2020 Democratic candidates take aim at Joe Biden during debate

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," June 28, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” live tonight from Washington.

In just 30 minutes President Trump will sit across from Chinese President Xi as a potential trade deal hangs in the balance. You'll see all of the drama unfold right here. So stay with us.

Before we get to that, though, we're going to break down last night's wild Democratic debate - the big moments, the clashes, the gaffes, and yes the gifts for President Trump and Republican ad makers.

Dennis Kucinich is here to tell us why Kamala Harris was wrong to come after Joe Biden in that forum and Raymond Arroyo has a special follies about how age, radical positions and religion are all shaping this this race.

But first. Could last night really signal the end of the road for Democrat front runner Joe Biden, as some have claimed? To say the former VP missed expectations last night's debate is an understatement. He's seem a bit unprepared for the main stage and he seemed weak.


JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: --because once we - once Bush abused that power, so I would eliminate the act that allowed us to go into war racist and white supremacist.


INGRAHAM: You think a man who's been in politics for more than four decades would be a little more polished? But the real trouble spot came in a clash with Kamala Harris where she brought up Biden's invocation of segregationist senators last week.


SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You also worked with them to oppose busing. And you know there was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school every day and that little girl was me.

BIDEN: --mischaracterized my position across the board. I did not praise racist. That is not true.

I did not oppose busing in America. What I opposed is busing ordered by the Department of Education.

HARRIS: That's why we need to pass the ERA.

BIDEN: I'm the guy that extended the Voting Rights Act for 25 years. I've also argued very strongly that we in fact deal with the notion of denying people access to the ballot box. I agree that everybody once they in five- ish - my time is up.


INGRAHAM: Well, here now my political power panel. Dennis Kucinich, former Congressman and two time presidential candidate, Horace Cooper, Co-Chair of Project 21, a National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives and Debbie Hines, a former prosecutor and trial attorney.

All right. Dennis you thought. It was a bad idea for Kamala Harris to bring race onto the debate stage. Why?

DENNIS KUCINICH, FORMER OHIO CONGRESSMAN: Well, first of all, Joe Biden's record is fair game. But if you divide Democrats on race, you lose. So you divide and Trump conquers.

Black turnout - voting turnout dropped 7 percent in 2016 from 66.6 percent to 59.6 percent. You want African-Americans to vote, have a plan. Address racial disparities in wealth, wages health. Well, talk about working poor families. Look at the crime and the murder rate in black communities and how people are treated by the police.

I mean these are issues that will motivate people. But if you just use it on race and kind of a personal attack, Democrats are going to lose that way.

INGRAHAM: Debbie, you thought it was a great moment for her, why?

DEBBIE HINES, FORMER PROSECUTOR: It was absolutely a great moment for her. And to answer Dennis's question, race is in everything in America. Race is in the water we drink, whether it's Flint Michigan, it's in who goes to jail, who gets shot, who gets killed by the police. You cannot avoid race.

And she was just letting it known what he had already had said, like a week or so later. I mean, honestly, Joe Biden literally put his foot in his mouth a week or so ago when he brought up the whole section about segregationists. And all she did is shove his foot down his throat, that's all that happened.

INGRAHAM: She didn't mention that the segregationist for both Democrats, the Democrat Senators of course in the South, that's a convenient fact that a lot of the Democrats today want to sweep under the rug. But Joe Biden did try to clean up what he said last night at a Rainbow/PUSH event today. Let's watch.


BIDEN: I heard and I listened to and I respect Senator Harris. But we all know that 30 seconds to 60 seconds on the campaign debate exchange can't do justice to a lifetime committed to civil rights.

I want to be absolutely clear about my record a position on racial justice, including busing. I never, never, never ever oppose voluntary busing and as a program that Senator Harris participated in and it made a difference in your life. I've always been in favor of using federal authority to overcome state initiated segregation.


INGRAHAM: I mean really, Horace, he thought he had to do major cleanup. I couldn't help, but think though it's the year 2019 and the Democrats are relitigating busing? I mean - I just - I find this to be just fascinating.

HORACE COOPER, CO-CHAIR OF PROJECT 21: Couple of quick takeaways. One, did you note how tired he sounded both during the debate, giving back his time. Who does that? And even during the cleanup period. It was some tracery that he had to go through.

This is part of the problem that vice presidents have. Let me tell you what he should have done last night. He should have had a Sister Souljah moment, where he turned to Kamala Harris and explained to her that it was 2019 and the complaints that she was raising about bussing isn't even popular within the black community, let alone within America, broadly. That's what he should have done.

But, those who live by the sword die by the sword". He called out Republicans and his opponents as racist saying, "They're going to hook you guys all back up in chains". And now it's come back to haunt him. He should never have used the race foil and it's never a good idea to have that--

INGRAHAM: No one will really end up measuring out - very few under this. It's - their goal posts are always changing. I mean, I literally never would have thought that Democrats would be arguing about busing in 2019. I'm just going to say that.

I mean, it's 2019. I mean we have new challenges. Debbie, you raised the criminal justice issue. OK. Those are - seem to be - those are interesting today. To me that was a disconnect. And I understand it was a Kamala's moment - Kamala's moment.

This is the echo chamber of Washington. I'm not sure long term that ends up playing. But the media reaction post-debate about some of the positions that were taken, panel, was quite revealing. Let's watch.


VAN JONES, HOST, CNN: This is not good. This is a bad night for Joe Biden's. It's a bad night for Democrats.

