D'Souza: 'Culturally responsive' education limits job choices to Antifa, Black Lives Matter

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," August 2, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham and this is a special "Ingraham Angle" from Washington tonight. The Democrats have declared war on law and order.

Mark Fuhrman and John Yoo, will explain in moments. Plus, Dinesh D'Souza is here to respond to the left's latest attempt to indoctrinate your kids by controlling what they read, and by the way, how they're taught.

Also tonight, we highlight the biggest media fails this week with a special nod to CNN's Don Lemon's debate performance, oh yes. And it wouldn't be Friday without Raymond Arroyo, I know you've all missed him, and he's going to expose the biggest political rescue operation of the week.

And what liberal filmmaker Michael Moore's 2020 Democratic presidential pick tells us about the prospects for his party.

But, first, I want to explain why the Democrats are increasingly becoming the party of lawlessness and disorder.

Now, radical Democrats are waging a full-fledged war on law enforcement, whether it's cops on the beat or immigration officers who protect our borders and our homeland. Now, their anti-police views were on full display during the Democrat debates as candidates targeted the NYPD.


JULIAN CASTRO (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Officer Pantaleo used a chokehold that was prohibited by NYPD. He knew what he was doing, that he was killing Eric Garner, and yet he has not been brought to justice. That police officer should be off the street.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-NY) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He should be fired. He should be fired now.

MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO (D-NY) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Here will never be another tragedy, there will never be another Eric Garner, because we're changing fundamentally how we police--


INGRAHAM: Now more on that in a bit. And Democrats don't stop there. They also vilify Border Patrol agents and even call for their complete elimination.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you get rid of Homeland Security too?


REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS (D-MD): When our own government rips vulnerable children, toddlers and even infants from the arms of their mothers and fathers with no plan to reunite them that is government sponsored child abuse.

REP. RASHIDA TLAIB (D-MI): We will not vote for anymore DHS funding that hurts our children, hurts our immigrant neighbors.


INGRAHAM: All right. I suppose the murderous gangs and drug cartels will just keep themselves out. And some of the Democrat fanatics have the gall to compare ICE agents who are responsible for evicting criminal aliens out of the country to jackbooted thugs.


OCASIO-CORTEZ: We can replace it, and we can replace it with a humane agency that it's directed towards safe passage.

GILLIBRAND: I don't think ice today is working as intended.

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'm a Jew and we are raised to say never again. It's happening again.


INGRAHAM: On top of all of that they want more prisoners released. Cory Booker is even floating a plan that would consider the release of any inmate over the age of 50. The question is, does President Trump have Democrats so boxed in on that issue that the left's only answer is to actively promote lawlessness or try to one-up him on criminal justice reform.

Here now to respond is Mark Fuhrman, former LAPD Homicide Detective and a Fox News Contributor and John Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General.

Mark, this has always been a bit of a trouble spot for the Democrats as a party. But why are they increasingly turning their - I think, their frustration and upset toward all law enforcement, not just a few bad apples, but to all of law enforcement.

MARK FUHRMAN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, Laura, when you look at it, they're trying to attract that base - that 18 to 25 year old base that is involved in all these movements - these anti-government, anti- establishment, anti-Republic, anti-Trump. They're trying to attract that group of people.

And the police - so it's very easy to attack them, because they don't respond to a call or any crime of violence, and wonder if somebody is a liberal or a conservative a Democrat or a Republican, and they just respond and they do what's appropriate at that time for whoever. So they can do anything they want. And they know the police are going to still do their jobs.

And the problem is when you pick out cases that they know - that the police actually did nothing wrong and that the person that actually died or was injured, actually contributed to his own situation, they never call that person on his responsibility to conduct himself a certain way. So they win all the way around.

INGRAHAM: Yes. And John it's very fashionable to push for the release of criminals. It's a fashionable thing to do. And there's merciful, I think, aspect to all of this. But when you're a party that is actively attacking pro-law enforcement experiences of some of your candidates, I mean, that's the negative thing. As if you were tough on crime, you can't be in this party, almost.

That's a wild place to be. So they went after Booker in Newark, and this was a bit on Kamala Harris's record. Let's watch.


REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Senator Harris says she's proud of her record as a prosecutor and that she'll be a prosecutor president.

