This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," November 30, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Good evening from Washington. This is "The Ingraham Angle." Let's get right to our top story tonight. A stunning very digit out of San Francisco, a five-time deported illegal alien with seven previous felony convictions was found, believe it or not, not guilty of murdering 32-year- old Kate Steinle on July 1st, 2015.
Now, the jury did find Jose Garcia Zarate guilty on one count, being a felon in possession of a firearm. The not guilty verdicts on the homicide charges came despite the fact that Mr. Garcia Zarate both admitted to shooting Ms. Steinle and to coming to San Francisco to take advantage of its sanctuary city policies.
Remember, Garcia Zarate had been in custody of San Francisco authorities until April of 2015, but then they released him without notifying ICE, of course, blatantly ignoring a detainer request. Despite this fact, his attorney had the gall tonight to say that the case had nothing to do with illegal immigration.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I believe today is a vindication for the rights of immigrants, that today we have to reflect all of us on how we talk about this case from the beginning, and how this swarm of reflection and reaction on the base of what I believe to be the racial dynamic of this case.
Nothing about Mr. Garcia Zarate's ethnicity, nothing about his immigration status, nothing about the fact that he is born in Mexico had any relevance as to what happened on July 1st, 2015.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: My God. I can't believe those words were said by that man. It's breathtaking on almost every level and almost wrong in every level.
Joining us now for reaction to try this -- sort this out is Michael Wildes who's been an immigration attorney from New York City, and in San Francisco, Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney and Republican strategist. She focuses on civil rights case. She is a litigator.
Harmeet, let's start with you. When this came across my phone tonight, I actually got choked up. I got choked up for the Steinle family and for every American family when has been brutalized at the hands of criminals, who should have never been in this country in the first place. Your take.
HARMEET DHILLON, ATTORNEY: Absolutely, Laura. I mean, as a citizen of San Francisco, I was tremendously disappointed not to say ashamed of my city and that jury today and the verdict that they gave. You heard the political rhetoric coming out of the attorney, Matt Gonzalez's mouth.
And despicably conflating this criminal illegal alien, who has several times been deported from this country with law abiding immigrants like myself and other citizens as of this city, and as if we have no rights at all.
This is really an example of the city of San Francisco's rolling out the red carpet for illegal aliens and his is the logical net result of that.
INGRAHAM: Michael, I want to go to you on this, he said the verdict has a lot of relevance. It vindicates the rights essentially of the undocumented. So, is the message today, if you're an undocumented immigrant, you are deported five times, you can come into the United States, shoot someone and get off on all murder charges? Is that part of the message today? Because that's what happened.
MICHAEL WILDES, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY AND FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No. Sadly, Laura, I join you and everybody this evening for the sad loss for the Steinle family and what looks like justice not being served. I happen to be a former mayor and a former federal prosecutor myself.
There are multiple truths and theaters that happened here. This sadly, although a terrible event, is an isolated event and a pure result of a poor prosecution by a state court prosecutor that did not succeed in bringing home a guilty verdict.
The prosecution didn't succeed just like immigration didn't succeed in stopping this man here. But for ICE's poor presence on the border or poor ability to do this, this young lady would have been alive.
Today. we cannot scapegoat I'm grants or immigration or refer to these individuals all by one big sieve as people that would cause Americans harm. Let's not forget, unless you're an American-Indian, we all hale from immigrants.
INGRAHAM: Michael, hold on --
WILDES: This is not the platform, Laura --
INGRAHAM: I'm sure you are a very talented lawyer. I was one in my day, but for you to kind of spout out the cliches about we are a nation of immigrants. We have a dead 31-year-old girl right here --
WILDES: Whose fault is that?
INGRAHAM: Hold on here -- San Francisco refused to hold on an immigration detainer in sheer defiance of federal law, federal law which is supreme over state law when it comes to matters of immigration. That is an outrage to all Americans. They did not hold him. They should have held him when he was removed from the country. You bet he shouldn't have come into this country.
WILDES: So, Laura, if I may --
INGRAHAM: People like you that stand up for these criminals when Americans are being brutalized and immigrants that are legally here are being brutalized makes me sick to my stomach tonight. Harmeet, go and then Michael, you respond. Let Harmeet respond then you go. I'm in no mood for the cliches tonight, I got to tell you that.
DHILLON: So, Garcia Zarate pulled the trigger, but let's be clear blood is on the hands of the politicians in San Francisco, who have made the sanctuary city policy the law and kept all of us unsafe for a long time.
