Candace Owens on challenging liberal orthodoxy

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," April 24, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

INGRAHAM: I am Laura Ingraham. I am Laura Ingraham. This is THE INGRAHAM ANGLE. You're looking at a live shot of the White House as President Trump concludes his first state dinner. We are expecting the departure of the French President Macron and his wife at any moment. So much for the myth that Trumps America first policy means isolating from entertaining and diplomacy. The president is now the leader on the world stage. That we knew he would be. The French president departs tonight, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel arrives on Friday. Potential historic meeting between Trump and Kim Jong-un over North Korea's nukes is imminent. So, how different reality is from what the so-called experts predicted not so long ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY, D—CONN.: This administration may be just a series of flip-flops, waivers on foreign policy for four years. That would put a lot of Americans and a lot of people across the globe in great jeopardy.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: We have stepped away to global leadership, and we are in fact not only have we stepped away, but we are kind of gotten shoved off the stage.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, CO-HOST, "MORNING JOE": This man poses to the safety and the security of the United States of America.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI, CO-HOST, "MORNING JOE": On the world stage, this president is humiliating America. No question.

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN ANCHOR: The United States has built up its credibility and political capital over the last century. The Trump administration is reading that trust fund.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: I think I just went into rem cycle. Totally deep sleep. Look, there is still time to revise and extend all of your comments, Ladies and Gentlemen. For more on tonight's state dinner, let's go to Fox News chief national correspondent, Ed Henry, live at the White House. Ed, give us the scene. We want to know what it's like there. I'm jealous I'm not there. Looks fun.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's interesting, Laura, because it was more intimate than other state dinners we've seen. Basically about 13 or so tables of ten, candlelit. They tried to make it intimate. Also, the toast just wrapped up a few moments ago. And President Trump, contrary to what critics have been saying, was very direct and saying look, we are going to build on this friendship, that God needs to bless this alliance, he said, because we are going to do great things together. In fact, there is already some suggestions that this relationship is bearing fruit. Earlier today, the French president, along with President Trump, talking a lot about Iran and in fact making some progress on that.

Remember the president has been talking about pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal brokered by Barack Obama. The Iranian foreign minister over the weekend had threatened that if that happened, Iran is going to speed up its nuclear activities. Well, today what we saw was a bit of a compromise. President Trump talking tough on Iran, warning them that they will face severe consequences like they have never seen before if they keep up this tough talk, if they restart their nuclear program.

What the French president tried to do in the side of this emerging friendship, he said look, instead of just pulling out of the deal, let's try to find another way. Let's reshape this nuclear deal to address some of President Trump's concerns. So, contrary to the idea that he's acting unilaterally, in fact, they seem to be coming together on this important issue of Iran. Listen to the toast from President Macron tonight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRENCH PRESIDENT EMMANUEL MACRON: We will work together, and we have this ability to listen to one another. This is the reason why our relationship will serve our strong history, and we are also aware of the challenges ahead of us, but we will keep working together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: The French president went on to say that remember it was the British, not the French, who burned down the White House. And he said look, it was President Monroe who decided to buy French furniture to spruce up the place. Kind of an interesting joke. But it seemed to fall flat in the room, Laura. People may be thought maybe that's not such a great way to break the ice. The bottom line is they are trying to come together, and it's a lot different than what a lot of critics predicted -- Laura.

INGRAHAM: Ed, thanks so much. By the way, last couple days, we've seen a real bromance develop between the president and his French counterpart. We have put together a fun little collection from Washington's newest odd couple.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We do have a very special relationship. In fact, I will get that little piece of dandruff off. We have to make him perfect. He is perfect.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Ed, that means Trump is Felix, correct?

HENRY: I guess so. He is trying to tidy things up. But, gosh, Laura, if we are ever unset, I hope you won't wipe dandruff off and make a big deal of it. I have a problem sometimes. We are friends. I don't want you to do that.

INGRAHAM: I'm sorry. But I think the two of them together are hilarious. I love it. I think it's great. It's very unexpected.

HENRY: Angela Merkel as well because it's pretty frosty with her.

INGRAHAM: Well, we'll see. Who knows what might happen with Angela after this event. We just don't know what will happen. Ed, thanks so much. Now for tonight's "Angle." The Trump administration takes the caravan to court. No doubt you've heard about the caravan of illegal immigrants moving north through Mexico. According to "The New York Times" over 100 have already made it to the U.S. border. The caravan started out with more than 1,000 people. It is now down to about 500 or so.

Now, some of these migrants have told reporters that they planned to find ways to get across the U.S. border. Now, most of them are from Honduras, so many are expected to apply for asylum supposedly to escape violence at home. Well, anticipating that, the Trump administration is sending additional ICE attorneys, Justice Department judges, and also prosecutors to make sure the caravan asylum cases will be, quote, "adjudicated promptly." But we have also learned, this is curious, that American attorneys have traveled southward to meet with migrants to instruct them on their rights to apply for asylum here in the United States.

