The Florida shooting, sheriff's reaction and Stoneman kids

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," February 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: All right. Sean, Great show. Good evening from Washington. I'm Laura Ingraham and this is THE INGRAHAM ANGLE.

A major win in federal court today for President Trump and a big boost for his push to build the border wall. Univision anchor, Jorge Ramos, is here, that's going to be fun and to debate me on the wall and a new Supreme Court ruling that could completely altered the immigration issue.

I'll discuss the president's strategy as well for Mexico and China, huge news on that with the administration's point man on trade.

A huge number of teens -- maybe yours? Are now sending out sexually explicit of themselves and of others. Some experts are saying it's a positive development a debate not to be missed ahead.

But first, the Florida school shooting, this sheriff's reaction, and the Stoneman Douglas High School kids, that's the focus of tonight's ANGLE.

We brought to you last night exclusive news about what was happening behind the scenes, new and shocking details about the activity of the Broward County Police under the leadership of Sheriff Scott Israel.

We shared with you a department email asking officers to defend the sheriff. It read, quote, 'At the moment we find our agency up against a flurry of media allegations and a personal attack against our sheriff, sheriff Israel stood with us. Now we must stand with him. It's important that they know we stand as one.'

This should be not about saving anyone's backside but about transparency. Not protecting the sheriff or anyone else. Remember, Sheriff Israel has endorsed gun control and for that he won praise from student activists.

And this is happening as his department's actions before, during, and after the horrific school shooting are now being investigated by a separate state commission. When challenged, Israel -- don't forget, unelected Democratic sheriff -- brags about his amazing leadership.

But it may not have been so amazing. Last night, we reported exclusively that sources close to the Broward Sheriff's Office are telling us that deputies on the scene of the shooting were told not to enter the school unless their body cameras were turned on.

Well, since they did not have body cameras, they didn't engage the shooter or enter the school. The Sheriff's Office by the way has not disputed our report. When asked about the deputies who failed to enter the school building, Broward Superintendent Robert Runcie, said, quote, 'There potentially could have been law enforcement that were sitting on the sidelines.

Again, we'll see what comes out of the investigation. The Broward County Sheriff's Office and the FBI has all the video related to this. We have none of it in our possession. They made that clear. They came, they gave us a warrant and a subpoena, and they took it all.'

But remember, Sheriff Israel said that the videos may never be released, another bizarre comment. How do you say that? It's not clear if the feds have the video as well, it would even be his full decision at this point.

Then there are the Parkland Florida school students, they've been through a lot. For anyone who has been conscious since Valentines Day, the media has featured these kids wall to wall, their passion, their words.

I would argue their pain and loss is at times of being exploited by anti- gun activists, sometimes using them as proxies even. Remember this from the CNN town hall.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Rubio, it's hard to look at you and not look down the barrel of an AR-15, and not look at Nikolas Cruz, but the point is you're here. Can you tell me right now that you will not accept a single donation from the NRA?


INGRAHAM: Nice. Some of the exchanges, I imagine the sheriff wouldn't like it if his officers were spoken to in that tone. Well, he then revealed himself.


SHERIFF SCOTT ISRAEL, BROWARD COUNTY: We do need to have some gun-control reform. 18-year-olds should never have a rifle and 18-year-old should never have a rifle. An 18-year-old kid -- they are not adults yet. They are in high school. These kids should not have a rifle.


INGRAHAM: You hear what he said? Kids. They are still in high school. They are going through a lot. It's something called growing up. Sheriff Israel made unwittingly one of the salient points here. Why on earth should teenagers dictate policy on gun control, the Second Amendment or frankly anything else for that matter?

Now without diminishing their pain or sadness or their right to express their opinion about the slaughter of their fellow classmates, why should their political or policy views -- we are talking 14, 15, 16-year-old kids be given special consideration? Well when they're not insulting congressman or senators, they are advising them on gun policy.


JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: You just met with about five students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, you know, I've heard a lot of conservatives say these kids aren't experts, why are they have a good influence on this debate? But you met with them so what did you think?

SENATOR JEFF FLAKE, R—ARIZONA: It's high school kids, a sympathetic group, very articulate, committed bunch of kids. They are obviously social media savvy and that's why I think they are having the impact that they are having. They are organized, and they are here. I'm glad they are, and I hope they keep it up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These guns are out there on the street that people who may be unstable are able to get it just as anybody else.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If we ever want to end this, we have to start at the federal level because that is where the law is supreme, that's where we have to take action.