Also on the hands of the Obama administration which did not enforce our borders for eight years. One of the reasons that President Trump was elected into office was promises to seal that boarder and keep us safe.
And frankly, now our entire state of California thanks to our governor signing the bill earlier this summer is a sanctuary state. So, every citizen in California can look forward to this type of situation occurring if we don't protect our borders. It's really passed time for us to do that in this state.
INGRAHAM: Michael, you can answer.
WILDES: Thanks for giving me a moment. Laura, I resent the insinuation that I'm a cliche kind of lawyer. I was a federal prosecutor and I share the loss of this family. The bottom line here is ICE has laws on the books and should have done a better job in stopping this.
Until they stop this properly, we can't engage in the political diatribe in the courts. The courts forensically found that he had caused an accident. It was not something that he intended on doing. He should never have been here, and this young lady had been alive had ICE stopped him.
You want to know something? There are so many ways, whether it's the building of a proper wall or the enforcement of the laws on the books that we can stop the federal felons and criminals from reentering.
Mind you, this man can now be prosecuted federally for reentering the United States after he serves the time for the illegal weapons charge.
INGRAHAM: More money from the taxpayers.
WILDES: Let's not scapegoat immigration or make this father think that for all the people that have accents in this country, his daughter would have been alive.
INGRAHAM: First of all, who is saying that except you tonight?
WILDES: No, you just said cliche.
INGRAHAM: No, your cliche -- you're trying to conflate legal immigration and immigration and that is a tactic that is so --
WILDES: I'm talking about the bifurcation of our system -- let me speak.
INGRAHAM: No, no, no. You can't when I'm speaking. That's the way the show goes. When you keep saying your scapegoating immigrants, no, we're not. What we're saying is he should not have been here. You bet he should not have been here.
WILDES: I agree. He should not have been here.
INGRAHAM: Don't take the blame, all of the blame and put it just on the feds. When the feds had a detainer out on him and San Francisco did not honor it.
WILDES: So, let me finish my sentence. The feds have a detainer on him and it's up to the feds to use their due process, yes, that is not a dirty word, to go out and find this gentleman and have him deported --
INGRAHAM: They released him. They release people.
WILDES: And they are respecting the local police who are overwhelmed with their own jobs to then hand somebody over like this --
INGRAHAM: This family is victimized all over again. Frankly, they're being victimized in hearing these of arguments. They're ridiculous.
WILDES: Let's get this guy out because he may kill somebody.
INGRAHAM: Sound good to most Americans right now. Harmeet, I'll let you have the last word.
WILDES: The next people that will be victim will be --
DHILLON: Laura, this is a joke. What happened in San Francisco is embarrassing. They let this guy out like they let people out every single day like (inaudible) in San Francisco. He was hanging out for two and a half months, a ticking time bomb for this crime to occur. He will now serve under the California laws maybe two or three years for this crime and then guess what? Catch and release again. Thank you, California.
INGRAHAM: We have to go. We're way over, guys. We'll have you back. We have to go.
WILDES: It's a broken system and we need to fix it.
INGRAHAM: Michael, you made some good points, but it's not about legal immigration. It's about illegal immigration period. Both of you thank you.
And a programming note, Kellyanne Conway will be on "Fox and Friends," tomorrow morning. Should be the first White House person to react to the Steinle verdict. So, make sure to watch that.
A lot more when we come back. Did NBC executives really have no idea about Matt Lauer's predatory behaviors? We'll, a report coming up.
INGRAHAM: Now how in the world did NBC brass not know about Matt Lauer's behavior all those years? Maybe they didn't want to know. CNN's Jeff Zucker, Lauer's boss for year at the "Today" show is claiming absolute ignorance today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFF ZUCKER, PRESIDENT, CNN: I was at NBC for 25 years of my career. You know, no one ever brought to me or to my knowledge, there was never -- there was never a complaint about Matt. There was never a suggestion of that kind of deviant predatory behavior, not even a whisper of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Not even a whisper. Please. People across the industry are saying they knew about his reputation for years. Don't forget, NBC is the network that held back the Juanita Broderick interview about Bill Clinton before they were forced to run it and the blockbuster Harvey Weinstein investigation.
So, with Matt Lauer, NBC initially claimed that there was one accuser. We told you last night, there's actually many more. Now today Fox News is reporting as many as eight women may accused Lauer of sexual harassment.