We did some digging, and according to reports, two of these lawyers are Allegra Love of Santa Fe Dreamers Project, and Marie Vincent, who also works for a small 5O1C3 organization. Vincent has said that many of the migrants are strong candidates for asylum because they are fleeing political persecution or violent gangs were threats over their gender or sexual orientation. But for asylum eligibility, according to Section 1208 of the Title 8 Code of federal regulations, attorneys have to establish that their client has, quote, "reasonable fear of persecution." And that is what Democrats and the media have been claiming, that these are political refugees escaping violence and yes, persecution.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's really more of a symbolic kind of PR moved by the migrants who want to talk about and want to bring light to the lack of rule of law and the human rights violations that occur in Central America.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Every time the president gets in a political jam, anytime he is feeling threatened politically, he goes back to a few of the same things. Beating up on immigrants, Mexicans or criminals.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The picture of president Trump paints hordes of immigrants, many of them criminals poised to storm the border, but the caravan CNN found is a very different scenario. We will take you live to meet the families. Many women and children waiting for the next move.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, there are next move is to crash into our country. The problem for the attorneys helping the members of the caravan could be the U.S. law, the code Section 1324, excuse me of Title 8, which makes it an offense for any person who encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, enter your residence is or will be in violation of law. So, the question is when does advocacy for illegals and up crossing the line to committing a 1324 offense, interesting legal question. Well, because of the attorney-client privilege, this could be tough to determine.

But if these attorneys are holding what is being described as these large group seminars and demonstrate intent to skirt the laws or to help the migrant skirt the laws, well, they could be in jeopardy at least technically. Here's the other problem for these lawyers. Most of the people in this caravan, as I said, are from Honduras. Well, a poll conducted by a Jesuit research group found a whopping 83 percent of Hondurans were considering migrating to the United States were motivated by purely economic reasons.

In other words, they simply wanted to move to a wealthier country with better economic opportunities. Only 11 percent said they wanted to leave due to violence and insecurity. So, given that poll, immigration judges have to be really skeptical about these asylum claims. And if these claims, a lot of them are bogus, as I assume most of them are, what does that say about the attorneys themselves? Michael Cohen, Trump's personal attorney, remember, he was called a fixer. Well, what would you call members of the American BAR who arguably connive with their clients to board or get around U.S. immigration law or at least gain it? How many of these migrants know exactly what to say to asylum judges?

Well, it's a must like when you hear this, they are almost working off of the same script. How would they all know to say the same thing? Huh. Well, the president is doing the right thing. He is heading the caravan off of the past. This is what he tweeted yesterday. He said, "I have instructed the secretary of homeland security not to let these large caravans of people into our country." Another tweet wrote, "Mexico, whose laws on immigration are very tough, must stop people from going through Mexico and into the United States. We may make this a condition of the new NAFTA agreement." Well, the plan is to detain any asylum-seekers until their hearings. The others will be prosecuted for illegal entry, and I say good. Catch and release does not work. The Trump administration said they were ending it. It must be ended now.

There can be no more catch and promise you will show up for your asylum hearing because as we know, and we have discussed this many times at "The Angle," the vast majority of those asylum-seekers never show up at their hearings. They disappear into society. Trump is right. Partnering with Mexico to stop the flood of immigrants to pouring through Mexicans southern border. Tying it to trade might be the only thing we can do. Might be -- if you can see building the wall is more necessary than ever, you must be blind. The president should also put Honduras on notice that this virtual invasion has to stop. It's not virtual. It's a real invasion. Even if that means things don't change, threatening to suspend foreign aid, which Honduras testily needs.

It would also help if we got our own house in order and stopped the abusive asylum and the process of applying and facilitating it by American lawyers. More has to be done there. So-called asylum-seekers all get their day in court, but for the American citizen? Security and justice always seemed delayed. And that's "The Angle.."

Joining us now for reaction here in studio is Andrew Arthur with the Center for Immigration Studies, and immigration attorney, Allen Orr. All right. Gentlemen, great to have you on. This is a big deal I think because we have now seen large groups of people, not just one group but several groups over the last four or five months begin to move north through Mexico all the way to the U.S. border. This latest group is due to arrive any day now. What is the immigration system in our country supposed to do when we have masses of humanity rushing the border and having their actions facilitated in part by U.S. lawyers? Allen, you are an immigration attorney. They are flying down there, at least the two we have been able to identify, and apparently, they are representing hundreds of people. How can you represent hundreds of clients? You don't know who they are. You don't know what their intentions are.