INGRAHAM: Speaking of Senator Flake who is retiring because 18 percent approval, I actually probably would prefer the students to most of his advisors over the years. That of having been said, before three of the students went on Ellen Degeneres is popular talk show, a jiff of them backstage appeared on Twitter.

They looked like Oscar nominees, they look adorable. Perhaps The Wall Street Journal's, Bill McGurn raised the best question about the kids turned policy experts. He wrote the following, 'Quick show of hands for those with children. How many of you look to your teens for political wisdom whether it's your daughter obsessing over her Snapchat streaks or the son spending his day eating Doritos and binge-gaming 'Grand Theft Auto' if you let him?' I have three kids. Did you raise your hand? I don't think so, and that's the ANGLE.

Joining me now for reaction here in Washington from the liberal perspective, Mark Glaze, a former executive director for Everytown for Gun Safety. He's very anti-NRA and pro-gun control. He says the NRA has a pro-slaughter agenda, and in Tallahassee, Florida, Richard Corcoran, is the speaker of the House in Florida. He's a Republican.

Gentlemen, great to see both of you. Mark, take it away. You've heard my ANGLE, what part of it do you --

MARK GLAZE, FORMER DIRECTOR, EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY: I don't think these kids have unique knowledge. I think part of the reason people taking them seriously is that in January, less than two months, there have been 18 school shootings and many more mass shootings. Things like Chinese water torture, at some point, things just reach a point where they break. I think these kids decided they were not going to duck and cover, but they were going to get out there and start agitating for change.

INGRAHAM: Because you are a victim and a survivor, you have a special policy expertise in the arena and again, everyone has a right to speak out, fine. I'm just talking about the frequency with which they are put on cable television, the celebrity add-on with a half a million-dollar check -- people can give money to whoever they want to.

But it's much cooler, no offense, your cool -- to have kids out there talking about I see you down the barrel of an AR-15. Then it is for you to say that. You look pretty cool, but those kids a picture says a thousand worlds.

GLAZE: If I'm flipping around on cable, I want to see kids say that because it's much more interesting. You're right. These kids don't have unique insight into the policy arguments here, but we have other people like me to do that to know everything there is to know.

INGRAHAM: All right. Let's go to the speaker of the House in Florida. Representative Corcoran, your reaction to this because I know you have pushed and pushed and pushed for a common-sense approach to policing in these circumstances and to the schools and hardening the school targets as we see a boycott of the NRA, which we will get to in a moment, what's your reaction to what we are seeing so far?

RICHARD CORCORAN, R, SPEAKER OF THE FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: I've met with close to 100 students, I've met with parents of the victims, I do think they have something to add to the debate and they've been very constructive.

One of the things that we are doing in Florida is we have instituted, as President Trump has suggested, the most robust first of its kind marshal program where we take a sworn law enforcement officers, they have more training, more expertise whether it's gun, active shooter, defense tactics than our law enforcement officers. And we give them that training and now they can be certified teachers and to be in the schools.

INGRAHAM: Again, the activists don't want teachers armed. That is the last thing they want. They are saying interview after interview, don't you dare arm the teachers because that's going to create another problem, some crazy kid gets a hold of the teacher's gun and then we are off to the races. You want to arm teachers and schools they say you are doing the bidding of the NRA that it's going to make them more money.

CORCORAN: I think they're changing the debate. It's not arming teachers. It's having a sworn law enforcement officers with all the expertise and training of any deputy or any police officer out on the street and allowing them to teach classes in the classroom and we have had students, we have had parents of the victims in our committee today testifying that having a marshal program like we have outlined is common sense.

INGRAHAM: Mark, I want to play for both of you some students in their discussion of the National Rifle Association, let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The NRA is not going to do anything but help shooting happened.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any politician on either side, who is taking money from the NRA is responsible for events like this.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They accept this blood money. They are against the children.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you can't get elected without taking money from child murderers, why are you running?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is to every lawmaker out there, no longer can you take money from the NRA, no longer can you fly under the radar doing whatever it is you that want to do because we are coming after you.


INGRAHAM: Coming after you.

GLAZE: I'll be nicer than Dana Loesch was on this topic. I don't think the NRA loves it when there's a mass shooting, but I think the agenda that they support directly facilitates mass shooting and the shootings that take place every day in the headlines. It is their philosophy that there should be anybody should be able to get any gun that they want.