Joining me now to make sense of all this and it's still rapidly developing tonight is Fox News contributor, "New York Times" best-selling author, Tammy Bruce along with Sam Braverman, who is a criminal defense attorney and a political analyst.
Sam, let's start with you. Look, I used to go on the "Today Show" fairly regularly, including back in the 90s, mid to late 90s when Jeff Zucker was there. He was very close to Lauer. Lauer was perfectly nice to me, but they were really good pals.
And the reporting today is that this was widely known in the network, that he had a reputation and people were afraid to speak out because of his power and the fact that he was the franchise of the network. What do you say?
SAM BRAVERMAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I'm sure that always has a role to play in all these sorts of things. Being a powerful guy that brings in $100 million to a television station gives you latitude. I have no doubt there's people there that knew this was going on.
Whether or not the people at the high end had properly insulated themselves from this so that they can, quote/unquote, have deniability is hard to say. But it seems unlikely to me that nobody knew about this.
In fact, "The Times" and "Variety" had been working on it for weeks. The idea that it came out this Monday is nonsense. Of course, they knew.
INGRAHAM: Tammy, this kind of plausible deniability, Zucker -- Zucker is a liberal over there at CNN and wagging his finger all the time when Fox is going through its stuff and Lauer was interviewing O'Reilly about a month or so ago. Something about this whole story seems hard to believe. Everybody is so shocked like with the Weinstein thing. Everybody is so shocked and stunned about the so-called behavior.
TAMMY BRUCE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Right. Now, look, what is interesting here is that Andy Lack, remember, was brought back to NBC to save NBC from the Brian Williams debacle. So, this is a man who was brought in to try to fix things. He's a fixer.
Now, this would be somewhat believable -- it's more believable with Zucker I supposed than it is with Lack because of the close personal relationship that Andy Lack has with Matt Lauer.
So, even if you try to insulate yourself in the workplace, that level I would think when you are managing that kind of money and the gem of your network, you want to know everything. You don't want to be surprised.
That becomes the issue for Mr. Lack and certainly for Mr. Zucker, who also pride himself on actually being, you know, a manager. He is a captain of a ship. You need to know these things. And so, this is where it becomes problematic.
I think, Laura, what we've seen, of course, are these men have been able to do this for decades. Suddenly it seems to them overnight that the rule has changed. I think they have underestimated the nature of what was occurring.
So, they thought that they could protect themselves. You saw that with the spiking of the Ronan Ferro dynamic and you saw it with just some of the denials that's already led up to this especially with "Variety" working I think actually months on this. "The New York Times" as well.
And then the firing, by the way -- a lot of people don't realize this -- it wasn't just a booker that was fired earlier. It was a vice president of NBC who was Matt Lauer's closest producer that was fired earlier for inappropriate behavior with women.
So, a lot of people thought that this would start the unraveling. Now we're seeing them try to still scramble and cover themselves. Clearly, I don't think they're thinking right at this point about the franchise.
INGRAHAM: Sam, what do they do here? I mean, there was rumors that Megyn Kelly would want to step in and her show is what it is. It's less of a news show, less of a serious show, that she would step in and seems like the knives were out for her today. Some people were thinking -- like she was throwing gasoline on the fire of Matt Lauer. What are your thoughts there?
BRAVERMAN: Wouldn't you be happy to see Anderson Cooper take over the job there? You guys would be happy about that. I think the answer is that you have to do as much damage control as you can, and you just behead as many people that you think will bring attention elsewhere and give you time to scramble internally.
So, if they cut off a couple people here and move them on, that gives them some latitude. To suggest this is a liberal network problem, I think probably misses the beat. There's a whole lot going on for the Lauer- O'Reilly interview a couple months ago. It's reminiscent of -- I don't know -- something like in --
INGRAHAM: I go back to the Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd in the 80s when I first came to Washington. A lot of stuff going on in this town that people laughed at for a long time in Washington.
BRAVERMAN: Since Rome.
INGRAHAM: It's been going on a long time.
BRUCE: Let me add, to, none of this -- as we know, none of this would be able to survive without leadership supporting and protecting people.
INGRAHAM: Protecting their brand.
BRUCE: Protecting the brand.
BRUCE: Especially with the behavior of Matt Lauer. People knew.
INGRAHAM: We have to go. Thank you so much. When we return, utter hysteria from the left in mainstream media over President Trump's mental state. Today's ANGLE next.