ALLEN ORR, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: I don't think they are actually representing. They may be having clinics to inform people of their rights in the United States. I really don't think it's that big of a problem because usc.gov also tells immigrants all the time exactly what the rights are to file the asylum claim. So, it's one of the things they are doing at the humanitarian issue, sort of a Good Samaritan type thing to go to these people who are in need from their home countries to sort of inform them of if they are coming to the United States, this is what you will need to do and what you will and encounter at the point of entry.

INGRAHAM: All right. Here's the reasons to seek asylum. You are a former immigration judge know this, persecution -- you have to have credible fear of persecution, due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion. Explain that because it looks like a lot of these Hondurans, especially are coming here because of economic concerns. They want a better life. A lot of people in Africa want to come here for a better life, but they can't come through Mexico. They have to go in a boat. It's an economic concern masquerading as an asylum claim, credible fear of persecution. Political or criminal or so forth.

ANDREW ARTHUR, CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES: For these grounds for asylum are very easy, race, religion, nationality, political opinion. Membership in a particular social group is wide open, however, it could be anything. It could be based on gender identity. It can be based on, you know, I was harmed because of my familial relationship. For that reason, most of these people claiming they had been harmed by gangs. So, the judges, the asylum officers have to figure out where there is a claim based on membership of a particular social group, given the claim that they have. That's really where we get all these people.

INGRAHAM: Right now, we have 311,000 asylum claims backlog in the United States, as of January, 311,000. DHS has said this is a crisis point. We've got, like, we've got to really winnow down the fraud which is a lot of fraud here. We have to do something about this because we don't have the manpower. We don't have the money. We don't have the judges. We don't have the prosecutors. We don't have the system to do this.

So, Allen, everyone wants to be a humanitarian. We give a lot of money to other countries. Millions of people around the world want to come here because they are being persecuted. I mean, a lot of people in the united states feel persecuted. Minority groups, different sexual orientation groups. People all over the world believe they have a credible of persecution. Conceivably they could all apply for asylum, correct?

ORR: That's correct. There is no bell curve on humanity. If someone has, they meet the requirements.

INGRAHAM: What about the humanity of the American people, the taxpayer, the children in an overcrowded classroom? Do they have any rights?

ORR: I think they all have rights and that's not necessarily the fault of immigrants. That sort of the process, the reason for the backlog in the court systems. You have to look broader than those issues for the school. That's something where Congress wants to spend more money. They are spending more money on the military.

INGRAHAM: They want to spend money on Americans because they are suffering
too.

ORR: Well, I think they are also spending money on Americans by making sure that our borders represent and help have a nice situation. I mean --

INGRAHAM: Wait, our borders should have a nice situation --

ORR: No, no. They want to make sure that America has a nice situation. Our country is built on a country of immigrants in which we have been --

INGRAHAM: Not illegal immigrants.

ORR: Well, they are not illegal because they're not here. So, if they are not in the United States --

INGRAHAM: There are a lot of these immigrants -- "New York Times" and AP reports is that many of them say they are going to get here. They are all going to stay outside the border and they are going to be dutifully processed. No, a lot of them say we are getting here by hook or by crook. The sense is they have a right to be here. It's not just help. It's we have a right to be here. Mexico deserved some of the blame here. Because Mexico, instead of deporting them from Mexico or keeping them, they are giving them these temporary visas to travel from Southern Mexico up to the border. Trump is about up to here with Mexico on this.

ARTHUR: Absolutely critical point because quite frankly, Mexico needs to defend its southern border in order to stop these individuals from coming to the United States. In addition, Mexico is an asylum granting country itself. And if these individuals are in fear of their lives, quite frankly they can apply for asylum in Mexico. The fact that they continue on to the United States indicates that perhaps they might have economic reasons.

INGRAHAM: They are country shopping. Right now, America is better than Mexico I guess for asylum seekers. Guys, great segment, as always. Candace Owens is a winning a lot of fresh praise from Kanye West, sparking a new liberal meltdown. The conservative commentator joins us next with her reaction.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: My next guest has sparked a national debate on the conventional wisdom about African-Americans and politics. Candace Owens has urged black voters to think independently for themselves and to question liberal orthodoxy. She has been mercilessly attacked online, but coming to her defense, interestingly, has been hip-hop star, Kanye West. He tweeted on Saturday, "I love the way Candace Owens thinks." is he plunking us? What's going on with that. As we shared with you last night, a hip-hop radio host also claims that West told him that he loves President Trump and he likes Owens because she is challenging conventional black thought. Joining me now to respond to the controversy is Candace Owens herself. Hey, Candace, how are you?

CANDACE OWENS: I'm doing great. Thanks for having me.