She put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I am proud of making a decision to not just give fancy speeches or be in a legislative body and give speeches on the floor, but actually doing the work.

GABBARD: --people who suffered under your reign as prosecutor owe - you owe them an apology.


INGRAHAM: So it's not the victims of crime, John, who are suffering, it's the people who are put behind bars.

JOHN YOO, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: What I wish people like Harris or Booker or any of the people been in responsible positions would do would be to defend the police and the prosecutors and also the record of success that's been happening in this country for the last 25 years.

People forget - this is - the Democratic Party says it's the party of facts. Well the facts are in the last 25 years violent crime has dropped by 50% in this country, property crimes have dropped by 70%. They should be proud of that record as success and that's not just elected politicians, that's police, prosecutors, judges people who make the criminal justice system go.

Instead, in the debates you hear someone like Elizabeth Warren saying things like the criminal justice system is racist from front to back and blaming the police when instead they should be proud that they have dropped crime rates at such a great - at such enormous levels for a 25 year period. There's nothing like it in American history.

INGRAHAM: And we have a really big problem in certain American cities and surrounding areas of recruitment of police, Mark Fuhrman. I mean we're in a difficult time getting people to even take the civil service exam to be considered to be a police officer in some districts?

Is that really what they want to make it such an unpopular career choice that young men and women just decide, you know, it's not worth it. Then where are we going to be?

FUHRMAN: Well, I think what they want is a police force that is made up of people that really don't have the pride for what they're actually chosen as a profession and they will go along to get along. And the problem is, we're talking about listening to politicians that are trying to be elected, you can't trust a thing they say.

I mean you can barely trust any politician any time to believe what they're going to say. And here we are trying to form our whole law-enforcement attitude across the nation because of 22 people that are running for the Democratic nomination, it's actually absurd.

When you look at this they had ample opportunities many times under Barack Obama and Eric Holder to actually hold officers responsible criminally in cases where there was racial overtones - Ferguson, few other places and the Justice Department did not. They found that there was no violation. We had grand juries that found that there was no violation.


FUHRMAN: But that isn't the platform that actually carries these people.

INGRAHAM: Yes, but the names - those names were still thrown around in the debate. When I say Michael Brown, like, let Officer Wilson can never work again as a police officer. His name was dragged to the mud after Ferguson. He had to - I think he had to change his name.

He can't even - he can't - he's not going to give an interview. He's - he was accused of basically murdering someone in cold blood and that's not what the findings were. So that was really irresponsible.


INGRAHAM: There's some pictures from Ferguson. John I want to ask you about what Harris said - Senator Harris said about - I think, it was Castro actually. It was Castro said at the debate about a national use of force standards, so federalizing the police use of force issue. Watch.


CASTRO: Whether it's the case of someone like Tamir Rice or Michael Brown or Eric Garner, where the Trump Justice Department just decided not to pursue charges. We need to ensure we have a national use of force standard and that we end qualified immunity for police officers so that we can hold them accountable for using excessive force.


INGRAHAM: John, quickly on this. Federalizing use of force standards.

YOO: Laura, I'm glad you played that clip, because that's unconstitutional. It's not the federal executive branch's job to go around examining the use of force in every state and city. This is an area where the Constitution itself places limits, the reasonableness test, on police at every level of jurisdiction city, state, local. It's not the job of the federal government.

Congressmen - Secretary Castro's proposal is unconstitutional. Second, it's a sound bite looking for a problem, because if you look at the statistics out in the most recent studies, there is no actual racial difference in the use of force and police shootings in the country.

INGRAHAM: Yes. No one believes, even if you say that and factually base, the left will not believe it and they'll keep spreading lies.

All right. Mark, I want to get to this controversial decision, tonight in New York where NYPD has suspended the police officer involved in that chokehold death of Eric Garner back in July 2014. The video looked terrific. He said he couldn't breathe.

Today a judge recommended that officer Daniel Pantaleo be fired from the Department. Mayor Bill de Blasio supports it.


DE BLASIO: Until today the Garner family has been failed by this entire process and as all this stretched on it reinforced the suspicion, as one felt by millions, that justice doesn't exist for people who look like Eric Garner.


INGRAHAM: Well, the New York City Police Union President Pat Lynch fired back.