INGRAHAM: Who is really crazy? President Trump or the media? That's the focus of tonight's ANGLE. There's been a steady drum beat from the bipartisan kabal and the media and a few in politics that are claiming that the commander-in-chief is unfit to serve.
Not in his right mind. Insane. Cuckoo for cocoa puffs. A "New York Times" best-selling book by a group of psychiatrists suggests that the president is psychologically unstable. This has been gaining momentum for some months now.
I'd say for a glimpse of true psychological instability, here's MSNBC's Joe Scarborough from "Morning Joe" along with a sampling of other hysterics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC ANCHOR: You have somebody inside the White House and the "New York Daily News" says is mentally unfit, that people close to him is mentally unfit, that people close to him during the campaign told me had early stages of dementia.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Think about the prospect that the president of the United States is not totally in his right mind. Let's just say it. He's not fully in touch with reality and is worsening.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Something is unleashed with him lately. I don't know what is causing it. I don't know how to describe it.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You see a difference in the past days, weeks?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think the last couple of days tweets have been --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Unhinged.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Markedly accelerated in terms of seeming --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are concerned that the president of the United States is so unstable, is so volatile, has a decision-making process that is so quick that he might order a nuclear weapons strike that is wildly out of step with U.S. national security interests.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Now consider the people questioning the president's mental health. Where did Scarborough psych degree from? Scarborough is not the only member of the media suffering from the severe case of Trump derangement syndrome.
But I've been thinking about this. I think there might be a method to their madness. You can see what is happening is, they're deflecting some attention from all of the real basket cases. The colleagues in the newsrooms with real psychological issues.
They're the ones that you've been reading about with careers going down in flames over habitual sexual a base and harassment. Yes, it's easier to talk about a crazy president that tweets than your pals down the hall or the management upstairs that supposedly knew nothing about the predatory behavior of their best friend.
You know what the left is mostly afraid here? Now that Trump is going to fail but that he's actually going to succeed. So, they use the word "mad man" to undermine is credibility while fitting up this narrative to oust him from office, delegitimize the election, pull it back.
Now last night, I asked someone who knows a little bit about the president. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and asked him his appraisal of Trump's mental state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, R-KY., MAJORITY LEADER: Those accusations are absolutely outrageous. I speak to president more virtually, daily basis. I'm involved with him all the time on all of these issues. That accusation is totally baseless and outrageous. I think those kinds of accusations are completely off base and irresponsible. Let's argue over the issues.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: But the left doesn't want to talk about the issues. The crazy talk allows them to divert attention from all the good the president has done already for the United States. Let's talk about a booming economy. GDP just revised up to 3.3 percent. Stock market at 24,000. Christmas retail sales up already this season.
Slash of red tape to boost investor confidence, unleashing small businesses across the United States. He's rolled back regulations that strangled business growth, restoring common sense conservatism. Trying to drain the swamp, having some success in urban bureaucracies like the State Department. He's nominating a record number of federal judges in courts across the land.
Finally, returning fire in the one-sided trade war with China. Almost gets no coverage. That $250 billion worth of deals he brought back after the trip to Asia? He's finally launching a real anti-dumping case against Chinese aluminum manufacturers.
Get this. Now he's working with our European allies to oppose China at the WTO came out hours ago. They're opposing market economy status for China. That's huge news. Where is all the media reporting and obsessing in all of that?
Top Trump aide, Stephen Miller, just told The Washington Examiner if media coverage was fair, unbiased down the middle, there would be a hundred stories about the unstoppable momentum and energy of the oval office.
It's the same thing that they did to my old boss, Ronald Reagan. They branded him a doddering old actor while trying to sabotage his agenda. These are the same people that got the election wrong, said the stock market would tank once Trump got elected.
And now they are desperately trying to revive their own reputations by defaming the president and they hope they get what they in the end, removing him from office. That's what all the crazy talk is about. Frankly, I think that is crazy. That's the ANGLE.
Joining us now to discuss what's really going on, Molly Hemingway, senior editor at The Federalist, and Garland Nixon, a radio talk show host. Garland, let's start with you. That's quite a montage of people both in politics and the media declaring Donald Trump basically either has dementia or mentally unsound.
GARLAND NIXON, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: You know, I think they may be out of line making a scientific diagnosis. But I don't think it's unreasonable when the president tweets out something that could literally start World War III one day and the next day he's in a Twitter war with a college basketball player, to say that that is out of line. So the president is acting in ways that I think we would have to question whether or not the president of the United States should consider a reasonable way to act, to lead the nation, to be the leader of the free world.