INGRAHAM: You go to a college campus and start talking about think for yourself and be your own person. Gosh, that's kind of a "me too" thing. Stand up for yourself. Don't be a victim. I was listening. I didn't see who it was. I thought it say "me too" thing.

Then I thought all, it's Candace Owens. Why is this so controversial? Were you surprised that this became such a big deal. Obviously, Kanye weighs in, but were you surprised?

OWENS: I actually wasn't surprised at all. This is what I've been talking about across college campuses with Turning Point USA is that there is a liberal indoctrination, they think that they have a monopoly not just on our students, which is what we do at Turning Point USA, but also on the entire black race in America. They cannot fathom that we might have different ideas. They don't understand because they have significantly created a mental prison for all of us. The second somebody runs off what I refer to of the Democratic plantation, they send the dogs out.

INGRAHAM: Well, there is an interesting moment on the radio show, an interesting host. He was talking about Kanye West and he was saying Kanye is not thinking a dependently because he lives in a bubble. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EBRO DARDEN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Kanye is talking about things that don't affect them.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's be honest. None of these things affect him. He lives in a bubble where it's like none of us could really understand. All he is surrounded by is the Kardashians and a bunch of yes men and in the fashion world. He doesn't understand what's happening in the streets, what's happening when it comes to protests. None of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Wait a second. As if there aren't multimillionaire African-Americans, Latinos, and others living in Bel-Air, Brentwood, Malibu because you don't live on the streets, then you can't comment on anything? Odd bringing in the Kardashians. What was going on with that comment?

OWENS: It just wasn't a very smart comment is what it comes to with a salacious argument that could be attacked a thousand different ways. To suggest that because somebody is money they can't think, or they don't have any knowledge or facts. or data makes entirely no sense. In fact, you could argue that they may have more access to things. After that just incredibly low I.Q. was when it comes down to. At the end of the day, these radio hosts are not the great philosophers of our time. They do they do. They get on there and they try to throw up the controversy, talk about the story of the day.

INGRAHAM: Well, I am a radio host and I talk about the subjects of the day, but I try to do it with some degree of knowledge and expense. Candace, where are you going next?

OWENS: You know; I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing. I am going to keep punching bag. I have zero fear when it comes to this. I knew this was going to be the blowback. I know that you recently had some experience with this. You understand mob mentality. The result is usually has adverse results, that's exactly what we've seen with your show. Why it's been so spectacular. We are going to see the same thing in the black community. You create a conflict and at the end the day it ends up waking up more people. It's the fact that we don't have enough diversity of thought within the black community.

INGRAHAM: All right, thanks so much, Candace. I'm sure you would agree with many critics who say that liberals have encouraged blacks to embrace, at times, a cult of victimhood. An example to they might be an editorial in today's "Los Angeles Times" headlined, "Black people were lulled into thinking Starbucks was different, as a safe space. We were wrong." The writer spoke of, quote, "The jarring reality that for black people especially men, there is no such thing as that kind of neutral space at least it's not guaranteed." Joining us now to discuss whether that's true are John James, Republican candidate for Senate in Michigan, and Wendy Osefo, Democratic strategist and Johns Hopkins University professor. All right, Wendy, your reaction to what Candace is arguing about intellectual diversity and the need to just encourage diversity of thought.

WENDY OSEFO, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It's OK to be intellectually diverse and we should welcome that, however, let's not be dubious in that narrative and that's what is going on. What is a fact and what we know is it's not about black victimhood. This is about the fact that our criminal justice system is flawed when it comes to black and brown people. Black people make up 13 percent of the American population, but they make up 30 percent of those individuals who are killed by cops and 45 percent of black people have said that they have been unjustly harassed by police officers.

This is not about Starbucks. This is not about the issue that happened at Waffle House. This is not about the women who belong to a country club, black women, kicked off the country club for playing golf too slowly. This is about our criminal justice system being inherently flawed. This is not an opinion. This is a fact.

JOHN JAMES, U.S. SENATE CANDIDATE, MICHIGAN: As a black man in this country, I understand that one of the most challenging positions is not only to be a black man but a conservative black man. As Candace is saying, 20 people have died for our right to be able to think for ourselves and to not take on this great responsibility is a failure. I truly believe that if we were talking about Chick-Fil-A not Starbucks, the most dangerous place in America to be would be between Chuck Schumer and a camera. As long as we're talking about statistics here, you talk about the minority of bad cops. Bad cops responsible for perpetrating these crimes against African-American males and anybody across the country, it's a very vast minority of folks when you consider the good cops out there doing great things for a country, keeping us right now, right here, safe every single day.