PATRICK LYNCH, PRESIDENT, PATROLMEN'S BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK: I stand here today to tell every New York City police officer and they're on patrol right now, when someone calls 911 and dispatchers call you and there is a circumstance where you have to put your hands on someone, call your sergeant first, call emergency service second, because you will not have the backing of the city.


INGRAHAM: Mark, pretty strong, words your thoughts.

FUHRMAN: Well, when you look at the Eric Garner case, it wasn't a horrific altercation. It was a kind of slow kind of resistance. I'm not going to go his size, complicated everything. He did not apply a chokehold. He had a takedown hold. That he immediately removed his arm. His physical condition and the situation might have caused his death. We don't know and I don't think there was anything conclusive.

So you have the federal government, the Department of Justice under President Obama and Eric Holder that has this case for two years and they can't seem to make a movement on it. You have a grand jury that clears the officer. Now you have the Justice Department under Attorney General Barr that says there's not enough evidence for any kind of civil rights violation.

A violation that takes intent, not just the conduct of somebody that happens to create his own altercation, and now he renders himself dead. This is not a situation where there should be a civil rights violation or an indictment. But unfortunately because of public opinion that these Democrats want, they're going to actually - probably fire this officer.

INGRAHAM: Well, I don't know what that's going to do to the morale, that's already, I think, fairly low and throughout the boroughs of New York City. Mark and John, thank you so much for this discussion tonight.

Also tonight, as President Trump continues to hammer the failed liberal policies that wrecked Baltimore, some Democrat strongholds are still pushing policies that treat school kids like - well, they're just social justice lab rats.

Just yesterday New York City officials approved a new - get this, "Culturally Responsive" education policy that requires schools to stop the practices that lead to predictable outcomes of success or failure for historically marginalized students, despite the fact that most NYC students aren't proficient in reading or math.

Now here to make sense of all this is Dinesh D'Souza, a conservative author, filmmaker. Dinesh when you dig down about what "Culturally Responsive" education means, you find out that it's the same liberal educrat gobbledygook that's been confusing students and keeping them stuck for decades now.

DINESH D'SOUZA, CONSERVATIVE AUTHOR: Yes. It's not really education at all. It's the politics of victimology. The idea here is to reconcile minority students to their poor performance and instead of trying to improve the performance to locate a person to blame for it, namely the system or the white man.

So this is actually a recipe for - it's not a recipe for creating educated students. It's not a recipe for preparing you to balance a checkbook or get a job or start a business. It might be a recipe if you want to go to work for Antifa or Black Lives Matter. But it limits your occupational choices really to those two categories.

INGRAHAM: All right. Well, here's the proficiency chart for New York City, Dinesh. Now check it out, math where you see Grade 4, 26 percent are at or above proficient; Grade 8, goes up to a whopping 27 percent. Reading 26, Grade 8, 27. Science, wow, Grade 4 only 18 percent at proficient or above; Grade 8, 13 percent.

Yet I just want to keep going back to "Culturally Responsive", because this reminds me of you - back in our alma mater in the 80s. This sort of concept started trickling in back then. This is what it says.

It said that the one-page definition of "Culturally Responsive" says students varied perspectives. Whether tied to nationality religion, race or other backgrounds should be seen as essential assets. It also requires schools to quote "foster critical consciousness", Dinesh, about historical and contemporary forms of bias and suppression.

That's the definition of culturally responsible, which means the Chinese students - protested at a meeting because they're like, wait, we don't get translators while the Spanish kids are getting translators. We're not getting translators. So everybody's at each other's throat now.

D'SOUZA: Yes, this is - the New York public schools are among the most diverse in the world. You don't have to teach the kids about diversity. They are diverse. This would be like having a program to teach me about being Indian. You don't need to do that.

The broader meaning of this, I think, is quite startling. Trump attacked these of Democratic party run cities as being crime-infested, drug infested, rat infested, but I think he in a way understated the case.

If I were a poor kid in a slum, I would rather choose to be in a slum in Mumbai or in one of the favelas in Brazil, than in Baltimore or New York City. Now why is that? Because even in Mumbai I get a good education, I have a strong intact family. If you transplant me out of poverty and put me into a place where I have opportunity, I can thrive.