INGRAHAM: So you're saying basically if he didn't tweet, we would have a booming stock market. He's dealing in China in way that I haven't seen any president, really any president in my lifetime deal with China, which is really common sense pragmatics. It's not partisan. It's pragmatic. All this stuff is happening on the economic front. He's working with our allies in Europe. So if he didn't tweet, he wouldn't be mentally unsound?
NIXON: I'm not talking about the tweets. I'm talking about what's in the tweets. He's suggesting, the president is suggesting the only way to fix the problem with North Korea, which would be prevent war, is to start World War III with North Korea and China?
INGRAHAM: Did he say that? That's not what he said. Mollie, go ahead.
MOLLIE HEMINGWAY, THE FEDERALIST: I think there's certainly room to have problems with his tweets. Just this week alone there have been many problems with his tweets. There's his rhetoric and then there's also just the reality. And when you look at the reality of his foreign policy, he's actually got some of the more restrained foreign policy that we've seen going back to someone like since Eisenhower.
It's funny to hear people talk about worrying about getting into wars. That's what this last three administrations have done, or the last several administrations have done is get us into wars needlessly.
He does have a different foreign policy posture. He does want to convey his seriousness with North Korea. And I think those tweets are not more directed toward North Korea so much as directed toward China and getting China to take it seriously. Again, his rhetoric could use a lot of improvement. But people who are observing it need to separate that rhetoric from the reality of the presidency, and from the reality he's actually operating as a pretty mainstream president with a lot of accomplishments to back him up.
NIXON: See, I think what we're talking about here is that he doesn't understand the -- apparently he doesn't understand the gravity of that rhetoric. Everybody remembers the shot heard around the world. But we don't want the tweet heard around the world. And what a lot of people are saying is you don't seem to grasp that when you make these kinds of boisterous tweets about North Korea -- one person just slips on the trigger and now all of a sudden --
INGRAHAM: That's probably not that simple.
HEMINGWAY: Military historian Victor Davis Hanson says there is no evidence in history of an errant word causing a war. We have had a lot of rhetoric from the previous administrations warning North Korea about destruction if they continued with their nuclear capabilities. Nothing has stopped them, absolutely nothing. Everything about our posture for the last several decades has done nothing to keep them from the path they're on.
INGRAHAM: Guys, do you what I think is crazy? This is what I think is crazy, and it's happened under both Republican and Democrat administrations. I think leaving the border open and very unsecured was crazy. I think letting China become such a dominant economic and military power, I think that was crazy. I think taking Mubarak out was crazy. I think doubling down and doubling down and doubling down again in these Middle East conference that are quagmires that we can't get out, there's a lot of craziness to go around.
And maybe people are really polished and they give speeches and maybe don't wander off so much as sometimes Trump can. But the policies have been crazy. They have hallowed out our middle class. That is craziness that had real world effects. And I'm talking Bush, Obama, Clinton, crazy town to let China get to where they are today. They all did it, all of them.
HEMINGWAY: It's almost like we're in the exact inverse of the Obama presidency where everything was very polished and considered, the public statements were always very presentable. And in the background you're having this absolutely destructive policies with Iran, all these destabilization -- thinking about what we did in Libya, convincing Muammar to get rid of his weapons and then destabilizing that regime, that's the kind of stuff that affects North Korea and makes North Korea think that they need to go nuclear. Maybe these polished presentations --
INGRAHAM: I think giving 20 percent of our uranium to a country that is one of our adversaries, or at least a company connected to Putin, I think that is crazy. I mean, that's really crazy to me. Maybe I'm just the one who is totally nuts here, but I think that's crazy.
NIXON: You're never going to get me to promote neocon war policies, that's for sure. So I've --
INGRAHAM: But they want him out of office. They want to remove him out from office using the 25th Amendment. Don't you agree with that?
NIXON: I think there are people --
INGRAHAM: Jackie Speier, Kelly --
NIXON: I think it's not unreasonable --
INGRAHAM: Murphy, excuse me.
NIXON: Recently we already know the president had copped the Billy Bush tapes. And recently now he seems to have forgotten that.
INGRAHAM: Reportedly. Reportedly, unnamed sources.
NIXON: He called it locker room talk, which he actually won doing that. He won. He did that. He got away with it. But now he seems to have forgotten it. And now he's saying --
INGRAHAM: I'll be considered crazy if I blow through another hard break. It's great having you here.