OSEFO: When we talk about cops, let's be clear. My brother served in the NYPD. My grandfather is a retired police officer. You don't have to educate me about cops. What we do know is that cops disproportionately attacked black and brown people. That's not an opinion. It's a fact. Let's use this one example. Let's use this one example. We know that the killer who killed four black and brown people in a Waffle House was taken. It was OK. He was fine. Dylann Roof killed people in a church, and he was treated to a happy meal from McDonald's before he went to prison. But why is it that when black and brown people -- it's a fact. Why is it that black and brown people, when they are out in the street, they are not apprehended in a way in which white people are? Those are the facts.

INGRAHAM: Wendy, you are getting -- well, you're getting off track. Our segment is devoted to whether African-American -- yes, I celebrate all police. There are bad people in my business. There are bad cops. We all get it. We all get that.

JAMES: I didn't bring up the NYPD. I brought up the minority of cops who are perpetrating these --

INGRAHAM: I think what happens is that we encourage hostility on both sides. We have incredible police officers doing really difficult jobs, as your family does day after day after day. And I think we have to be careful with our language. We have to be careful with how we paint with a broad brush. Otherwise kids of all backgrounds are going to feel like "I'm afraid." I don't even want to report a crime. I don't want to see a police officer. I don't want help from a police officer because they are not fair, or they are inherently biased.

Getting back to the point of Candace for a moment. She goes to a college campus and she talks about thinking for yourself. Just because you grow up black doesn't mean you automatically register D for Democrat. That's her point. I've seen time and again that black conservatives or Latinos or even Asians, they are treated like they are second class citizens within their own communities. And they are looked at like what's wrong with you? You're an uncle Tom. You are this. You're an uncle Tomasina, I've heard. That also I think is toxic. Let people debate the issues. Let people have different points of view. Don't demonize them. They might disagree. Maybe they are wrong. Maybe they are right. Maybe sometimes I am wrong, you are right. That's fine. But I just feel like, there is no monolith here. You know what I'm saying, Wendy?

WENDY OSEFO, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR: I agree. I agree that there is not a monolith. And I don't believe that people challenged Candace when she said it's OK to think differently. Absolutely we are not monolithic, black people are not. We all do not think the same. However, where the challenge came in was when she talked about the flawed rhetoric that Black Lives Matter has no ground to stand on. When she says you guys are talking about slavery but none of you guys experienced it, so why are you bringing it up. On your show here today, I am challenging Candace to a conversation, to a debate about what she mean by that comment.

INGRAHAM: I'm sure she would love to debate.

OSEFO: I love to debate her, because I don't understand what she means by the comment that just because we did not experience slavery that we have no right to say issues of slavery are still impacting the black community. That's inherently --

INGRAHAM: That's fine to hear her point of view. Last word.

JOHN JAMES, IRAQ WAR ARMY VETERAN: There are those who say we are still experiencing slavery but not slavery of wrists and ankles but slavery of the mind when we are continually being told that if you think a certain way, that I'm not black enough because I have different thoughts. An so I think what we are talking about here is mob mentality is a bigger threat to our democracy than any foreign country. And we need to make sure we are broadening our minds.

INGRAHAM: All right, guys, fantastic conversation. And I have a question. Did the Obama administration step in to squash a probe of the Clinton Foundation? There are new questions now being raised tonight, and we have the stunning details next. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: There may be evidence that the Obama Justice Department pressured the FBI to drop an investigation of the Clinton Foundation during the heat of the 2016 presidential campaign. The inspector general recently submitted a criminal referral against the fired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe for lying to federal investigators. But buried in that report is McCabe's description of a crucial phone call in August of 2016. Now, that's when McCabe claimed that he pushed back hard against someone in Obama's DOJ who seemed to be pressuring the FBI to quash a probe into the Clinton Foundation.

Let's discuss the stunning details of former FBI undercover agent James Reddick in Sacramento, California, who handled, I think you handled a corruption, you were head of the corruption task force in Sacramento, I believe, if I got that right. Let's talk about where we are here on this case. I had you on radio this morning and you were so great I had to invite you on T.V. Is this normal for an FBI principle associate deputy to call up the FBI and say kind of slow walk this or eh to this investigation of the Clinton Foundation if this is how it went down.

JAMES WEDICK, RETIRED FBI UNDERCOVER AGENT: Thanks, Laura. Yes, I ran the corruption squad here in Sacramento for a number of years. It is the state's capital city, most populous, largest state in the nation. I conducted numerous investigations involving suspect, corrupt officials, many high-level officials, and I can tell you that conversation that Matthew Axelrod had with Deputy Director McCabe asking him to stand down, if you will, the agent's working the Clinton investigation was improper. I do not agree or support many things McCabe did, but his pushback there to Justice Department officials, telling them they were influencing or attempting to influence an investigation was improper I agree with. And unfortunately it was his disclosure of that conversation that of course has caused him problems, and now the I.G. has made a criminal referral to the Justice Department.