AARON BLAKE, THE WASHINGTON POST SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: --on immigration. The way that they talked about it, all raising their hands when they said, "Health care coverage for undocumented immigrants". This is something--

HALLIE JACKSON, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: And can I show you? I'm a texting with Trump campaign sources.

BLAKE: They love it. They love it.

JACKSON: "Christmas. Compared to Christmas. Gleeful."

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST MSNBC: Last night was a disaster for the Democratic Party. My only hope is people were not watching.


INGRAHAM: Dennis do you agree with that media montage?

KUCINICH: It's still early in the campaign. My concern is that, look, let's have a plan to address the issues of racial disparity, the economic and social. That's what I think we should be. Somebody should be talking about that instead of just, "Well, you did this so many years ago".

That's legitimate to raise it. But when you focus on that, you don't give any options for people. Voters get turned off and polarization in an election - some people will vote, others might not. You got to be very careful. I really am very concerned, Laura, about the polarity that exists in American politics today and anything that intensifies it really protects the status quo.

INGRAHAM: There was a moment last night, panel, where Biden seemed to - he seemed to defend President Obama was actually today - excuse me - where he tried to defend President Obama. And people are saying well to Obama at one point did too many deportations and so forth.

And then Biden stepped forward and says wait a second now, is he not liberal enough for this ground? Watch.


BIDEN: My President gets much too little credit for all that he did. He was one of the great Presidents of United States of America, and I'm tired of hearing about what he didn't do. This man had a backbone like a ramrod.


INGRAHAM: I don't even know what that means, but Debbie your thoughts on that one.

HINES: I mean, honestly, there are many progressives that not just in 2019 - I don't know what it means either, Laura.

INGRAHAM: Ramrod - what does it mean?

HINES: We'll have to look at with Google.

INGRAHAM: OK. Debbie go ahead--

HINES: I mean, honestly in 2019 and during President Obama's term there were many progressive, such as myself, who did not think he go - did not think he went progressive enough.

So this is not just a new 2019 thing, whether it was a deportations or whether it was not fighting hard enough for the public option. This is not just something that's being raised. And so what Joe Biden he's going to try to attach himself to the coattails of President Obama. He gets to take the good and the bad. And it seems like that's all he wants to do.

But he has to run when his record and his past. He has to do that. He cannot stand on his mother's, father's or sister's or his brother or President Obama.

INGRAHAM: So Horace that's where Biden is now. He's desperate to get some of that reflected glory from Obama. I like don't you pick on Barack Obama. I'm sorry, that was a sad moment. That was a sad moment for Biden.

And I've always liked him like, I guess, I don't agree with him. But I've always kind of liked Biden as just a person. But he seems kind of a smaller person now in this situation to me. I mean, that was - that was bizarre. I'm sorry. I was just a strange moment.

COOPER: It's my observation that it's very difficult for a sitting Vice President or former Vice President to actually ever win the presidency. One of the reasons is that a Vice President is selected to balance the ticket, not to be in the mainstream of the ticket.

But when he runs in the primary, he has to sit in the middle of where the party is and that means he has to forego his existing record. You saw that with Mondale. You saw that with Al Gore. You're seeing it now with him.

Add to that the poison of, we can call anybody a racist for any reason today, and what you see is a man who's living on borrowed time.

INGRAHAM: Dennis, we're going to go lightning round. I think that's the best way to do this, because I'm I - I can't believe - I still can't believe that comedy made about Obama. All right Dennis is this a fatal blow to Joe Biden.

KUCINICH: I don't think so. I mean, he seems to have a strong support in the black community. I don't think that'll disintegrate. He has the support of a number of major black leaders.

I - but however, I hope lightning round, that it does cause redirection to the issues of disparities that exist based on color in America.

INGRAHAM: Debbie, this is Kamala's time. I mean, she is going to rise above and beyond where Biden hoped to be at this point.

HINES: Well, look, in politics as in life, only the strong survive. And last night she was mightily strong. And so we just have to see what goes. It was still one day. And when - in politics I mean a week from now is like an eternity and you're talking about 2020. But I think she's got the momentum and if she can just carry the momentum. And Biden, he looked weak.

INGRAHAM: You've got to do more than memorize a choreographed hit though, which I'm going to get to in a few minutes.

COOPER: All the other guys got to see that Joe Biden had a glass jaw. It got hit and I promise you as these debates go forward other people are going to stand up and they're going to take a swing too.

INGRAHAM: What a great panel. Thank you guys.

And Kamala may have impressed on the debate stage, but as I said, afterwards in the spin room she seemed a little off.


CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST, MSNBC: Do you feel that he had an adequate answer to you emotionally, intellectually, historically or what you were raising tonight?

HARRIS: I think that he - you know I would like to hear him acknowledge what was wrong about perspective on busing. Listen, we were all - this busing was part of what was necessary to integrate the schools.

INGRAHAM: Joining me now to analyze that kind of bizarre looking down behavior and reaction - body language expert, Tonya Reiman. Tonya, great to see you. What do you see in this interview after this big moment she had on the debate stage by Kamala Harris? What dod you say?

TONYA REIMAN, BODY LANGUAGE EXPERT: Right. So when she was doing the debate when - during the debate she was right on point, had all her messages right on cue. Afterwards when she's questioned on it - just like anyone else, she has to rethink it.

So when you watch her, you know she's looking down at her notes and she's making sure she has everything proper. In addition to that, when she looks down, she's also grasping at her emotions.