The problem for the poor kids in Baltimore and New York is they're not even being prepared with the basic skills for life. So even if opportunity comes their way, they don't know what to do with it. They don't have the ability to perform at the jobs that they're not being educated for. So this is a real disaster in the making.

INGRAHAM: So we're teaching them to be professional agitators or community activists or protesters are members of whatever group happens to be vogue and at the moment. But we're not really giving them the skills in science or math or writing that would actually make them more productive and probably make more money in society.

Dinesh, by the way, the President got a lot of heat because there was a tweet he sent about Elijah Cummings, the robbery of his home. Really bad news, he said. The Baltimore House Elijah Cummings was robbed. Too bad.

Today, he said that - well, that wasn't a wisecrack. He said I was - I just basically reported what was in the news. So the media hopped on that and pestered him about that at his helicopter spray today and he said, I was just basically repeating what everyone else had said. But they're not letting this Cummings - Elijah Cummings things go.

D'SOUZA: Well, I think Trump's thing was taken as being a kind of snarky, a chuckle at Cummings estate, but there's a broader point here. And that is that, usually these politicians can pursue these policies that make life miserable for other people, make these neighborhoods extremely dangerous. But they themselves live in gated communities where they're immune from the consequences of their own policies.

Nancy Pelosi, I'm sure, doesn't have to live with homeless people at her door in San Francisco, for example. And generally neither would Elijah Cummings. So I think this is actually kind of an interesting case where the crime in Baltimore actually found its way to Elijah Cummings' own door.

INGRAHAM: Thanks Dinesh. Great to see you tonight. And there was one topic at the debates that had the Democrats scrambling, what was it? And why is nobody talking about it? Plus Raymond Arroyo is back and has a jam-packed "Friday Follies", so stay right there.



SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You're looking, I believe, at the only member of Congress who not only voted against these disastrous trade agreements, NAFTA--

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: For decades, we have had a trade policy that has been written by giant multi-national corporations to help giant multi-national corporations. They have no loyalty to America.

JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The bottom line is, you talk to any economist, there is not a single example in history where a trade war had a winner. Trade wars are for losers.

GOV. STEVE BULLOCK (D-MT) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need to make sure that our trade deals actually are protecting - thinking about the workers. They can't be the stepchild. But the way to do it, with this blunt instrument of tariffs that the President is doing--


INGRAHAM: Well, the massive trade imbalance that has plagued this nation for decades has undercut American workers at every pass. Yet it only came up as a topic at the very end of the Democrat debate nights.

Now, remember, it wasn't until President Trump made this a political issue in 2016 that folks started paying attention. And it is why this is all more surprising to see as the establishment elites continue to mock the President's efforts to produce fair trade for all Americans.

Here now to respond is Steve Moore, former Trump economic advisors. Steve what's the biggest misconception that - of the sound bites you just heard. You heard Elizabeth Warren railing on about multinational corporations. And I probably agree with her that they have outsized influence.

The problem is those trade deals were written under Obama and Bush and Clinton, Trump came in and said these don't work for us and already did renegotiate NAFTA and the free trade agreement with Korea and he's moving on with China.

STEPHEN MOORE, HERITAGE FOUNDATION CHIEF ECONOMIST: Well, Laura, that those messages that you just played they show that the Democrats are completely scrambled in their message on trade and they're discombobulated. They don't quite know how to deal with Donald Trump's message on trade.

You remember from the first time Donald Trump came down that escalator and announced that he was running for President in 2015, he made trade, and especially the situation with China, a centerpiece of his campaign.

And by the way this idea of - I'm not sure whether that was Delaney nor which Democrat that was saying, oh, you can't win a trade dispute--

INGRAHAM: Hickenlooper.

MOORE: --you can't win a trade war. I think Trump is winning on China. He's winning with Europe. Look, I'm more of a free trader than you are Laura. But I love the fact that Trump is fighting for American workers. That he's fighting for a better deal. China, we've been trading with China for 35 years now.

It's a completely unlevel playing field. They lie, they cheat, they steal, they're spying on us. And nope - you're right, where were the Clintons, where were the Bushes, where the Obamas to ever do anything about this?