INGRAHAM: Shouldn't Matthew Axelrod, I might've missed his testimony, but shouldn't he be called to testify on Capitol Hill about this if that's actually how it went down?

WEDICK: Sure. I don't doubt that there are a number of officials. I don't believe Axelrod made that telephone call on his own. I don't doubt that he did discuss the matter with Sally Yates. I don't doubt that there are emails and other text communications surrounding the call because, let me just say this. I worked 35 years and ran the corruption squad for a number of those years. Nobody has made a phone call to me attempting to get us, influence an investigation that was already opened predicated and had much -- was valid, if you will.

INGRAHAM: Presumably for political reasons. This is in the heat of the campaign. This is in August 2016. Hillary at that point looked like he was probably cruising to victory. You don't want this Clinton Foundation -- I am just speculating. This thing smells, stinks to high heaven. Unless this is something that McCabe is also making up. He was lying about other things. Maybe he could have been lying about this, but it didn't seem so. James, thank you so much with your wealth of extremes, 35 years with the FBI.

Meanwhile, we may finally, finally get some answers on whether political bias affected decisions in investigations at the FBI and the DOJ, including maybe even this. Congressman Bob Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy announced they have made a deal. This is like the North Korean deal. And the Department of Justice will turn over documents their committees have requested finally. Let's get the details firsthand from the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte who joins us in the studio. Mr. Chairman, good to see. So this is a threat of subpoena. This is the result of a threat of subpoena and perhaps contempt of Congress. This is not --

REP. BOB GOODLATTE, R—V.A.: Absolutely. We saw the same effect with the Comey memos last week. Now the department is working with us and the FBI, by the way, too. Make some changes at the top and bring to bear the forces that be, and follow the truth wherever it leads. And I think it's going to lead to some interesting places.

INGRAHAM: So could you actually find some of these documents we were just
referring to, perhaps, if this Matthew Axelrod was advised by someone else to call over to McCabe and say we don't want any more problems with this investigation?

GOODLATTE: Absolutely. Our understanding with the Justice Department includes looking at documents that their search terms yield documents, but we will also be able to say we want to use our search terms to find email communications and other communications and other documents related to that very matter because that goes right to the core of our investigation into how the FBI handled all the matters related to former secretary Clinton during 2016 and on into 2017.

INGRAHAM: This is a quote from Brad Schlozman who was referencing whether Sally Yates could have been the person who was at one point later on acting attorney general. But they are pointing to her on this. "In my experience these calls are rarely made in a vacuum. The notion that the principle deputy would've made such a decision and issued a directive without the knowledge and consent of the deputy attorney general," which she was the time, "is highly unlikely." He was counsel to the principle associate deputy during the Bush administration. Sally Yates' name, she ceremoniously quit, remember, in the beginning of the administration. Does this sound plausible?

GOODLATTE: Absolutely. That is good insight. And that will also be part of what we will have the opportunity to examine related to documents for our investigation. So the department is now sitting up a room at Justice where we will be able to send our investigators down there and see the documents.

INGRAHAM: How many documents?

GOODLATTE: Up to 1.2 million. It's important understand not all those 1.2 million documents are relevant to our investigation. That is what was given to the inspector general. Of course we are very interested in his report as well. But we have our own entitlement and our own investigation to look at those documents. They will start producing documents. We will then have the opportunity to see them unredacted and then get possession of them, the ones that are most material to our investigation.

INGRAHAM: We did this big segment on my Angle and these caravans coming -- why do we call it caravans? It's like a circus. Caravan. It's a fun thing -- coming toward the U.S. border, wanting to rush the border, clearly, overwhelm the system. You are actually proposing legislation that would deal with some of these loopholes in this asylum process which is rife with problems. Congressman, we've got to deal with this.

GOODLATTE: Absolutely. The Securing America's Future Act which you have said great things about before. We've been working to build up the score for this. This is a good illustration. What's coming toward our border right now is exactly why we need that legislation, because it addresses it in several ways. First of all, it gives the ability of the administration to return people safely to their homes without having to keep them here for a long period of time. And for asylum applications which are being grossly abused --

INGRAHAM: This is a joke. This is a joke -- 311,000 outstanding asylum applications, Most of them never come for their hearings and they go and they live in the United States. They are seeking asylum. They just want a better life with a better economic situation.

GOODLATTE: Asylum is a good and appropriate consideration. Alexander Solzhenitsyn came here on political asylum. And 5,000 a year most years, now 300,000. It's fraud. It's abuse.

INGRAHAM: A total scam.

GOODLATTE: And our bill fixes it.

INGRAHAM: Is the going to have any traction? Is the president going to help?

