAHAM: You are welcome. And when we come back, might the Clinton spell finally be breaking for the Democratic Party? Well, and what about the Bushes? Stay tuned.


INGRAHAM: Clinton world and their enemies within the Democratic Party are engaged in kind of a "Family Feud" about whether or not they should relitigate Bill Clinton's past. This is what Josh Barrow of Business Insider titled his piece today, "The Clintons held the Democratic Party hostage for two decades."

Going on to write inside, "The core problem is that the Democrats decided the Clintons were their people and then reasoned backward to their principles." So, I have a question. Is it fair to argue that the GOP treated the Bushes the same way? And that President Trump has wrestled the party back to its Reagan roots?

Joining us now from Washington is Ronald Reagan biographer extraordinaire, Craig Shirley, and from Austin, Texas, Mark Updegrove, he is the author of the new book, "The Last Republicans Inside the Extraordinary Relationship Between George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush." It's great to see both of you.

Let's start with you, Craig, on this question of the legacy of the Bushes and the -- obviously the Bushes didn't have their sexual scandals other than, I guess, the groping from the wheelchair rumor that we're hearing now.

But they didn't have their sexual scandals, but nevertheless there is clearly a break that has happened for the most part from the Bushes to the current Republican Party. Talk about that.

CRAIG SHIRLEY, RONALD REAGAN BIOGRAPHER: The Bushes were always, Laura, an aberration to some degree. Look, George H.W. Bush was only president because he was Ronald Reagan's vice president for two terms. And in fact, a New York Times poll in 1988 after he beat Michael Dukakis said a majority of Americans voted for him because they saw him as a continuation of the Reagan legacy.

Obviously, he didn't continue that and he pursued basically big government Republicanism as did his son George W. Bush. So, they are both aberrations from the degree of the Republican Party, the party has always traditionally been at least in the modern area for less government, more freedom, you know, federalism, all those issues that animate Republican centered on the personal freedom, dignity, and right.

So, it was kind of a natural exorcism that had to happen because they both ended up perceived as failed presidencies.

INGRAHAM: And, Mark, George W. Bush, whom I like very much personally, he left office with an abysmal approval rating. It was in the mid 20's by most accounts. The nation had turned against pretty much both wars in the Middle East. We had the mass economic collapse.

He tried to push through immigration amnesty that went down in flames.
Harriet Myers, his Supreme Court had to pull that back. We lost the House, the Senate and the presidency to Barack H. Obama.

In your book, you kind of make this argument that the Bushes are the real Republicans, and they are worried that Trump will be the last Republican because he is not really Republican. I find that analysis curious given the carnage post-Bush to the Republican Party.

MARK UPDEGROVE, AUTHOR, "THE LAST REPUBLICANS": Well, I want to make clear that when I called them the last Republicans that's really a type of establishment Republicanism that the Republican electorate clearly rejected in the 2016 campaign cycle, to the surprise of everybody.

I think to a large extent the Republican Party wanted to protect the establishment in the beginning of the cycle. They resisted the candidacy of Donald Trump. He won the nomination fair and square and went on to win the presidency.

So, there is no disputing that, but it is the end of a kind of Republicanism where America was more engaged in the world.

INGRAHAM: Hold on a second. The president just came back from this 12-day trip to Asia. He was in the Philippines, Vietnam, Korea, China, at the APEC Summit. He went to Europe, talked about NATO. He went to -- talked to all the Muslim leaders. He went to Jerusalem. He went to meet the pope.

I mean, he has been around and he wants to engage with the rest of the world. He just doesn't want us to be involved in endless wars which in part helped elect Barack Obama. The idea he is some isolationist, that's ridiculous.

That is a Bush line that he is an isolationist, he is a protectionist, he is a nativist. Those old tropes aren't working anymore, Mark. I think the more we hear them, the more people just start laughing when they hear them.

UPDEGROVE: Well, I think if you look at the Trump agenda, it was largely transactional. It was what deal can we get that's the best deal for America and that's fine. I think the Bushes were pushing a different kind of agenda, a humanitarian agenda, human rights --

INGRAHAM: Yes, globalist agenda, open borders, open markets, yes.

UPDEGROVE: Sure. That's the term that's used. Again, that's a very different kind of Republicanism.

INGRAHAM: Well, yes, it's focusing on America first. I want to play a sound bite from 1979. This is 1981 actually from Ronald Reagan for both of you and have you quickly react. Let's watch.