INGRAHAM: Yes, so that's why, again, they have to kind of criticize Obama here, otherwise it makes no sense. And even speaking of Obama, Biden comes out, he's asked about the Trans-Pacific Partnership that Trump is like, "We're not joining that", and again they were in favor of it. And now in this new Democrat Party this is what Biden says.


JOE BIDEN (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I would not rejoin the TTP as it was initially put forward. I would insist that we renegotiate pieces of that with the Pacific nations that we had in South America and North America, so that we could bring them together to hold China accountable--


INGRAHAM: OK. He's going to get crucified on that if he's up on a debate stage with Trump, explain.

MOORE: Well, the fact is that this was Obama's deal - and by the way a lot of liberals, including people like Joe Biden, until yesterday or the day before, were criticizing Trump for pulling the United States out of the TPP and now they're saying well we wouldn't join it ourselves.

I mean, look, I think the fact is, Trump has taken a very strategic position when it comes to China. He is he is fighting them toe-to-toe. I do believe that he is going to get major concessions from China. It's a tough - it's tough slogging, no question about it.

But I will say this, Laura, and I think you know it's true, I think most people do. Who do you think the Chinese would rather have be the next President?


MOORE: Joe Biden who's a patsy when it comes to China or Donald Trump whose tough on China?

INGRAHAM: Yes, I like how they say, "Well Russia really wants Trump to win". But who has it who is the big monster on the on the field, it's China. Russia's economy is puny. But China of course wants Biden in there and it'll be back to business as usual. Steve, thank you so much.

MOORE: And this is by the way a little bit of a problem for Trump, because he wants to get this trade deal done and the Democrats, in a lot of ways, are undercutting, getting that done, because they say we'll make a better deal. We won't stand up to you. That makes it difficult for Trump.

INGRAHAM: China's going to try to wait it all out. They're going to try to see if Trump gets defeated. Then again they can go back to just abusing our trade relationship as they did before.

All right, Steve, thanks so much. And so how is this whole playing out, though, on the world stage? It - just today it was announced that China dropped to number three among U.S. trading partners and president Trump thinks he has, gee, right where he wants them.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We have rebuilt China. So now it's time that we change thinking around it. They don't want to trade with us anymore that would be fine with me, would save a lot of money.


INGRAHAM: Joining me now to analyze is Gordon Chang, columnist and author of the book "The Coming Collapse of China". Gordon, where do you see this going? You and I have talked about this idea that it's crazy for us to trade with China at all given their strategic ambitions to push us out and the world's dominant military and economic power.

The President actually seemed to even float that concept today, you know the markets are pretty jittery, the last couple of days. But where do things stand now?

GORDON CHANG, AUTHOR, "LOSING SOUTH KOREA": Well things stand now at a point where the Chinese are not talking to us.

You know, it was really interesting at the Osaka G20, President Trump and Xi Jinping, the Chinese ruler, negotiated an interim deal that actually was very favorable for China. It gave them a critical concession on Huawei and the Chinese agreed to buy more Ag products, which they have to do anyway from somebody.

Well, you know, Xi Jinping couldn't even honor that, Laura. And I think that it says that in Beijing right now there is political paralysis, something is really wrong and you know you can't negotiate with the Chinese right now.

So I think President Trump is absolutely right. If these guys don't want to talk to us in good faith, well, we'll just go on without them. And that's really where we need to be, to disengage boycott.

INGRAHAM: Well, and China apparently, according to Fox News has some sources, report coming out that China says it - looks like it's moving toward an effort to decouple from the United States. But how realistic is that Gordon when you have Germany's economy essentially flat. France is in all this turmoil the "Yellow Vests", Brexit still not determined. A lot of tumult in in Britain.

I mean, there's no other economy that's really strong in the world right now of the big countries other than the United States, so how does China decouple? Is that just kind of a tit-for-tat thing?

CHANG: Yes, well, China can't really decouple. I mean, last year China's merchandised surplus with the U.S. accounted for a 119.3 percent of its overall merchandise surplus. That is incredible dependence on the U.S.

We have an economy Laura that is not export dependent - certainly not dependent on China. But China has an economy dependent on us. That means we've got a lot of leverage. You had a lot of smart people in the U.S. saying, "Oh, you know China and the U.S. can't decouple. Well, one thing we've seen this year is that China is becoming much less of factor for us.