GOODLATTE: The president strongly supports it, and we need to bring --

INGRAHAM: Republicans better start doing stuff like this. You guys are carrying the load for all of these other Republicans. I'm sorry, but the Republicans need to support the president's agenda. You are doing it. We've got to get this wall built.

GOODLATTE: That's also in this bill.

INGRAHAM: You authorized it but we've got no money for it, correct, in the bill?

GOODLATTE: That's right. We are an authorizing committee, not appropriators. But that can be part of the final deal absolutely.

INGRAHAM: Congressman, thank you for coming in tonight. We really appreciate your work on this. It's essential we deal with these loopholes and finally fix this. And coming up, Melania Trump scores are a huge triumph over the media and her critics. We will explain right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: President Trump pulled off a diplomatic coup in the last few
days playing host to French President Emmanuel Macron. But First Lady Melania Trump has engineered her own diplomatic triumphs recently, first as a dignified White House representative at the Barbara Bush funeral this weekend, and then over the last two days as the flawless hostess of the French first family, including at tonight's state dinner. Maybe Melania will finally get some of those magazine covers that featured Michelle Obama so prominently and frequently, but I won't hold my breath.

To discuss all of this, we are joined by FOX News contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy along with the publisher of "Catalina" magazine Cathy Areu. Great to see both of you. Let's start with you, Rachel. Melania has had to endure Jimmy Kimmel mocking her accent. I know he apologized. That's fine. But she's not gotten the cover of "Vogue" five times in the first year like Michelle. I'm exaggerating but you know what I'm saying. And she has been scrutinized, the way she's holding her husband's hand or not. It's endless. And yet tonight we see a beautiful dinner that she did not hire or an event planner for. She did it all herself. All the designs, all of the selections, no Desiree Rogers there helping her, I guess.

RACHEL CAMPOS-DUFFY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No. Remember, she was a socialite and we assumed when she was Mrs. Trump living in Manhattan she probably hosted many events. And this is her showcasing what she brings to the office of first lady, or the position of first lady. I would say that while this has been an amazing event and it has been flawless, you're absolutely right about that, Laura, she's been doing this all along. I have been so impressed with not just her quiet dignity, as you brought up, but also just this diplomatic use of fashion. It's been brilliant when she went to Paris and to that restaurant at the Eiffel Tower. She was wearing red, white, and blue, a symbol of both flags. She wore that gorgeous black caftan with the gold white belt in Saudi Arabia. And of course who can forget the amazing Asian inspired gown that she wore in China with the pink fur sleeves. So she has been doing this all along. I have to say also, you are right. Jimmy Kimmel has been mean. So has the fashion industry, and bravo to Dolce Gabbana, Carolina Herrera, those who have celebrated fashion instead of boring us with another political statement as so many in the industry have done to take a stab at her.

INGRAHAM: Cathy, Michelle Obama, I think she was on the cover pretty much every magazine that's ever been published. Good for her. She's a beautiful woman. She's a great first lady. But Melania Trump has gotten nothing from the elite fashion industry or certainly from the entertainment industry.

CATHY AREU, PUBLISHER OF "CATALINA" MAGAZINE: She is from the elite fashion industry. This is a former model. She's had many covers. We
don't want to see her on another cover. We want to see her in the White
House.

INGRAHAM: Cathy, I'm talking about the way first ladies are treated.

AREU: But she hasn't really been a traditional first lady.

INGRAHAM: What's wrong with that? What happened to being with your own person.

AREU: There's nothing wrong with that. I think many Americans, some people feel sorry for her. We actually feel sorry for her because of her husband. I mean, she's going to start her anti-bullying campaign and it seems like she's married to one of the biggest bullies in the country. So she is against cyberbullying and she is with a cyberbully. She was put down by Jimmy Kimmel and meanwhile her husband mocks people like Jimmy Kimmel. So we feel sorry for her.

INGRAHAM: Cathy, I think that's really condescending. I really like you. I think you're really fun. Why is it condescending? Let me finish, because this drives me crazy about the way people treat Melania. She has made her own choice. She made her choice. She married Donald Trump. I presume she loves her husband, and yet all these women who claim to be pro-choice and women should do what they want, any kind of arrangement for their marriages are good for them. It's all about free choice. But when a conservative woman makes a choice, you trash her or you say we feel sorry for her. And by the way, Melania also responded to the cyberbullying that she got over her cyberbullying initiative. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MELANIA TRUMP, U.S. FIRST LADY: I have been criticized for my commitment to tackling this issue, and I know that will continue. But it will not stop me from doing what I know is right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Rachel.

AREU: She is sitting by her husband, these women coming up, Stormy Daniels. We all feel horrible to be in her shoes, to be married to someone like this. We feel bad for her. Many of us feel bad for her.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Cathy, I think you're being disingenuous.