When we look down what happens is, we try to get our thoughts together because we can break eye contact that way. So in that regard she's breaking eye contact to get her thoughts together and then kind of give out the same speech that she gave during the debate. The difference here was you heard a lot of "Ahs" and "Ums", so you knew that she was--

INGRAHAM: You don't think it goes - Tonya, you don't think it goes to credibility? Because I always understood that when you can't make eye contact - I think about my kids, when I ask, "Who lock this here?" "Oh" - look down. And I'm they are looking, like, "OK. Don't look at me. He did it"

REIMAN: Right.

INGRAHAM: And to me that's you better on something, you're like, yes, this happened. This happened and this was - instead it was - private insurance--

REIMAN: Yes. You know, unfortunately a lot of people are under the belief - they believe that if you can hold eye contact you're either lying or that - that's not true. Really a lot of people are just uncomfortable holding eye contact or they can't really grasp their thoughts.

So it's difficult to hold eye contact with someone and gather your thoughts and your emotions and then be able to deliver your message. So what people do is they look down to kind of break that eye contact.

INGRAHAM: Yes, I guess the - I guess for politicians when we're trying to look for who's authentic, you don't really have to think if it's who you are. You could well answer the question. You don't think much if it's like a simple. I have another moment though. This is from an interview she did this morning. Let's watch.



WILLIE GEIST, CO-ANCHOR, MSNBC: You were asked to raise your hands. The entire panel - 10 of you, if you believe eliminating private insurance should be part of the Medicare for All proposal. You and Bernie Sanders both raise your hands. Do you believe that private insurance should be eliminated in this country?


GEIST: You don't?

HARRIS: No, I do not.

GEIST: But you raised your hand last night.

HARRIS: But the question was, would you give up your private insurance for that option? And I said yes.

GEIST: I think you heard it differently than others, then.

HARRIS: Probably, because that's what I heard.


INGRAHAM: Tonya, do you think she's a little too rehearsed though and might be struggling while she's off the cough there?

REIMAN: There you could see, here's an interesting thing that does go with the normal behavior of people, right. So when we not our heads and we're talking, typically we're trying to make others agree with us. So let's see how she's nodding. Right.

So what she's doing unconsciously is not only agreeing with herself but trying to engage you to agree with her in addition to that. So when she's talking there you saw a slight negative head movement, so there was some unconscious question ability on her part.

But otherwise I think that she was being sincere when she said I did misunderstand the question, because she was nodding her own head in a slightly yes mode and then suddenly just a slight negation. So I think she was being sincere up until a point there that there was --.

INGRAHAM: Interesting.

REIMAN: --unconscious - I'm not really sure if I did understand the question properly.

INGRAHAM: All right. We've got to show you one more thing - real quick.


INGRAHAM: OK. This was President Trump with Vladimir Putin walking in Japan before the G20. I think we have the video, when he's touching his back. Yes, no, sort of? There we go.


INGRAHAM: OK. So he's touching the back of Vladimir Putin, which - yes, you see it there.


INGRAHAM: In the slo mo.

REIMAN: Right.

INGRAHAM: He is touching his back which led some commentators, Tonya, to say, "Oh, he's - it's way too cozy with Vladimir Putin". And I can't believe like we've never seen this before.


INGRAHAM: And of course, Obama did the same thing with Medvedev, except he grabbed his knee, when he was sitting across from him. But what does that mean. Is that domination or --?

REIMAN: That's a power move. Yes.

INGRAHAM: It's a power move.

REIMAN: The person who touches first is the person who is more powerful. So if you see somebody touching somebody else's back, that's a power gesture. That's a power move to say, "Hey, I'm the one who's in control. I'm the dominant force in this relationship".

INGRAHAM: Got it. Tonya, thank you so much. Great to see you tonight. Great analysis--

REIMAN: It's great to see you. Thank you.

INGRAHAM: --on Kamala and President Trump. But we are awaiting President Trump and Chinese President Xi to meet at the G20. We're going to bring it to you live, of course, as it all happens. But first Raymond Arroyo is here to break down the wildest moments from last night in this week's Friday Follies.


INGRAHAM: It's Friday night that means it's time for.


TEXT: "Friday Follies"


INGRAHAM: Come on. Democrats squared off in a fiery second primary debate last night and here with all the wildest moments you may have missed, former--

RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: Former? What, now I'm being removed. Thanks.

INGRAHAM: Sorry, (inaudible) Raymond Arroyo. Its Friday--

ARROYO: I going to do my own introduction.

INGRAHAM: --long week. Raymond, last night was a it was kind of a bloodbath. Poor old Joe, I mean, I actually felt bad for him.

ARROYO: Laura, Biden, he took a beating last night. And though Harris got all the headlines, it was Eric Swalwell who landed the first blow, raising questions about Biden's age. He recalled seeing the former senator speak when he was nearly six years old.


REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Joe Biden was right when he said it was time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans 32 years ago, he's still right today.

BIDEN: I'm still hold onto that torch.


ARROYO: He might be holding the torch, but the flame is out. Now throughout the debate, Biden seemed confused and well a step or two behind the proceedings.


Could you explain your position?

BIDEN: I'm sorry. I beg your pardon. I didn't hear you.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, ANCHOR, NBC NEWS: I believe at the show of hands you did not raise your hand. Did you raise your hand?

BIDEN: I did.

GUTHRIE: OK. Sorry. Sorry.