FORMER PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN: It is my intention to curve the size and influence of the federal establishment and to demand recognition of the distinction between the powers granted to the federal government and those reserved to the states or to the people. All of us need to be reminded that the federal government did not create the states. The states created the federal government.


INGRAHAM: Craig, I watched that from 1981 inaugural and I stood at the president's grave tonight, said a prayer for him and Nancy, and thanked him for what he did for this country. I watched that, and I wonder what would he think today about the state of the Republican Party and the state of this country?

SHIRLEY: Well, he was always a party man once he switched parties. He supported Republicans even those he didn't always agree with. But, you know, that sound bite reminds me of how Reagan was such a devotee of the Constitution, the Declaration.

He was -- he started out as -- became enlightenment believing the man was more important than the state. And that statement about the state's creating the federal government, that's right out of the federalist papers.

It's right out of Madison which he avidly read. He was an American conservative. He believed that power flowed upward from the people to the national government as opposed to a British conservative, who believes that power flows down from the institutions to the individual. He was very centered on rights and dignity and privacy of the American individual.

INGRAHAM: Hey, Mark, do you think Ronald Reagan would tweet if he was alive during Twitter, do you think he would tweet.

SHIRLEY: Yes, he would.

UPDEGROVE: No, I don't. I disagree.

SHIRLEY: May I jump in here. I will make my point. Go ahead, Mark.

UPDEGROVE: No, I don't think he would. Reagan was about civility. When he went to Washington. He campaigned against a big government. Government actually got bigger during the Reagan administration. There were three platforms he campaigned on.

One was ending the cold war by a clear American victory, which he achieved largely or helped to achieve. He wanted to end big government. Government got big early and he wanted to restore the American pride in the nation.

INGRAHAM: Mark, we are out of time. We are out of time. He would have tweeted, Craig, why? That was the people's medium. People's medium.

UPDEGROVE: Because he loved technology. He mastered commercial radio in the 1930s. He mastered movies in the 40's. He mastered television in the 50's and 60's. He loved technology. He loved the ability to communicate his message --

INGRAHAM: Absolutely.

UPDEGROVE: -- to as wide as audience as possible. Reagan was alive today he would be using Facebook and Twitter.

INGRAHAM: Maybe it wouldn't be just like Trump's tweets.

SHIRLEY: No, it wouldn't be.

INGRAHAM: It would be. He would tweet and we would all love the tweets. Let's face it great to have you both on. Thank you so much. I wish you were here at the library with me, though.

Directly ahead, what should the Republican Party learn from the Al Franken groping scandal? Guess what? A rise in homelessness in the golden state. We will tell you why right after this.


INGRAHAM: Welcome back. Al Franken versus Roy Moore and the battle over equivalence. It's a debate that has drawn commentary from all corners, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that it drew the attention of Hillary Clinton. The never-ending book tour, will that book tour ever end? "What Happened." What happened? You lost. Anyway, she had this to say to Rita Crosby on WABC radio earlier today.


CLINTON: Clearly he doesn't appear to be someone who will bring respect and honor to the state of Alabama. Look at the contrast between Al Franken accepting responsibility, apologizing, and Roy Moore and Donald Trump, who have done neither.


INGRAHAM: Respect from Hillary Clinton. Joining us now for reaction from Washington Kelly Jane Torrance, deputy managing editor of The Weekly Standard, and in New York, Ed Rollins, a Republican strategist who spent just a little bit of time over my shoulder on that Air Force One who managed Ronald Reagan's 1984 campaign. Ed, I wish you were here. Kelly, I wish you were here. It's so beautiful. I know, but I hopped into Air Force One. Come on, Rollins, how many cigars did he smoke in that Air Force One back there?

ED ROLLINS, FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR REAGAN-BUSH 84: I rode on that plane every place he went domestically for about five years. That and the helicopter bring back a lot of memories, a lot of memories.

INGRAHAM: Oh my goodness. Let's start with you, Kelly, on this Hillary Clinton coming out and talking about disgracing the office of the Senate, and now she comes out and she says that, well, Bill Clinton's accusers, I guess, everybody had a chance to confront the accusers. I mean, this stuff is crazy at this point.

KELLY JANE TORRANCE, DEPUTY MANAGING EDITOR, THE WEEKLY STANDARD: It's hard not to laugh, Laura, isn't it? And this is a serious matter. In a way it's not a laughing matter, but when I hear people talking about disgracing the Senate, I think of Ted Kennedy. I mean, this is the guy that basically killed a woman, and they are talking about disgracing the Senate? It's really kind of incredible, isn't it, that now they are worried about disgracing the Senate.