NIXON: All right, thank you.
INGRAHAM: Thank you so much.
And the career of the longest serving member of the House may be coming to an abrupt end now that even Pelosi has decided Congressman Conyers has become too toxic. But the lawmaker's lawyer had an in your face response. Wait till you hear what he told her next.
INGRAHAM: Welcome back. As we've been reporting, Democratic Congressman John Conyers facing multiple accusations of sexual harassment, and now even Nancy Pelosi is calling for his resignation. It gets really bad. However, Conyers isn't going quietly. His attorney said, quote, "Pelosi did not elect the congressman and she sure as hell will not pressure him to leave." He claimed a double standard, noting that Democrats are not calling on Senator Al Franken to resign, maybe a race element there.
But a new bill would abolish the office that hides congressional offenders and uses taxpayer money to hush up their indiscretions. We first told you about this Office of Compliance, and last night I asked Majority Leader Mitch McConnell about the unmasking of names, would he be in favor of it, of alleged abusers. He said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: Laura, I think my attitude about that, I want to wait and see what the women of the Senate recommend on that and the other issues we're talking about.
INGRAHAM: So it could possible --
MCCONNELL: I'll wait and see what the women of the Senate recommend on that issue.
INGRAHAM: Why just the women of the Senate? Doesn't everybody --
MCCONNELL: I think they're in a very position to take the lead. Some men are involved as well on both sides.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: And tonight we have some new clarity on the identity of the alleged harassers on Capitol Hill whose settlements were paid from the slush fund. A whopping $100,000 went to two staffers of disgraced Democrat Congressman Eric Massa that was forced to resign.
Joining me now for reaction to all this, Congressman Ron DeSantis, Republican from Florida. He's a co-sponsor of the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act. I can't believe there's an act with "hush fund" in the title. Congressman DeSantis, take it away. Mitch McConnell would not commit to unmasking the names there as far as I could tell.
REP. RON DESANTIS, R-FLA.: Think about it, Laura. You have a situation where members of Congress can commit misconduct, the taxpayers will pay for their misconduct, and then it's all kept secret. So what kind of behavior are you trying to promote?
And here's the thing about the offenders. This is taxpayer dollars. You as a taxpayer have a right to know how your money is being spent. So my bill would unveil the claims that were brought and the amount, and then the perpetrator. And the American public deserves to have that information. There's no way that that should be secret.
INGRAHAM: Are there any other funds we should know about on Capitol Hill that you've come across that --
DESANTIS: We're actually, my staff, we're researching to get all of them because what happens is, they'll do one permanent appropriations, so just a pot of money that existed outside the budget process so people said did you know this is there? No I don't know it's there because it's not in the budget, it's not in our appropriations bill.
INGRAHAM: How is that even allowed?
DESANTIS: It shouldn't be allowed. Mueller's funding is actually DOJ --
DESANTIS: Is Outside. I think that's a bad interpretation. I don't think he's entitled to that. That's what they're relying on.
INGRAHAM: So he can spend as much money as he wants, and without any real oversight.
DESANTIS: Justice could tell him to stop, but they've not shown any inclination of doing that.
INGRAHAM: So he can hire as many people as he wants.
DESANTIS: He has got 16 prosecutors.
INGRAHAM: Is that all. What have they found so far?
DESANTIS: They have enough for the O.J. Simpson murder case or Oklahoma City.
INGRAHAM: Kate Steinle's accuser basically got off, nothing. Maybe a couple years, possession of a firearm as a felon. Illegal immigrant deported five times, sanctuary state, sanctuary city policies. Your take on this?
DESANTIS: The verdict obviously is a disaster. The root cause of this is exactly what you said. It's the fact that we didn't have control of our borders and you have a sanctuary city where he could return knowing he would be put back on the streets. So I think Congress needs to look at this now and say we have a spending bill coming up in December. We have to totally defund sanctuary cities in that spending bill.
INGRAHAM: I'm thinking about her family tonight, and victimized once again, their hearts broken again. There's no justice here. No justice.
DESANTIS: You remember Jamiel Shaw and his son in California. They're releasing these illegal immigrants right back onto the street even though they were in custody, and his son gets killed, a high school senior who was going to go to play football. So how many more of these stories do we need to have before we actually take action?
INGRAHAM: I'll tell you in a second what the lawyer for the -- for whatever his name is. I forgot the evil person's name. But here's what Trump tweeted, "A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case. No wonder the people of our country are so angry with illegal immigration." I think he's right about that.