INGRAHAM: Yes, Gordon, thank you so much. Great to see you, as always. And up next filmmaker Michael Moore's pick to run against Trump and the biggest political rescue op of the week.

And Burger King customers could be asking where's the beef, Raymond Arroyo is back. He explains it all, this week's "Friday Follies", next.


LAUREN GREEN, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Live from America's News Headquarters, I'm Lauren Green.

The gunman who opened fire at a Garlic Festival in Gilroy, California, committed suicide. That's according to the Santa Clara coroner's office. It was initially believed that police killed Santino William Legan. Investigators say the suspect killed three others at the festival including a six-year-old and a 13-year-old. Sixteen others were injured. Police found evidence that the suspect was planning a large-scale attack. They also discovered white supremacist literature in his Nevada home.

At least one person is dead and several others hurt from a cliff collapse in San Diego. One of the injured is in critical condition, and another has serious injuries. Rescue teams are searching for anyone who may be trapped under the debris. The piece of cliff that collapsed is about the size of the bus.

I'm Lauren Green. Now back to "The Ingraham Angle." For all your headlines, go to FOXNews.com.

INGRAHAM: It's Friday night, and that means it's time for Friday Follies. Michael Moore believes that only one candidate can beat Trump, Burger King unveils new meatless patties, and Joe Biden's big political rescue. Joining us with all the details, Raymond Arroyo, FOX News contributor. Raymond, we missed you last week. I know you had fun in France. We love the photos.


INGRAHAM: And liberal provocateur Michael Moore, he feels like he has the person who can beat Trump.

ARROYO: Amazingly, Laura, he floated this idea after one of the Democratic debates this week. Watch.


MICHAEL MOORE, DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKER: The only way to remove Trump is to crush Trump. Who is the streetfighter that can crush Trump? And frankly, I think there is a person that could do this. If the election were held today, there is one person that would crush Trump, and she hasn't announced yet. And her last name rhymes with Obama. In fact, it is Obama, Michelle Obama.


ARROYO: Laura, this is desperation writ large. Rather than making a case for one of the Democrats actually running for the office, Moore ignores them all and he reaches into Neverland for Michelle Obama. Michelle Obama is not participating in the race, Michael, as she has said repeatedly.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you ever run for elected office in the United States.


MICHELLE OBAMA, FORMER FIRST LADY: Absolutely no way. I have never wanted to be a politician. Nothing has changed in me to make me want to run for elected office. I want to serve. I want to do work. I want to be out there. But there are so many ways to make an impact. Politics is just not my thing.


ARROYO: Laura, she has again and again said she is not doing this. You and I covered the early days of the Obama administration when Desiree Rogers came out and said we're not just a political movement here. We are a brand, the Obama brand. Michelle Obama more than anybody else has cultivated and curated that brand, now selling more than 10 million books worldwide. She is not about to jeopardize that, Laura, to run for political office where she will be politically vetted and have to stand for policies and issues that would inevitably divide and dissipate her followers. I just don't think she's going to do it.

INGRAHAM: Raymond, they tried this with pushing Oprah after that award speech she gave.

ARROYO: At the Oscars.

INGRAHAM: George Clooney. They pushed George Clooney at one point in time.

ARROYO: Megan Rapinoe. Remember Megan Rapinoe?

INGRAHAM: Megan Rapinoe, they pushed her for five second. Angelina Jolie, couldn't she run? Honestly, they pushed every possible celebrity. And Michelle is a global celebrity brand.

What else have you got?

ARROYO: This is Fahrenheit 2020. So from queen Michelle to Burger King. The fast food giant is unveiling a meatless whopper this month, Laura. It's called the Impossible Whopper. And the patties are made by a company called impossible foods of soy protein, coconut oil, and genetically manipulated soy and yeast which allows it to bleed. Customers claim they can't tell the difference.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a -- cow.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It tastes like a Whopper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It tastes like a Whopper.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It tastes like a beef burger.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's made of -- beef right here. You see that. It's beef.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We swear it's not beef.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's impossible. It tasted just like a Whopper should taste.



ARROYO: And 7,000 Burger Kings will offer this impossible Whopper, Laura. But if you wanted a Whopper, why would you get a soy one? Nobody wants this, a soy patty with grill marks. I don't know why people would want this.