INGRAHAM: Ed, the new found moral conscience when it comes to Bill Clinton, I mean, it's so transparent, yet, literally words like "hero" and "courageous" are being used to describe Kirsten Gillibrand today for saying that Bill Clinton should have stepped aside. Mika Brzezinski apparently called Bill Clinton a predator today. How many times has Bill Clinton been on "Morning Joe"?

ROLLINS: None of them called him a predator, none of them basically raised the issues of the two women that were on before. The bottom line is Hillary Clinton went on "60 Minutes" and talked about Gennifer Flowers, called her a liar, told it was totally untrue. That had been an affair that had gone on for 12 years which he later admitted. I mean, he basically didn't stop.

The truth of the matter is whatever may have happened in someone's life, hopefully by the time they get into public life they change and they basically hold a higher standard, which I think -- there's no charges that Roy Moore has ever done anything the last 35 years when he has been happily married, raised kids, been a very significant leader, and obviously the people of that state have an opportunity to pick someone who will represent their viewpoints. Bill Clinton hid the whole time and never stopped misbehaving. Monica Lewinski was late in his term, but he had always been a womanizer and he continued to be a womanizer immediately after he became president.

And I think the difference between a Ronald Reagan who always held the office in the highest esteem and always basically felt the country was so important and that he had to be a model for the country and was, I think to a certain extent there is no comparison whatsoever.

INGRAHAM: Kelly, let's move on to Roy Moore. The Republican Party in Alabama are still sticking by him. A lot of the establishment leaders and even others like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee say he should step aside. He is slipping in the polls. Any predictions here?

TORRANCE: This is a tough one, Laura. I really think there is not really a lot the GOP can do because the only thing they are suggesting is a write- in campaign for someone like, say, Luther Strange. People are even talking about Jeff Sessions. But it's clear that that will hand Doug Jones the victory. And it's a tough situation. Of course I'm sure Roy Moore wished these allegations had come out sooner, but they are coming out now. And there is not a lot, I think, the GOP can do.

I kind of wonder, Ed made a great point. These allegations, almost all are from about 40 years ago. I wonder, what if he had come out and said, hey, I did this stuff 40 years ago, it was wrong. Since then I have gotten married. I'm a religious man and I no longer act that way. What would people be saying then if he had come out and basically apologized? I think it would be a lot different.

INGRAHAM: That's an interesting point. Ed, finally, last word for you. What about this? Donald Trump hasn't really said anything about Roy Moore but he slammed Al Franken. Should he say anything about Roy Moore?

ROLLINS: No. I think he just moves on. I think the governor today put it very appropriately. She believes the women -- not disbelieve the women, but she basically said Roy Moore is the one who is going to be good for the state. If he gets elected he's going to go there and he's going to vote for Supreme Court justices that basically make a difference. Federal judges, he is basically going to be a pro-life candidate which is very important in an evangelical state, and he will represent the values of the state much better than certainly Bill Clinton's U.S. attorney.

INGRAHAM: Ed and Kelly, thank you so much, really great to see both of you.

ROLLINS: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: And up next, the homelessness epidemic is overwhelming many cities across the country, including right here in California. Are Democrat policies to blame? A special report moments away.


INGRAHAM: California is a beautiful state, the mountains, the ocean, the desert. Its entertainment, its agriculture and high tech output is the envy of the world. And California seems to have it all. I first came here 30 years ago as a college student and thought, wow, people actually live like this? This is paradise.

But, let's face it, the golden state has changed a lot over the past three decades. And a lot of that change, frankly, has been for the worse, and a lot of it has been caused by disastrous liberal policies. Taxes have gone up and up. Regulations have stifled small business creation. Illegal immigration has exploded here. Jerry Brown called California a sanctuary state. Electricity prices are climbing because of stupid government mandates. The mandatory $15 minimum wage is hurting low income workers because more retailers are now moving to automation to save the money.