Again, we had the lawyer for the accused tonight, we had played a sound bite earlier where he said this vindicates basically the rights of illegal immigrants to be here in the United States and to stop demeaning immigrants, always conflating illegal immigrants with immigrants. He went on and on with this impassioned statement about how this demonstrates that we have real justice in the United States for people no matter what color of their skin, making it a racial issue. And it was nothing further from the truth. The guy shouldn't have been in the country.
DESANTIS: That's why when we get the statistics from the Obama administration, how many illegal immigrants did they release that then went on to commit crimes, it's I don't know what percentage of that is committing crimes, but every one of those crimes you can say had we enforced the laws written, none of those crimes would have happened. That's just the bottom line with this.
INGRAHAM: Last night Mitch McConnell in this interview actually said that he was in favor of ending chain migration and was in favor of basically the RAISE act, which I hadn't heard him say before. That was actually very heartening to a lot of our viewers and a little surprising to me. He's sounding really conservative on immigration.
DESANTIS: Yes. McConnell obviously is viewed as a quintessential establishment Republican. The Republican establishment has never embraced things like the RAISE act or ending chain migration. So things are changing, obviously driven by the president of the United States.
INGRAHAM: So his agenda perhaps will actually be pursued in this regard.
DESANTIS: It's a way to unite the party because that's where our base is on these issues. Our base is not with the open borders folks.
INGRAHAM: So it looks like Corker tonight might be throwing a monkey wrench in the tax reform bill over in the Senate. Any thoughts there?
DESANTIS: Every Republican runs for office saying the tax code is a disaster or we pay too much. We have a chance to do something --
INGRAHAM: He's retiring.
DESANTIS: Right, so you're not going to face the voters again and you want try to deep six this because you have a personal beef with the president? That's not what we're here to do. We're here to represent our constituents. The Senate needs to get this done and end the legislative drought that they've been in all year.
INGRAHAM: It would raise taxes by $350 billion more. If this goes down, 2018 prediction?
DESANTIS: Obviously I think our base will be deflated. We elect your guys --
INGRAHAM: It's over.
DESANTIS: Yes. It's not going to be good. It's not going to be good for the economy either.
INGRAHAM: Horrific. Congressman DeSantis, always great to see you. Thank you so much.
And up next, check this out, Black Lives Matter says it has a nasty Christmas gift for white-owned businesses, a boycott. We'll explain coming up.
INGRAHAM: We always keep an eye on culture, and tonight it has a Christmas feel. Why is the Washington D.C. metro system waging a war on Christmas? Plus, CNN plans to boycott the White House Christmas party. But we begin with Black Lives Matter, which seems to be dreaming of a, I don't know, communist Christmas. Joining us now is Raymond Arroyo, "New York Times" bestselling author and EWTN news anchor, author of the "Will Wilder" children's series. Raymond, let's start with the Black Lives Matter issue.
RAYMOND ARROYO, MANAGING EDITOR, EWTN NEWS: Do we have to?
INGRAHAM: Yes, we do. With white organizations and businesses, do they not like the phrase "white Christmas?"
ARROYO: No, no, no. They want to boycott all white-owned businesses as a way to stop capitalism, as a way to protest against the Trump presidency.
INGRAHAM: Because all white people like Trump?
ARROYO: I guess.
INGRAHAM: Even in California? A lot of them voted for Hillary.
ARROYO: One of the Black Lives Matter leaders said something, wrote an op- ed I think last year in "The Los Angeles Sentinel."
INGRAHAM: Here's the quote. "Rather than lining the pockets of Trump and the other white supremacist capitalists," that has a nice ring to it, "white supremacist capitalist," "donate to black-led organizations that are building new liberatory," is that a word?
ARROYO: Liberatory structures.
INGRAHAM: Is that a word, "liberatory"? I must have missed that one in school. "Liberatory structures in our communities" wrote Melina Abdullah.
ARROYO: She's a professor at Cal State University.
INGRAHAM: "Liberatory." I've learned a new word.
ARROYO: Can you imagine in the Klan came out and said hey, white people, only frequent white-owned businesses. They would rightly be decried as racists. This has a racist tinge to it that we don't need at the holidays. There's one color that matters to retail this time of year. It's not black or white. It's green.
And this is a time of year when everybody comes together. And it also is really dumb because by telling black consumers don't go to white-owned businesses, you're beating up and you're condemning and hurting the black employees at those businesses. This is bad for everybody.