BIDEN: Three things. Number one, they in fact contribute to the well-being of the country. The other thing is folks look we can deal with these insurance companies. We can do this by making sure that we're in a position that we, in fact, allow people - you mean time is up.

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: Your first issue, Mr. Vice President.

BIDEN: The first thing I would do is make sure that we defeat Donald Trump. Period.



ARROYO: They asked him, "What would you do as President?" Defeat Donald Trump. It was definitely bedtime for poor Biden. He was like the Admiral Stockdale of this debate. Remember him? Who am I? How did I get here? Why am I here?

INGRAHAM: Great Patriot.

ARROYO: He was a great patriot. But you remember how doddering--

INGRAHAM: Remember that Saturday Night Live were they are like incoming.

ARROYO: It was very sad. But afterward, MSNBC cornered him, Laura - Biden for an interview, which he needed some rescuing from.


BIDEN: It has to start allowing children - my wife. I got to go. Sorry, sorry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't compete with Dr. Biden. I think we'll leave it there.

BIDEN: That's true.


INGRAHAM: Well, the doctor is in.

ARROYO: Right. Biden is out. Look, when in doubt call your caretaker in.


ARROYO: She was like rescuing angel there--

INGRAHAM: Visiting angel - rescue.

ARROYO: She was rescuing angel in that moment. It was very sad, though, to watch a great man like this. I mean, he's had a long career now. He's been all over the map on foreign policy, on life on all these issues. But to see him go down like this, it was very sad. We would get back--

INGRAHAM: It kind of reminds me of Cher's farewell concerts that kind--

ARROYO: Laura, even Cher can get in and out of the Bob Mackie gowns. This poor man - I don't know who gets his shoes on. It's very - Jill must lay them out for him. Anyway, Laura, there was a progressive radicalism that we saw across the board during this debate, particularly on the issue of immigration. Did you catch this moment?


JOSE DIAZ-BALART, ANCHOR, TELEMUNDO: If someone is here without documents and that is their only offense, is that person to be deported?

SWALWELL: No that person can be a part of this great American experience.

HARRIS: No, absolutely not, they should not be deported.


ARROYO: And then Kamala Harris went down to a deportation or migrant detention facility in Florida today and she doubled down. Watch.


HARRIS: Families belong together. And babies deserve to have their parents with them. OK. And we're going to fight for your family to be together.


INGRAHAM: What's she going to be - is she running for the president of Honduras?

ARROYO: Maybe--

INGRAHAM: What is he doing?

ARROYO: --maybe we're going to fight for your family to be--

INGRAHAM: What a second - what, your family? How about the people who have been in Oakland who've suffered from violence or homelessness.

ARROYO: Well, maybe cities - Anacostia--

INGRAHAM: She can go to the homeless encampments in L.A. that we've been talking about. We're talking about with Dr. Drew. I mean, I find this to be disturbing.

ARROYO: Immigration is the number one issue in recent--

INGRAHAM: OK. Let me tell you. I will stand - I'm going to say this again.

ARROYO: OK lay it down.

INGRAHAM: The Democrats are making a huge mistake on the issue of immigration. They're going to deep six they're their campaign. I'm telling you to say.

ARROYO: To say you're going to give health care, there should be no borders, and now--

INGRAHAM: What did I say - what did I say on "The Angle" - what did I say on "The Angle" earlier this week? No detentions, no borders and no deportations. And everyone's like, "Oh that's overstatement". Oh really?

ARROYO: Laura, we also have to highlight something else that a lot of people missed. It was Mayor Pete who attempted to insert religion into the proceedings. He was the only time religion was invoked and he used the border crisis to slam Republicans for their Christian hypocrisy.

INGRAHAM: Oh, get out.


PETE BUTTIGIEG, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: For a party that associates itself with Christianity, to say that it is OK to suggest that God would smile on the division of families at the hands of federal agents, that God would condone putting children in cages, has lost all claim to ever use religious language again.


ARROYO: This is an amazing thing. This is the rise of the religious Left. They see that 80 percent of evangelicals are supporting Donald Trump. They think they can pull off some of that--


ARROYO: But I'm telling you, when the party of abortion on demand, infanticide, all of these - the Little Sisters of The Poor tattling at back of people's minds--

INGRAHAM: Gender bending.

ARROYO: This is a hard group to try to win over. But I see what they're trying to do it. This is a little bit like Chairman G talking about religious diversity. OK. It's really hard--

INGRAHAM: Do they really want to go to like the Bible verses and I don't think that's where any of us want to go really.

ARROYO: Well, they want to take the language back, but not the morality.

INGRAHAM: They want to take the language and foisted it on the government when it supposed to be your personal morality. Correct?

ARROYO: With Democratic field, Laura, running to the left, Joe Biden tried to make his case to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition today. Listen to his take on the economy.


BIDEN: --a lots changed very badly since we are out of office here. Wall Street did not build America.

-- making it harder to be very basic needs, stripping you of your personal dignity along the way.


INGRAHAM: Dignity.

ARROYO: No, there is dignity--

INGRAHAM: Why are they starting to talk like this? Get off my lawn.

ARROYO: People are wondering why are they repelled by Biden. Part of it is he uses three notes when he speaks now and it's all here, here's all talking--

INGRAHAM: It's like when you're someone is--

ARROYO: Hearing impaired.

INGRAHAM: And then the TV is too loud in the room.

ARROYO: I feel bad for. But to try to create an argument for unhappiness and economic ruin at a time when wages are up, unemployment down, it's a historic--

INGRAHAM: For every demographic group, by the way.