INGRAHAM: That is completely untrue. The NRA does not believe convicted criminals should get guns. They do not believe that someone who has been committed to an insane asylum should get a gun. They don't believe that at all. I'm not even a member of the NRA when I say that.

GLAZE: That's a law as it currently exists. The bottom line is the vast majority of crimes that are committed with guns were committed by people who bought them legally who passed a background check.

INGRAHAM: You prefer that all handguns be banned because handguns commit most of the murders in the country by far. I think three quarters of all murders are committed by hand guns.

GLAZE: Look, I'm one of those guys who thinks that the NRA is actually much smarter about this stuff than we are. They make their case about what they want no matter how outrageous and they keep making it for decades and then they win. I think we have to reverse Heller. I think there should not be in an individual right to own a gun.

INGRAHAM: Speaker Corcoran, right now, we have a massive effort by celebrities and students to boycott the NRA. Alyssa Milano, I know she's high on your list of authorities, she said, 'we are calling for a one-day boycott of Amazon, Apple TV, FedEx, pass it on, don't shop, don't stream, don't ship.'

Fred Smith of FedEx said, you know, we are not endorsing the NRA, but we are not playing this game because where does it end? About the company's views on climate change, have you ever done a road race where Planned Parenthood ever had a sign? If you politicize everything, your reaction to the boycott.

CORCORAN: I think it's silly, and it's vindictive and it's pernicious and it's bulimic. It doesn't get to the solution. What we're trying to do is make sure that what happened never happens again. To your other guests' comments, I'm an NRA member, I'm in A-rated legislator with the NRA.

I have a concealed weapons permit. I have six children from 17 into 6 and your comments are offensive. What I tell my kids all the time, there is no greater threat to their life, liberty, and freedom than big government. Big government has destroyed more lives, slaughtered more people in the history of mankind than any other entity, it's certainly not the guns.

INGRAHAM: Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot.


INGRAHAM: I got your point. Mark.

GLAZE: The reason you need an arsenal of assault weapons in your house is because Paul Ryan is going to come to your house, take away your guns, give you health care, and then strip you of all your other rights, that's the scenario? That is stopping us from regulating guns?

CORCORAN: Well, you know what, I live in the state of Florida. We have a massive exile community from Cuba where that exact thing happened so don't think it can't happen anywhere else.

GLAZE: Governor Rick Scott is actual changing his mind on some of these issues, maybe you ought to think about it too.

INGRAHAM: I think in the end --

CORCORAN: Governor Scott has been a tremendous advocate for our constitutional rights --

INGRAHAM: Are you in favor of raising the age for the AR, Speaker, right?

CORCORAN: As President Trump said as long as we get rid of this insanity that we take our most precious resource our children and put them in gun free zones -- we are going to end that with our marshal program.

INGRAHAM: All right. Guys, great segment. By the way, President Trump did score a huge win on his plan for the border wall and I have a feeling that Univision's Jorge Ramos may have something to say about that. I'll debate him next.


INGRAHAM: The same federal judge of Mexican heritage that Candidate Trump said in 2016 was biased against him just gave President Trump a huge win on the border wall. U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel ruled that the Trump administration can proceed with plans to build a border wall regardless of environmental objections.

I also want to get into today's Supreme Court immigration ruling with our next guest, Univision and Fusion anchor, Jorge Ramos. He is the author of a new book I just started 'Stranger: The Challenge Of A Latino Immigrant In The Trump Era.'

Jorge, great to see you. How are you?

JORGE RAMOS, ANCHOR, UNIVISION: Thanks so much for inviting me.

INGRAHAM: All right. Congrats on the book. So, what is your take on the Supreme Court ruling that came down today. First of all, the one that said that the border wall can go forward without the concern about the environmental injections is a lawsuit following.

RAMOS: Yes, I think the first thought is that President Trump is going to have to think about again the racist comments that he made about Judge Gonzalo Curiel because it's exactly the same judge that now sided with his government. That racist remark that President Trump made --

INGRAHAM: I don't like to comment on judges when you're before the judge on an issue, I wouldn't have done that, but what part of that remark was racist? He said he didn't think someone of Mexican heritage could rule on immigration related matters because of the dual loyalty?