And we have seen a major squeeze on California's middle class as the number of working poor is growing. California's public pension systems are about $200 billion in the red. Oh, and while homelessness nationwide is declining, it's up here by three percent. By the way, sheltering and caring for the homeless cost taxpayers an estimated $80,000 per person per year. In fact, it's so bad that some of the major cities like San Francisco, Sacramento, and right here in the Los Angeles area now have what they call permanent tent cities or encampments. It's all the homeless. Like this one that popped up not far from some of the wealthiest zip codes in the country.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think the problem of homelessness has gotten worse over the last five years in Los Angeles?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. It's worse. It's getting worse. There is so much people out of a home.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is growing and growing in different spots. Not just here. This is one of the bigger ones and then skid row. But there is little spots, all the freeway entrances.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think that the city government here cares?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think so. I don't think so. I think they would rather make us disappear than to be near that building over there, which is city hall.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The city government in Los Angeles is all Democrats. They haven't done anything. Do you think it's time for a change?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. And it's sad because I'm also a Democrat, too. I'm also a Democrat, and I'm shameful of these people that they're treating us like this.

I contacted a lot of the senators about the situation down here, and all they say is we'll get back with you. And as a fellow Democrat, I think they need to really look at what's going on, because I even told them I'm a Democrat and I voted for them, so why do I have to wait this long?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: City government has failed you?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The city government is run by which party?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Democratic Party.


INGRAHAM: Amazing. It has been run by Democrats, basically a super majority Democrat state. This beautiful, gorgeous, amazing place has been brutalized by decades of liberal policies. Of course, the sanctuary status, high taxation, crippling environmental regulations -- liberalism has ruined a once idyllic state in many ways.

There is exodus out of California, and while the population continues to reelect wave after wave of liberal leaders that only compound the state's crisis. Joining us now with reaction from Los Angeles is Shirley Husar who is the CEO of urban game changers an urban community activist group along with Clay Cane, a Democratic activist. Clay and Shirley, great to see both of you.

Clay, let's start with you, why is this working, Democratic policies in Los Angeles? Just focus on L.A. for a moment. We won't go up to the problems in San Francisco. But you heard from the homeless people in that piece that it's gotten worse under Democrat leadership. They are living in the tents.

CLAY CANE, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, Laura, listen, I have been homeless. I was homeless as a teenager. So this is a very personal story to me. But I think it really minimizes the story to just look at just Democrats. When you look back at this, this goes back to the early 1980s. It's a very complicated issue. You have drug addiction that was never dealt with.

To say that oh, this is just a Democratic issue would be like blaming a state like Mississippi, which is the poorest state in the country on Republican or Republicans because it's a red state. I think it's unfair to do, and it minimizes the true horror people go through who are homeless. I can relate to this.

INGRAHAM: Shirley, the issue of illegal immigration, which we didn't delve into in this place, but from the time I have walked those same tents there are a lot of illegal immigrants who are homeless as well. They come here. They try to get jobs. Sometimes they can't find jobs, and they don't have any sponsors or families to live with, and so they live among the homeless. That is also a big problem for the state of California. And you have spent an enormous amount of time in these permanent encampments.

SHIRLEY HUSAR, URBAN GAME CHANGERS CEO: Yes, absolutely. I will tell you, Laura, the infrastructure in California is being destroyed. It is being demised by Jerry Brown, Kevin de Leon, and Eric Garcetti. They have personally instructed the police officers not to enforce law, to allow the illegal immigrants to do so much to cause so much damage and the homelessness.

We have money in this state. We are talking about this state -- you can't compare this to Mississippi. Come on, Clay, let's get real. California, at one point we were the fifth largest economy in the world. We are still in the top 10. You have a state in the top 10 of the economy.

CANE: Sure.

HUSAR: Let me finish, because of the financial issues that are going on in this state, there's a misappropriation of funds. We have hepatitis A, we have measles going on. We have Legionnaires' disease that just happened over at Disneyland. We just had San Diego that spent $2 million towards sanitation of the homelessness. The homelessness in California is disruptive because of the illegal immigration and the misappropriation of movement of money within the state.

Democrats have failed this state and they continue to fail this state. They are destructive with their governmental programs that filtrate within their pockets that have killed our economy.

CANE: Shirley, according to your bio, you worked for Governor Schwarzenegger, who put California -- who was a Republican and put California in actual bankruptcy. So it's not just Democrats. I mean, that was somebody that you actually worked for.

And there has been no documentation, no proof that anybody is homeless because of undocumented workers. I wasn't homeless because of undocumented workers. I was homeless because of rents were too high. My mother didn't have access to good healthcare. My mother didn't have access to good education. It was not for undocumented workers. And for you to say that is scapegoating. And you know there is no one who is homeless because of an undocumented worker. That is ridiculous.

HUSAR: That is not true.


INGRAHAM: You guys, we are going to have you both back because this is a ridiculous amount of short time for this. I think what Shirley was trying to say, though, as long as we have a single American homeless, a veteran homeless, a family homeless living on the streets, why are we bringing in more problems?