ARROYO: This is a tough--

INGRAHAM: Wall Street it doesn't build America.

ARROYO: This is the argument you're going to make amid a thriving economic renaissance. You've got to come up with something else.

INGRAHAM: You side track wrong track four words and it's looking pretty good for Trump right now.

ARROYO: This is really - but he's got to modules, find other notes in your voice, because - This one is not working.

INGRAHAM: That's like Bernie Sanders.

ARROYO: Very sad. Lastly Laura, quite possibly the oddest moment of the entire evening came when New Age guru and author Marianne Williamson--

INGRAHAM: Love her.

ARROYO: Got on stage - and well she's the most searched Google candidate following the debate and you can see why. Her closing comment was practically an incantation.


MARIANNE WILLIAMSON, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Mr. President, if you're listening, you have harnessed fear for political purposes and only love can cast that out. I'm going to harness love for political purposes. I will meet you on that field and Sir love will win.


ARROYO: Shirley MacLaine is going to play her in the movie.

INGRAHAM: Who is she anyway?

ARROYO: She's an expert on crystals. She's a spiritual guru. I'm going to read you this. I've got to read this to you.

INGRAHAM: Did she bring like a (inaudible).

ARROYO: Well, she should have brought some stones to put on your people. This is a tweet talking about nuclear power. "The power of the mind is greater than the power of nuclear radiation. Visualize angels dispersing it to nothingness. How's that for a defense strategy?" We'll give that to the Polish--

INGRAHAM: President - the President Xi. Now she's doing this to do what? To sell a book?

ARROYO: I don't--

INGRAHAM: I mean, what is she doing?

ARROYO: She believes there needs to be a spiritual and moral renaissance but it's untethered. It's tied to all this to New Age stuff.


ARROYO: It's not about morality.

INGRAHAM: --come with go on like the mid-90s.

ARROYO: Not in California. She's written 13 books. She is advisor to--

INGRAHAM: She - best seller. Well now what she's got - like you go to Sedona, Arizona, which is beautiful and there's a lot of that kind of deal there. It's like purple crystals.

ARROYO: Maybe she'll win.

INGRAHAM: Is there any way to get a crucifix in the place. The guy was like, no, we got go the crystals. Go over to the magic crystal ball.

All right. Any minute now President Trump and Chinese President Xi will meet in Osaka, Japan, for a bilateral meeting at the G20 summit. This face-to-face comes amidst escalating trade war talks. I don't think you have trade war talks, but just a trade war maybe. Chief White House Correspondent John Roberts is live in Osaka tonight with a preview of the president's big meeting. John, this is the biggest meeting of this presidency with any foreign leader, no doubt about it.

JOHN ROBERTS, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Laura, good morning to you from Osaka. It is the biggest meeting of the G20. The meeting with Vladimir Putin yesterday was pretty big and produced a couple of interesting moments. But what happens today with President Xi really will tell the tale as to whether trade talks between the United States and China on a new, more balanced trade relationship get back on track, or if things continue the way they are and that we see the tit-for-tat escalation of tariffs.

We have heard a bit of a scene set, or setting the table from the Chinese side. They want to try to control the narrative here. They've told us in the last 48 hours that there's a few things they want. First of all, before China allows any concessions on trade, they want all of the tariffs that are currently against China to be lifted. They also want Huawei, the big Chinese telecom giant, to be taken off the entities blacklist sometime within the next three months or so.

And they have also said that President Trump has promised that he will not impose any new sanctions against China. Remember, he has been threatening 10 percent now on some $300 billion in Chinese goods if they can't get a trade deal going. But China is saying that President Trump has promised he will not impose any new tariffs for six months.

In a meeting yesterday with Jair Bolsonaro, the president of Brazil, the president was asked directly about that, and he said no, I have made no such promise. I've heard from other senior administration officials that it's unlikely that they would take Huawei off the entities blacklist. So China really here is trying to control the narrative. The United States at the same time is saying, look, we're not doing anything different than we're doing right now. But I think both countries would like to see those trade talks back on track because this idea of increasing sanctions on both sides really isn't helping anybody.

INGRAHAM: John, isn't it the case as well, though, that the president is very reluctant to lift those tariffs without a clear and concrete commitment by China, which they've broken before, and we've seen it all the way back to the WTO and all the commitments they made there, but a clear commitment to stop these forced technology transfers and all the other issues with I.P. that were at the heart of this disagreement.

ROBERTS: Absolutely. The president believes that it's the hard-hitting sanctions that he has imposed in the last six months that have brought China to the table, so why would he take them off without a deal on the table? It's the idea of fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, or fool me twice, won't get fooled again if you're George Bush.


ROBERTS: But they had almost 90 percent of a deal done, and Steve Mnuchin said this the other day, and Larry Kudlow said it yesterday on Fox News, they had about 90 percent of the deal done, and then China said, oh, by the way, this idea of intellectual property theft and forced technology transfer that we've agreed to stop doing, now we're going to stop doing that. We don't want to do that, so we're going to go back to the drawing board on that, and that's when the new sanctions kicked in.

But China would have to agree to all of that, because those really are the pillars. It's the unfair trade practices, the intellectual property theft, the forced technology transfer.

INGRAHAM: Yes, that's the whole shooting match.