RAMOS: That is precisely the definition of racism. When you think that someone can't do his job simply because of his heritage. President Trump said it because he was of Mexican heritage, he couldn't do his job dealing on Trump University. So that's a racist statement the same way it is a racist statement to say that people from Haiti and African nations are from s-hole countries.

INGRAHAM: We know that President Obama use derogatory language about other countries. We know that other countries have done the same thing. On the issue of racism particularly, you make some really kind of wild charges in your book that we are going to get into a just a moment.

But there was another case that came down the court, it was a 5-3 ruling, that said at the U.S. government can indefinitely detain individuals who are found at the border or even green card holders who they have a reason to question their legal status, that was a 5-3 ruling, your reaction to that.

RAMOS: It's not easy to be in immigration nowadays in the United States. Many immigrants feel --

INGRAHAM: Illegal immigrant, Jorge, you always do this, and it drives people nuts.

RAMOS: First of all, I don't call them illegal immigrants because no one is illegal in this world.

INGRAHAM: What do they call them in Mexico?

RAMOS: They are simply undocumented immigrants and the fact is that it's increasingly difficult to be an immigrant in this country. Donald Trump has made it a hostile, dangerous nation for many immigrants, undocumented and documented.

INGRAHAM: Latino unemployment is at a record low, that's not a good statistic for you?

RAMOS: I think that's positive when it comes to economics, but how about if you are a family whose father or mother has been deported. How about if you're one of the people that the Trump government has arrested?

The arrests in Trump's first year are 30 percent higher than the last year of Barack Obama. So, OK, sure, unemployment is better for Latino, however, Donald Trump has arrested many more people than Barack Obama did.

INGRAHAM: Jorge, let's get an answer -- I'm a simple person at the bottom of all this. My question to you is do you believe in nationhood?

RAMOS: Absolutely. I believe that every single country has a right to protect its border.

INGRAHAM: Do countries have the right to determine who comes into the country and who must leave their country? Do they have that sovereign right?

RAMOS: I do believe that, but I also believe that we are partly responsible for the 11 million undocumented immigrants who are in this country simply because we benefit from their work every single day. From the food that we eat to the homes that they are building to the children that they take care of. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes.

INGRAHAM: Not all of them. I've seen people get cash under the table. Every illegal immigrant rescues a cat from a tree. There was also a DACA recipient who was arrested for making threats against a school. Every time we hear DACA, everyone is supposed to think their future valedictorians.

We have a right as Abigail Hernandez, she was arrested in federal detention up in Yonkers, New York, arrested for making a threat against the school she didn't attend, by the way.

For every -- every time you say it's bad for immigrants in the United States, why do so many people want to come to this country if this is a country that is not welcoming to legal immigrants? People who have faith in the system and follow the law, not to those who break the law, and then expect special benefits on the other side?

RAMOS: Are you criminalizing 2 million --

INGRAHAM: That's the game you're playing and no one buys it.

RAMOS: It would be the same way if I were to say all non- Hispanic whites were like the men who killed people in Las Vegas or -- what Adam Lanza did in Sandy Hook. You cannot criminalize --

INGRAHAM: They are already here unlawfully. We don't have to criminalize them.

RAMOS: Then don't. Because of one case, all the DREAMers are like that, they are not.

INGRAHAM: Jorge, in the end, this country is the greatest country in my view, I know you are both a citizen of Mexico. You vote in Mexico, correct?

RAMOS: I vote in Mexico and the United States.

INGRAHAM: Are you going to vote for Pena Nieto or no, done with him?

RAMOS: I think President Pena Nieto has been one of the worst presidents that Mexico has ever had --

INGRAHAM: We need you to run that will be fun.

RAMOS: I'm part of the United States and -- but I didn't want to see President Pena Nieto is one of the worst president that Mexico has had. He didn't have the courage to tell president Trump in his face that Mexico was not going to pay for the wall.

INGRAHAM: Do you think in the end Mexico will forge a strong relationship with China instead of renegotiating NAFTA and that's going to be a good thing for Mexico?

RAMOS: I don't think it's going to be a good thing for Mexico. A good thing for Mexico would be a strong relationship with the United States, but if you are the president of the United States who wants Mexico to pay for the wall -- Mexico won't pay for that wall.

INGRAHAM: I think Mexico might pay some of it indirectly.

RAMOS: I don't see that.