HUSAR: Absolutely.

INGRAHAM: I think that's what you were saying.

HUSAR: We don't need that.

CANE: I totally disagree. That's a scapegoat and smoke screen, and Shirley, you know that.

INGRAHAM: Wait, wait, wait, guys, guys, guys, stop. So what Clay is saying that we should bring in more indigent people.

CANE: I'm not saying that, Laura, and you know that. I'm not saying that. I'm saying different policies you can create. And to blame an undocumented worker is passing the buck.

INGRAHAM: We're not blaming on him, we're blaming it on the government.


INGRAHAM: Guys, we are out of time.

HUSAR: No infrastructure is helping. You are wrong.

CANE: I will see you next time, Shirley, and I hope you liked working for Governor Schwarzenegger who put California into bankruptcy.

HUSAR: I was appointee.


INGRAHAM: We will continue this.


INGRAHAM: OK. We're going to have to cut your mics. All right, coming up, I love you both, but coming up, comedian Sarah Silverman laments all our heroes are being torn down. So maybe we shouldn't be making celebrities and politicians our heroes to begin with. Stay with us.


INGRAHAM: Welcome back. Comedian Sarah Silverman had an interesting reaction to the fall of her friend comedian Louis C.K. who is among the wave of celebrities taken down by credible misconduct claims. Roll the tape.


SARAH SILVERMAN, COMEDIAN: It's messy and it's complicated and it is going to hurt, but it's necessary, and we will all be healthier for it. And it sucks, and some our heroes will be taken down and we will discover bad things about people we like or in some cases people we love.


INGRAHAM: Heroes? What? Louis C.K. a hero? Admitted to inappropriately touching himself in front of women multiple times, yuck.

Joining me now, sorry for that introduction, Raymond, for reaction is broadcaster, New York Times bestselling author Raymond Arroyo. Raymond, I've never thought Sarah Silverman was funny. I'm sorry. I know a lot of people are fans of hers. Never made me laugh once. I never got her.

She sounds like she should join a monument conservation movement. We don't want to tear our heroes down. This is a hero? This guy was --

INGRAHAM: What a perv.

ARROYO: But Sarah Silverman is also a woman who portrays --

INGRAHAM: Filthy, filthy comic.

ARROYO: She has contributed to a coarseness in society and a level of conversation about intimate things that kids and families don't need to hear, so I'm not going to go any further.

INGRAHAM: What else do we have?

ARROYO: Jay-Z, he had a New York Times op-ed where is he arguing, very upset about a friend of his, a rapper Meek Mill who has been -- he violated his parole, he went to jail. Jay-Z writes today we have got to do something about this. We need reform. And he makes this startling claim. In 2015 one-third of the 4.65 million people on parole or probation were black. Well, that means two thirds aren't black. So that's a good thing, isn't it?

INGRAHAM: Wait a second. Why is Jay-Z suddenly like a political commentator or analyst?

ARROYO: I think Jay-Z is looking out for himself. Remember, this is a man who was dealing crack at 13, stabbed his producer, and shot his brother. If I were he I would be worrying about parole, too.

INGRAHAM: I guess it's only up from there.

ARROYO: I guess.

INGRAHAM: All right, let's talk about dogs. You're going to tease me about dogs.

ARROYO: I'm going to ask you about this. This new ViaGen Pets, they will preserve the DNA of your beloved.

INGRAHAM: Junkyard dog and Annie the hell hound.

ARROYO: They will preserve the dog. Would you do this? Would you clone your dog?

INGRAHAM: Never. Never. I'm trying to get rid of my dog. I don't want to clone the dog.

ARROYO: Can I talk about my favorite moment of the week on the show?

INGRAHAM: Quick, quick.

ARROYO: This was it. Can you roll that?

INGRAHAM: Roll it.


INGRAHAM: I want to know where that missing hard drive went. How does a hard drive jump out of a car? Where is the hard drive? Who took that hard drive?


INGRAHAM: Where is the hard drive?

ARROYO: I know what I'm giving you for Christmas, a hard drive.

INGRAHAM: Shut up. Oh, get out. Don't go away. We will be back in a moment from the Reagan Library.


INGRAHAM: Before we sign off tonight, a huge thank you to everyone at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library. John Heubusch, you're the best. Everyone come here if you have a chance, visit this beautiful place, a great tribute to one of our greatest presidents ever. Shannon Bream and "Fox News @ Night" up.

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. 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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.