INGRAHAM: Retail is still in --
ARROYO: It's booming this season.
INGRAHAM: It's booming this season. It's not just Amazon, it's not just online. Retail is up. And that hurts everybody. But they -- this is what happens is they always take it too far.
ARROYO: It goes too far. And this is only going to hurt black businesses because what happens? Then only black people will frequent black businesses and white people frequent white businesses? There's more white people buying. That's a problem.
INGRAHAM: Is that what Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks was really all about?
ARROYO: It's terrible. Division at Christmas.
INGRAHAM: Now there's just so much sadness in my heart because I understand that CNN won't be at tomorrow's White House Christmas party. There's a lot of media Christmas parties I guess, or a lot of parties.
ARROYO: Not this year.
INGRAHAM: Only one media party.
ARROYO: The Trumps are only doing one.
INGRAHAM: Good for them.
ARROYO: No pictures with the president.
INGRAHAM: Boo hoo, Mr. President. Change that. Raymond wants a picture because he wants to meet Melania. Sorry, Rebecca. I didn't mean that. So CNN says they're not going? Who cares? Who cares if they're not going?
ARROYO: Because they feel the president is attacking the First Amendment.
INGRAHAM: Fake news.
ARROYO: And attacking CNN.
INGRAHAM: Maybe they got a fake invitation then.
ARROYO: You know what happened here, you have a president who for the first time that is responding regularly to aggressive --
INGRAHAM: Unmasking the press.
ARROYO: Well, and look, for good or ill there's always that tension among the media. That's a good thing. But I think at Christmas time, can't we drop the grudges and come together and have a little eggnog at the White House and get our picture with Melania?
INGRAHAM: No. It will be more fun without the CNN people. I'm just kidding. I like some of them. By the way, I'm remembering a Christmas past of the Clintons. Didn't the Clintons have an interesting Christmas tree that we've forgotten about?
ARROYO: We talked about this the other day. All the criticisms of Melania's decorations. Remember the Clinton tree, Gary Aldrich's book, the Secret Service guy, who said there were condoms and sex toys hanging from the tree.
INGRAHAM: Do we have a picture of it? Wait, wait, I can't make out -- oh, that can't be true.
ARROYO: That's what he reported.
INGRAHAM: Condoms and -- that's like Matt Lauer's Christmas true.
ARROYO: You never know what's back there.
INGRAHAM: Come on. And Obama's Christmas card, now we're picking on all the Christmases. We are the Grinches tonight. Obama's Christmas cards, those were kind of a season's greetings --
ARROYO: They were always happy holidays. No merry Christmas. The Trumps have been demonstrative in their declaration. The president tonight even in a tweet invoked the 2,000-year-old story of Jesus Christ that everybody knows no matter their religion. This is not going to gain him any more friends.
INGRAHAM: We're bringing maybe J.C. back in Christmas. Wow.
ARROYO: I guess. So this is all --
INGRAHAM: Trump's gone away in the manger. This is where we are right now.
INGRAHAM: Finally tonight, archdiocese, the Catholic archdiocese suing the metro.
ARROYO: They're suing them because every season they advertise on the sides of buses. It's a very bland ad.
INGRAHAM: Let's show the ad.
ARROYO: The ad just says "Find the perfect gift." And it's a couple of shepherds --
INGRAHAM: OK, we see it. So who is suing to stop it?
ARROYO: The diocese wants this advertisement --
INGRAHAM: They don't want it?
ARROYO: Metro says it endorsing religion. How is that endorsing religion? It's a couple of sheep. I don't understand it.
INGRAHAM: Given some of the ads on the Metro I think that's about what we need is a couple of shepherds.
ARROYO: Merry Christmas. I hope I get my Melania photo.
INGRAHAM: Melania, Raymond wants a photo. Don't go away. We're coming back.
INGRAHAM: Before we go, as you ramp up your Christmas shopping, "Billionaire at the Barricades: The Populist Revolution from Reagan to Trump," would make a great gift. Buy one for yourselves and your aggrieved liberal relatives. They'll love it.
And I want you to follow me on Facebook and Twitter. By the way, we're going to be reading some of your best tweets on the Steinle verdict, so I want you to get on Twitter right after the show. Watch Shannon Bream. She is up next. I want to know what you think about this outrageous verdict or if you agree with it. I want to hear. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team up next.
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.