INGRAHAM: We might have a whole new business arrangement with Mexico that would be good for Mexico and good for the United States, but I love having you on. Thank you so much and congratulations on your book, 'Stranger.' Love having you on. Thanks so much.

Moving ahead with the border wall may mean trade retaliation by Mexico, up next, I'm going to talk to the man who try to prevent that while ensuring that China plays by the rules of free trade, really important topic.

Later, some experts suggesting that teen sexting is a good thing, I kid you not. Stay there.


LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Now, let's be honest, Trump is the first president to confront China, which is increasingly wealthy, increasingly aggressive, largest standing army in the world, no one else has done it like him. And now there may be a major fight brewing with Mexico over trade, NAFTA, and the wall, who's going to pay for it?

My next guest is at the center of it all. And the U.S. trade representative Bob Lighthizer might not be a household name, but you're not going to want to miss any of this. He joins us exclusively.

Ambassador Lighthizer, great seeing you. Thanks for being back with us. So we read that now on this issue of NAFTA renegotiation, all these great new deals I keep hearing, all these great new deals are going to start, that there has been a snag in the negotiations, and it was reported in Reuters and Washington Post that there was a call between the president and the Mexican president Pena Nieto and it ended in some kind of testy manner. I guess the snag or the holdup was about over who is going to fund the wall. I just want to play something for you. My radio listeners today chimed in on this topic of whether it matters if Mexico pays or if it's an indirect payment. Let's listen.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm totally in support of the president. If he can bring in much more revenue, bring in billions of dollars and use those funds to pay for the wall, it's the art of the deal.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I always expected my tax dollars to pay for the wall.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I never expected him to get the money directly from Mexico but I always knew there would be a way he could get it indirectly, and I knew he would do it.


INGRAHAM: So Mr. Ambassador, it doesn't seem like the hardcore Trump supporters care about the wall, so why should that be a snag here? It seems like the president has played this really smartly as a negotiating matter.

LIGHTHIZER: First of all, the wall is out of my lane. I stay in my lane. We have to have a wall, beyond that, I stay in my lane. And my lane is really about trying to get new deals. It's trying to reverse a very bad trend that we have had for a long, long time in the trade area. The president ran on this, he feels strongly about it. When I talk to him, its workers, ranchers, farmers, that's it. It's wages and its jobs. And I think if we renegotiate that deal, if we get a good deal with Mexico and hopefully with Canada if that's possible we are going to find more jobs.

INGRAHAM: The biggest holdup seems to be about auto manufacturing, and that's with a lion's share with our trade deficit of Mexico is. I was shocked to just read today that 77 percent of Mexican manufactured vehicles that were exported came to the United States. That is because there is no tariff on those because of NAFTA, correct?

LIGHTHIZER: That's correct.

INGRAHAM: And what will a potential deal look like regarding that type of imbalance?

LIGHTHIZER: The biggest part of the problem between the two countries and from a trade point of view is that Mexico has an industrial policy which is a smart one. It's designed to get auto companies to move to Mexico and then shipped to the U.S. You say 77 percent, for some companies it's even higher. And a lot of these are companies with very little products that are made in America. So they're low U.S. content.

And the kind of thing we are looking at is to have a better balance, have a higher regional content but also a U.S. content, and to reorganize the way we keep track of which is which. The president's objective is we have to get more jobs back to America, we have to reduce the deficit. And that will ultimately put pressure on wages and raise wages.

INGRAHAM: But again, global trade, which is a big publication in the global trade arena, they say that critics will say that advanced economies have been steadily reducing the share of jobs in manufacturing and that is really accounting for a lot of the job losses in the United States. You can nail some of them to NAFTA, but most of it is because improving and productivity, technology changing, so we are steadily moving away from those types of manufacturing jobs. What do you say to that?

LIGHTHIZER: The greatest economies in the world right now are the United States, they're China, they're Germany, and they're Japan. Who says German and Japan don't have basically a lot of manufacturing? As a percentage it's shrinking perhaps. But those are still great jobs, very important jobs. And they spin off wealth to thousands, millions and millions of other people who serve the people who do the manufacturing. So to me it's complete nonsense to say that we don't need manufacturing.