ROBERTS: It is. And the president believes, in particular Peter Navarro, his trade deputy, believes that there is a lot of short sightedness on the part of a lot of corporate CEOs in America who are looking where the next dollar is coming from and they could get things cheaper in China, but five years down the road it is going to back to bite them you know where. And the president is saying, look, this playing field has been tilted in China's favor for far too long, and the United States is not going to continue to be the economic powerhouse of the world if we continue letting China rebuild its country with American money. So the president wants to change all of that. We don't know if he's going to be able to do that, but he's certainly going to try.

INGRAHAM: No one else has come closer, that's for sure. John, thank you, we'll get back to you.

Joining me now with reaction Victor David Hanson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, retired Colonel Douglas MacGregor. Victor, what's the best case scenario for these talks?

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, HOOVER INSTITUTION: I don't think they could have taken place 10 years ago, because we were suffering from this grand delusion that the richer China got at our expense, at the western expense, the more they would be open to liberalization. Instead they interpreted our magnanimity as a weakness to be exploited. And 10 years ago we weren't getting three percent annualized GDP, we weren't the largest oil exporter in the world as we're going to be. We were relatively a lot weaker.

But I think we're dealing from a position of strength. And then it is not an optional choice. What we're seeing now is abnormal. The technological appropriation, the cheating, the currency manipulation, the commercial distortion, and what Trump is trying to do to bring back a return to normalcy. You have got to remember that, again, one American worker produces twice the GDP of three Chinese workers. We have about 17 of the top 20 universities in the world. China has none. We have a lot more oil and natural gas than they do. They're dependent on 50 percent of the Middle East exporting. So we've got to restore this confidence that we're in a position not only of moral right, but of economic, cultural, political, superior influences.

INGRAHAM: They believe they're the superior power of course, Colonel, and they've always believed that, and they have a very long-term vision. They have the China 2025 initiative, Belt and Road. They aim to dominate supercomputing, rare earth, space weaponry. And just today the administration again basically saying we have to be extremely careful. Companies here in the United States cannot give supercomputing technological components to China because of what they're doing now with it. This is a realistic view of the Chinese threat.

COL. DOUG MACGREGOR, RET., U.S. ARMY: Obviously President Trump is the first to take the truly realistic perspective. I think there are a couple of things happening. First of all, the foundations of Chinese economic strength and power have actually eroded since these tariffs were imposed. We have a narrative here in Washington the world is ending because we've imposed tariffs and we're hurting worse than they are. In truth it's the opposite. I think Donald Trump knows that.

But there's something else happening I think with the president. I think he understands that at some point in these negotiations, which I think we'll learn will restart very shortly, you have got to find a way so that both sides walk out eventually with some sense of success.

INGRAHAM: Save face.

MACGREGOR: It has to be that way in Asia. He knows that.

INGRAHAM: And I would say this, that the president was asked, Victor, about whether he was going to pull sanctions back, and he was committed to doing that. This is what he said. Watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you promised you won't put any deterrence on?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: No, I haven't promised, no. Good question. No.


INGRAHAM: No, I haven't promised. Wall Street has been banging on his door, calling him, all these people saying you have got to stop these tariffs. It's killing us. And the president reaction seems to have been no, it's hurting China, though. You guys have made a lot of money over there in China. Now it's time for America to try to make this market more efficient, Victor, which is what a more level trading playing field would actually mean for us, for our companies, for our workers, and even for the rest of the world competing against China.

HANSON: It is a winning message and it is consistent on all fronts. We saw the other night in the Democratic primary debates that they were privileged non-citizens in a way over citizens. And this is the same message that it is nice to be globalists, maybe in theory, but in fact China doesn't play by the same rules. And the losers of that asymmetry are so often people on the interior of the United States. And they're tired of it, and Trump is the first person that has changed the entire narrative.

What is weird, or strange, Laura, is that there are all sorts of people across the political spectrum, even liberals now are coming out of the woodwork and saying China has reeducation camps, China is persecuting religious minorities. They were silent in the last administration. But I think we've torn away that facade, and what we see now is not so inviting to a lot of people.

INGRAHAM: And Colonel, he is moving on to Korea after this meeting, G20, wraps up, and he tweeted today "After some important meetings, including my meeting with President Xi of China I'll be leaving Japan for South Korea with President Moon. While there, if Chairman Kim of North Korea sees this, I would meet him at the border DMZ just to shake his hand and say hello." Now the left has always believed in peace, peace, peace, peace, no war, are freaking out because President Trump tweeted that. He is sideling up to dictators. What's the truth there?

MACGREGOR: The first and most important truth is that North Korea is circling the drain. It's finished as a society. It's falling apart internally. North Korea desperately needs the help that only South Korea can really provide. That's the first thing. And this business about this nuclear power, that's all very questionable. Their tests have been hardly successful by any means. So there is no danger in that sense.

I think what President Trump is considering is an end of war declaration, which is desperately needed on the peninsula, which is something that both the South and the North Koreans want. And I think that's in the back of his mind. I wouldn't be surprised if he says something like that, if he meets Kim at all.

INGRAHAM: That's unbelievable. And by the way, the president spoke out, Victor, about why he sent that tweet. Let's watch.


TRUMP: I'll be going to South Korea. We're going with President Moon. So we'll be there, and I just put out a feeler because I don't know where he is right now. He may not be in North Korea. But I said if Chairman Kim would want to meet I'll be at the border. Certainly, we seem to get along very well.