INGRAHAM: It is condescending and demeaning. I feel sorry -- if you said that about Hillary Clinton, the feminists would be going crazy. They would be saying how dare you. That's her choice. The line between the couple and themselves. It's about themselves. And for you it's a political statement. Rachel, really quick.

CAMPOS-DUFFY: That's exactly right. Cathy is being disingenuous. She knows exactly what's happening, all of us who have a brain know exactly was happening.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMPOS-DUFFY: Wait a minute. The fashion industry, Hollywood, the mainstream media, they all consider Melania and Ivanka complicit in the election of Donald Trump who happened to have run as a Republican, and that that's what this is about.

INGRAHAM: It's politics pure and simple. Melania has class and it's politics and they don't like it. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Back in 2015 this state of California passed the California Healthy Youth Act. It's a law aimed at promoting healthy attitudes for teens about body image, gender, sexual orientation, relationships, marriage, and family. Harmless. Well, now the law is taking effect and now we are seeing mandated sex-ed classes that deal with abortion and transgender issues and approve teaching materials that include suggestions about lubricants and sex toys. And it gets worse. In Orange County, parents can't opt out for their kids as part of this class. Unbelievable.

Joining me now for reaction is Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Victor, we have got this and another subject we have to hit fast. What about this? The guy from the general counsel, the Orange County Board of Education says parents who disagree with the instructional materials related to gender, identity, expression may not excuse their children from this instruction. That's not how the law was supposed to be written, though.

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, SENIOR FELLOW, HOOVER INSTITUTION: We are in California. So in California, do what you want and then you make the law fit what your activity is. So if you're going to walk out because of a protest about guns, there's not repercussion. It's political, Laura. They are not going to teach students about which particular type of sexual activity encourage greater risk. The legislature just passed a bill saying if you knowingly pass AIDS to a person who does not have it, it's no longer a felonious behavior. So if they really wanted to address it, they could've done things. But it's a political agenda for a particular LGBT group. I understand that. So we have politics in California and we call
them laws. But they are really politics.

INGRAHAM: What happens to Christians, Muslims in public schools? That's just not their thing. It's not what their families teach and parental rights are clearly being subverted. You can't opt out. If people want to teach their kids all of that, that's fine. Do it in their home. But teaching sex education should be biological. This is how babies are made. Now it seems like it's just a political agenda.

HANSON: I have three kids. I've raised three children in public schools in California. And we had to reteach them education because not only wasn't biased in terms of religion but it was not factually correct. They would not tell people the types of intimate details you would need to protect yourself because that butted against certain types of political agendas. And so it wasn't even -- it wasn't just biased against religious committees but it was biologically inexact.

INGRAHAM: Victor, we have to get into this lovely Fresno State professor Randa Jarrar who tweeted a horrifically nasty thing about Barbara Bush after she passed away. Barbara Bush, you can see it. I don't even want to read it. Amazing, called her a racist basically, a war criminal, a racist war criminal. Understated, as usual, for the left. And she's not can be fired by the school. No penalty, no punishment at all, because I guess she has tenure. What if she had said this about a member of protected communities? Do you think she'd be treated the same?

HANSON: No. I taught at that institution. It's a fine institution. I'm very loyal to it for 21 years. But there's two types of speech that are protected. There's politically correct and politically incorrect. If she said something about Obama or if she had said something about a racial or minority group, she would be fired probably. But more importantly, she told people to jam a hotline about suicide, and that seems to be that that was bordering on semi criminal activity. And then she has other tweets they didn't really get in the news that people in the university know about it where she almost advocates violence against white people and particular racial groups. So it's not just free-speech that was her personal choices but she says things that are bordering on advocating violence and trying to disrupt a public service. I think they could've been a little bit tougher on that.

INGRAHAM: One of the things she said, the PSA, either you or against these pieces of blank and their genocidal ways or you are part of the problem. Victor, nothing seems to shock me anymore about the lovely golden state. I love California.

HANSON: I know. The lunatics run the asylum. What can I say?

INGRAHAM: Victor Davis Hanson, we will see you soon on radio. Thanks so much. We'll be right back to close it out, some parting thoughts. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Before we go, let's take a look at a few interesting tweets that came my way about tonight's show. A tweet from Joe, "Immigrants on the border, I think you made a great point. If the immigrants refused or don't accept asylum from Mexico, it could be successfully argued that asylum isn't their real reason to immigrate to the United States. It's an economic reason." Ding, ding, ding. Tweet from Lisa, "Love America's newest odd couple." Now that is funny. Trump has to be Oscar, right? I don't know. I think he's Felix. He kind of looks like Felix. Tweet me @IngrahamAngle.

END

<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.>