INGRAHAM: So if we have a $60 billion, a $70 billion trade deficit with Mexico, we have eight times that maybe with China. Last year was the biggest trade deficit, the first year of the Trump administration, that we have ever had. Now you have to decide, the administration, by April about what you're going to do with Chinese aluminum imports. The concern of dumping under market priced goods, and they are now saying we could retaliate on your agriculture, the sour gum coming into the United States feeds livestock, so there's a trade war, Lighthizer and Trump are going to start a trade war, it's going to be a nightmare. And you say?

LIGHTHIZER: The response that we're going to start a trade war is nonsense. We have a very, very imbalanced relationship with China. And once again it's not based on basic economics. It's based on an industrial policy. This is a country who has a centrally driven kind of economy.
They take technology, they subsidize, that use access to their markets and create an enormous amount of wealth and an imbalance with the United States not based on basic economics.

INGRAHAM: A lot of people I hear say the president doesn't really know the nuance of policy. He will get on the phone with someone and blow up negotiations -- he doesn't follow the nitty-gritty of things like trade or military policy. You are in all these meetings with President Trump on a weekly basis, sometimes a daily basis given what's going on. I know you can't reveal what he says but you can tell us -- does he get these concepts?

LIGHTHIZER: If you look at what President Trump said when he was 35 years old and follow it to what he's saying right now, it's the same thing. He understands the issues. When I am in these meetings it is a very strong give-and-take from a variety of people with interests. The president is beyond engaged. He cares about jobs and wages, politics never comes up. And when he's not thinking about jobs and wages its wages and jobs. This is what he thinks about.

INGRAHAM: I appreciate you coming on and spending some time.

LIGHTHIZER: Thank you, Laura. This is an extremely important issue. You are one of the very few people that is actually pushing it and part of the reason is because it is complicated but it is extremely important and I'm honored to have had a chance to come out here and talk about it.

INGRAHAM: Ambassador Lighthizer, thanks so much.

LIGHTHIZER: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: And now, is it healthy for teens to be sexting, and should it be added to our sex ed curriculum? We're going to debate it next.


INGRAHAM: If you're a parent you've heard about the sexting epidemic, and the latest from the Journal of America Medical Association is not welcome news.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A surprising new study about teens and sexting suggest it's on the rise, more common than you think, it could be causing legal trouble for teens.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A new study finds 27 percent of kids under 18 receive sext messages including nude photos. Nearly 15 percent of teens send them.


INGRAHAM: Oh, my God, that's a heartbreaker. And now some experts say it sexting should be included in sex ed classes because it's the new normal. Let's ask behavioral and psychology expert Dr. Gina Loudon, and psychotherapist Dr. Karen Ruskin. Let's start with Dr. Ruskin. When I read the experts say I usually ignore them because the same people told me to do dumb stuff when I built the house and they were all wrong. But now on this it's about kids. Now sexting can be normal and healthy and we should teach it in sex ed, your reaction?

DR. KAREN RUSKIN, MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPIST: Here's the thing. It is a very normal part of development for teens, especially older teens, to explore sexually. Sexting meaning utilizing your phone to express your thoughts and feelings is part of the digital age. And that is exactly why having sex education would be helpful because you can talk about how to do it in a digital age that is being mindful of not having sext extortion, not having non-digital censorship. I know it sounds ridiculous, but the fact is there is a safe sexting that is consensual and then there is not.

INGRAHAM: Sexting that is consensual, because sexting mean never having to say you're sorry. What happens at the big break up? Sorry, Johnny, this is what she sent me. And then he screenshots it and then you're off to the races. This is a nightmare for kids. It's a disaster for especially young women.

RUSKIN: And that's why education --


INGRAHAM: Here's my education, you're in my classroom, here's in my education, don't sext. If you sext you are giving your power away.

RUSKIN: They are. They are.

INGRAHAM: I know they're doing a lot of dumb thing. They're kids. Go ahead, Dr. Loudon.

DR. GINA LOUDON, BEHAVIORAL AND PSYCHOLOGY EXPERT: You point to something that has been proven through science. In fact Guttmacher Institute which is an arm of Planned Parenthood, not exactly a conservative mecca, they even said that the more you teach sex ed the more children have sex, the more there is unwanted pregnancy, and the more abortion ends up as a result, and STDs, by the way.

But even more recently, you have science direct pointing to the fact, new research that says that women are mostly harmed through sexting. And so we don't need it. This is the role of parents, Laura. No wonder kids are screwed up today, right, when parents do their job. They turn over to big brother, and now we're turning it over to big daddy government school. That idea has never worked, it will never work.