INGRAHAM: Victor, I'll see you at the DMZ at 5:00 p.m. I'll bring the diet coke. Again, the left, though, it's very interesting to watch the box that he has put the left in on this issue of China and the issue of peace and his desiring peace above war with Korea. And Victor, you and I have talked about this before. June 25th, was that the anniversary of the Korean War anniversary, correct, I believe, June 25th, we just commemorated it. So where does this leave President Trump in the pantheon of diplomacy and diplomatic intrigue?

HANSON: It reminds everybody if you're strong and you insist on deterrence and you're unpredictable and you can't be predicted or what you are going to do is not going to be scripted, then you can afford to be magnanimous. And that's that Trump is doing, and that conflates the leftist agenda or the progressive narrative that he wants war. Really, people who insist on military strength, and he has increased the defense budget, and they don't talk always about international solutions, then that gives him the leeway psychologically, politically, culturally, economically with a strong economy as well, that allows you to have the margin of error that you can reach out and you can show that you don't want war.

But when you say that you rule out force and your economy is stagnant and you have cut the defense budget and you talk about all these utopian pie in the sky international solutions, then you're not taken very seriously unfortunately given the nature of humankind. Human nature being what it is, they look at that and they say he wants a deal too bad or he is never going to stand up to us so we're going to take advantage of him. I wish it wasn't true, but that's the way it is. And Trump understands human nature. He has got a cunning that has been completely underestimated by both his foreign and domestic opponents.

INGRAHAM: And John Roberts is back with us. John, I have to bring up this freak-out in the political class of President Trump and his walking with Vladimir Putin. We spoke about this earlier, oh, he touched his back, and that shows that he is sideling up to dictators and so forth. I mean, Trump does that with everybody. Obama did that with Medvedev, he touched his knee in 2012, and no one said anything about that. But suddenly, it's wow, he is inviting them to meddle in the next election. But you've spent a lot of time with the president, John. How does he do with the body language and arm around someone, especially in that situation? What are you sensing?

ROBERTS: And of course, we remember the famous moment when President Obama whispered to Medvedev that I'll have more flexibility after I'm reelected. The president, he does have one of those demeanors where he is a very touchy sort of person. He kissed Angela Merkel on each cheek when he greeted her earlier today. With President Macron he's got a very warm relationship. He's like that, big hand shack, touches you on the shoulder, pats you on the back, whatever. But when he does that with Vladimir Putin, of course, it is seen in a different light.

Just want to add something to your discussion here about Kim Jong-un if I could. Our spider sense has been tingling for the last couple of weeks thinking that President Trump after learning that he was going to go to South Korea on the tail end of this was going to try to make a trip to the DMZ because the last time he was in South Korea when he addressed the South Korean parliament, he tried to helicopter up there the last time. Moon Jae-in was already up there, he drove up. President Trump was going to take the helicopter up, but he couldn't get down on the ground because fog had moved in. So he has always wanted to go.

So when we heard he was going to South Korea we figured that he was probably going to the DMZ. Today's tweet about Kim Jong-un really came as a surprise. He did let on earlier this week that he may try to contact him some other way other than having a one-on-one meeting. So this morning's tweet was a bit of a surprise.

But I'm told, though, that typically with most presidents you wouldn't put something like that out unless you had the whole thing pre-cooked and it was all arranged. Then you put out the tweet to say hey, why don't you come down, we'll meet, and it's already done. Apparently, it's not. So this really is just an open invitation. The president might have said something about it when he responded to the birthday greeting that President Kim gave him a couple of weeks ago. But I'm told there was nothing pre-cooked in this. It's just the president reaching out to say, hey, if we can put this together let's do it.

INGRAHAM: John, he said it was a feeler. You heard him at the spray. I put out a feeler, an invitation. He is all the way over there.

ROBERTS: You know politics well enough, Laura, to know most feelers like that are already pre-cooked and already arranged to --

INGRAHAM: But not Trump. That's before Trump.

ROBERTS: But no, it's not. This is a real kind of shot in the dark type of thing. And he has got time built into the schedule when he gets to South Korea. He has a bunch of things to do in the morning, but he's got a lot of time in the afternoon, and it is supposed to be good weather. So he could always go up there.

And remember April 27th of last year, that shot where Kim Jong-un walked across the DMZ, the line of demarcation there, and shook hands with Moon Jae-in. We were wondering the very first time that the president met in Singapore, were they going to meet there at Panmunjom and have a same sort of thing? We could see that tomorrow. If Kim gets the message and says, you know what, it's a couple hour drive from Pyongyang, why not do it? What a scene that would be. And the critics, of course, will say the president is going there and he's getting nothing for it. But it is relationship management, and if you can keep the relationship going, maybe you can keep the dialogue going, yes.

INGRAHAM: It is better to talk.

ROBERTS: It's usually better to talk.

INGRAHAM: These talks with China might impact whether that actually happens or not given the closeness, the brewing closeness between Xi and Kim Jong-un as well. So I think that's part of what we're going to see play out.

ROBERTS: And there's a whole lot of things going on around that as well. China is very close to getting a trade deal with Japan. The United States is trying to get a new trade deal with Japan. And the president wants China to help work on Kim Jong-un, and then you have Vladimir Putin who is meeting with Kim Jong-un. There is a small version of the great game going on here with North Korea at the center of it all.

INGRAHAM: The big dog is still the United States. The big dog is still the United States. Our market is what everybody wants.


INGRAHAM: All right, the president is walking in now. We just got word. And this is a FOX News Alert. There he is just moments away is this meeting that he is going to have -- I think it's the biggest of his presidency, no doubt about it, with President Xi of China. Of course we have ongoing stalemate in these trade talks with fairly significant tariffs being put on about now $200 billion worth of Chinese goods. U.S. market affected mostly in soybeans. But still Wall Street, a lot of big businesses want to see an end to the tariffs. President Trump has stood fairly firm in the face of enormous amount of pressure brought to bear upon him. And he will be sitting down in just a moment.

These always take a while to set up as John Roberts knows all that well. We have a lot of chairs there, and a lot of talks have already taken place between Bob Lighthizer and the Chinese trade minister. There you go. There's the photo. Let's listen in.

The sound is going in and out. When it comes up, we'll bring it back to you. He's not touching his back. Looks a little chilly to me. The president standing firm, handshake. He put the firsthand shake out, and Xi has to take it. There goes the touch of the back, that's the domination move again. There he goes. Steve Mnuchin, of course Treasury Secretary, Bob Lighthizer, the chief of staff, Mike Pompeo, all lined up, John Bolton is at the end of the table. There we go. Let's listen in.

We're noticing here at the studio that President Trump does not look all that happy. Maybe we're reading too much into it. We don't want to do that. Mike Pompeo is pretty stern faced. I think Colonel MacGregor agrees with me. Ivanka is smiling.

XI JINPING, CHINESE PRESIDENT, (through translator): In 1971 --

INGRAHAM: Here we go. Let's listen in.

JINPING: -- in a place called Nagoya just over 100 kilometers from here, Chinese and American ping-pong players participating in the 31st World Table Tennis championships had friendly interactions with each other. And that marked the beginning of what we now call ping-pong diplomacy. The small ball played a big role in moving world events. And then eight years later in 1979 our two countries established diplomatic relations 40 years ago.

Forty years on, enormous change has taken place in international situation and China-U.S. relations, but one basic fact remains unchanged -- China and the United States both benefit from cooperation and lose in a confrontation. Cooperation and dialogue are better than friction and confrontation.

Recently Mr. President, you and I have stayed in close communication through phone calls and exchange of letters. Today I'm prepared to exchange views with you on the fundamental issues concerning the growth of China/U.S. relations so as to set the direction for our relationship in the period to come and to advance the China-U.S. relationship based on coordination, cooperation, and stability.

TRUMP: Thank you very much, Mr. President. We have had a lot of time together and we've become friends. My trip to Beijing with my family was one of the most incredible of my life. I have seen a culture that rarely would you see. Chinese culture is an incredible culture.

I look forward to working with you. As you know, we've had an excellent relationship, but we want to do something that will even it up with respect to trade. I think it's something that's actually very easy to do. I actually think that we were very close and then we -- something happened where it slipped a little bit. And now we're getting a little bit closer. But it would be historic if we could do a fair trade deal. We're totally open to it, and I know you're totally open to it. I know all of your representatives have been working very hard with my representatives and the representatives of the United States.

And I will say that I think this can be a very productive meeting and I think we can go on to do something that truly will be monumental and great for both countries, and that's what I look forward to doing. And thank you very much for hosting us. We appreciate it. Thank you.

JINPING: Thank you.

TRUMP: Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you.

INGRAHAM: It looks like that's the end of that for now. And all of us -- there is bob Lighthizer, wondering where he was. He was on the other end of the table. He is the U.S. trade representative and critical in the trade talks, and probably of all people involved in these trade negotiations, knows more about deals and international trade law and trade violations than I think anyone living. He was Ronald Reagan's deputy trade representative, the youngest ever in the United States. And left retirement, semiretirement, to come back and work in the U.S. government.

Colonel MacGregor, your thoughts after seeing that. That was Trump, a little compliment and a little nudge.

MACGREGOR: I think going into this grim faced is a good thing because if you go in happy and smiling and you come out with nothing or something very modest, everyone assumes that you are a fool. So going in with this stern countenance was a very smart move. You noticed the entire team was mimicking the president. That's the way it should be.

I still think that we will end up returning to negotiations. I think that he is probably also going to be told in private by Xi that Xi is uncertain, personally uncertain that given this 1.1 billion person nation that he can absolutely deliver on everything, including the I.P. issue.

INGRAHAM: Victor, one of the hold-ups, the hang-ups, was that China had agreed, according to the reports and my sources, to a number of provisions that they would change in their law for whatever that is worth. They wouldn't do it. In the end they wouldn't do it, and that's when the talks stopped. Your reaction to the atmospherics here, Victor, and close it out for us.

HANSON: I think that was pretty good that we didn't back down and now they know they can't try that again. I think the subtext of Donald Trump's brief little speech was we don't run up a $600 billion trade deficit with you. We don't steal patents, violate copyrights, we don't have 300,000 students in your country, many of them engaged in espionage. So whether we like it or not, that's asymmetrical, and there's going to have to be a little give on your part. And we like you and we want to get along, but that's just the way it is. You can't lose when you speak the truth, Laura.

INGRAHAM: No one else brought Xi to the table. No other president. This president did. Fascinating.

We have final thoughts when we come back.


INGRAHAM: This is great Friday night. Look at all the drama. Look at the faces, the conversation. They're standing next to each other. We needed to bring that body language expert back, Tonya Reiman. This was great. It was great to see, great to have you with us tonight. What kind of trade deal if any can be worked out? We'll see. But that's all the time we have.

Don't forget, check out my podcast, PodcastOne.com. Now Shannon Bream, the "Fox News at Night" team take all the breaking news from here.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 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.