INGRAHAM: I want to play for both of you a heart wrenching piece of videotape. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bethany Burtlow was in high school when she sent a revealing shot of herself to a boy she was dating but it ended up in the wrong hands.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just wanted to be alone. I felt horrible.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: For three years she says she received threatening messages from an anonymous number demanding she send more explicit photos.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I got a text that said I have some photos of you, if you don't do what I say, you're going to regret it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The person on the other end of those threats, a former classmate found guilty of exploiting her. He remains behind bars.


INGRAHAM: Dr. Ruskin, these are kids with her hormones racing.

RUSKIN: This is why we need education to talk about not sending pictures. Sexting need not be sending pictures. It can be expressing yourself with words. Extortion is insanity and painful.

INGRAHAM: You don't think the words can be used against you? How about this? How about go on a date and look at each other and talk to each other and grow up?

RUSKIN: That too. This is the reality so that's why we have to educate them.


INGRAHAM: Believe me, my daughter says when am I getting a phone. I say how does never sound to you? These statistics are bad, and they are shocking, but I think you're right. Both of you have some points. Education is important but what we teach our daughters and our sons, don't give your power away. You give your power away you will never, ever be able to get some of that power back.

But it was a great conversation. We have to have you on radio, fantastic.

RUSKIN: Sexting can be empowering.

INGRAHAM: Sexting can be empowering, oh, really? Put that on a t-shirt, Dr. Ruskin.

And you will not believe, by the way, what the media are trying to link President Trump to this time. It is amazing. Stay with us.


INGRAHAM: A new report from the Anti-Defamation League says that in their
40 year history they saw the largest one year increase in anti-Semitic incidents in 2017. In reporting their findings, the Los Angeles Times could not help but suggest that the President Trump of all people was to blame.
"The Times didn't directly accuse the president of encouraging anti- Semitism, but the paper might as well have because it selected background material that appeared to strongly imply that was the case. The Times reported, quote, 'Civil rights groups say that Trump has contributed to an atmosphere in which people feel freer to express hate.' The Times also obtained a quote from ADL chief executive Jonathan Greenblatt saying hate groups and white supremacists feel emboldened, and they are not just coming out online but are also getting involved in political campaigns. Can you guess who he is talking about?

Forget insinuation and innuendo. Let's look at some actual facts, shall we. The last four presidents vowed to fulfill one of the Jewish state's fondest wishes, but only one did it.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. I am also directing the State Department to begin preparation to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.


INGRAHAM: Israel leaders have heard the slanderous accusations that Trump is anti-Semitic. But they know better. They know better from firsthand experience.


BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: I've known the president and I have known his family and his team for a long time. And there is no greater supporter of the Jewish people and the Jewish state than President Donald Trump. I think we should put that to rest.


INGRAHAM: I'll take Bibi's word for it. On the other hand, how exactly was the previous administration a friend to the Jewish people or the State of Israel? Obama disrespected the Israeli prime minister. He entered a ruinous nuclear deal with Iran. And then there were Obama's personal associations.

This is an Illinois state senator Obama with the raging anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan and it was taken in 2005 but it was kept under wraps by the Congressional Black Caucus until just a month ago according to the photographer. And don't forget the LA Times has been sitting on a 2003 videotape of an event attended by what National Review's Andy McCarthy called a racist terror mongers. At that even Obama himself reportedly sang the praises of Rashid Khalidi. He's a supporter of Palestinian terrorist Yasser Arafat. But now the LA Times which admits it has the video of Obama rubbing elbows with an apologist for Palestinian terrorist is helping imply that Trump is enabling a wave of anti-Semitism? There is one word for that. Chutzpah.

We'll be right back.


INGRAHAM: Before we go, an update to a story we covered last night. Ice has arrested more 150 individuals in violation of federal U.S. immigration in northern California this week. That comes despite that warnings from the Oakland mayor of an impending raid. So well done, Mayor Schaaf. You did a good job. Didn't quite work, though, 150, and a lot of these people are criminals wreaking havoc on society in Northern California, so the people should be cheering this mess. Get them off the streets and out of the country.

Shannon Bream and the Fox News @ Night team, it's not dancing yet because it's not Friday. We've got to have some activity like you have, Shannon. You have the dancing on Friday. You know what we do? We just go home. It's so boring.

Copy: 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.