INGRAHAM: When you said, and I actually I think I got a little sick in my throat, when you said to make it bleed.

ARROYO: You squeeze it and red comes out.

INGRAHAM: I don't like genetically modified anything. I don't like any of that stuff.

ARROYO: It's genetically modified.

I've got some other quick facts here. It's a dollar more, there's more protein in the beef. And this thing has more saturated fat, this Impossible Whopper, and more sodium than beef.

INGRAHAM: It sounds like it's impossible to digest.

ARROYO: It's got 10 times more. There is a reason Chick-fil-A is America's favorite fast food chain.

Laura, this week, I don't know if you saw this rescue of several beached whales in Florida. The Coast Guard and locals banned together to pull this off. But there was a political rescue in the media that was perhaps even more daring this week.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Looking at Biden tonight, he actually had a strong performance tonight. He showed something he didn't show last time, which is fight.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He had a very strong night last night.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Joe Biden came prepared to defend his record this time and to go on offense.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He got into the fight. His team will be happy that he showed up, that he responded, that he fired back.


ARROYO: Amazingly, Laura, this was the Joe Biden they were talking about.


BIDEN: With the whole -- do you know the whole immune system.

We further support the -- the ability to buy into the Obamacare plan.

The bills that the president, excuse me, the future president here, that the senator is talking about.

Go to Joe 3-0-3-3-0, and help me in this fight.


INGRAHAM: Make it stop. That is so sad.

ARROYO: Poor, poor man. I felt bad for him. He was trying to get them to text 3030. He actually sent them to a web site that supports Pete Buttigieg. It's a wonder he found the Fox Theater, Laura, and didn't end up in Hannity's show.

INGRAHAM: Come on. I've got to say, I think that's unfair. I think he actually had a pretty good night.

ARROYO: He did?

INGRAHAM: I thought he was pretty -- look, they were all coming at him. He was the only one that didn't look bat blank crazy, OK, as far as I could tell. He's the only one that has any common touch, OK.

ARROYO: I think when you look at this and stand back, the fact so many on the left are looking for other solutions and not spending any time of making the case or building up the men and women standing on the stage contending for the office, that tells you something. But if Joe Biden is the frontrunner, this is a dangerous place for the Democrats to be.

INGRAHAM: Excuse, I just sneezed, Raymond. Raymond, I just almost sneezed on national T.V. OK, that's never happened in like 20 years.

ARROYO: Well, God bless you, and Joe Biden.

INGRAHAM: I am allergic to Friday Follies, I'm telling you. I'm just kidding, Raymond.

ARROYO: We'll inoculate you next week.

INGRAHAM: It's great to you have back. Raymond was in Paris for the last week with the little people.

All right, still ahead, a new defamation case from the Covington Catholic kids. See which politicians and media members found themselves on that list. Plus, the worst media offenders of the week. "The Ingraham Angle" has got its eyes on you. That's next.


INGRAHAM: It's easy to become numb to bias these days in the media. So "The Ingraham Angle" is keeping track of the worst offenders this week.

Joining me now is Jeffrey Lord, a former CNN contributor and former aide to Ronald Reagan, along with Scott Bolden, attorney and former chair of the National Bar Association PAC. Let's begin, gentlemen, with the Democrat debates where CNN's Don Lemon seemed to only be concerned with one thing.


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Congressman O'Rourke, President Trump is pursuing a reelection strategy based in part on racial division. How do you convince primary voters that you'd be the best nominee to take on President Trump and heal the racial divide in America.

Mr. Yang, why are you are the best candidate to heal the racist divide in America?

Why are you the best candidate to heal the racial divide the exists in this country today which has been stoked by the president's racist rhetoric?

What do you say to those Trump voters who prioritize the economy over the president's bigotry?


INGRAHAM: Jeffrey, what do you make of your former colleagues editorializing here?


SCOTT BOLDEN, FORMER D.C. DEMOCRATIC PARTY CHAIRMAN: Jeff, I haven't seen you since those day either.


JEFFREY LORD, FORMER CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Laura, I knew before we were going into this debate that he was going to do some version of this. He did it to me on air on one occasion. And when I made the pitch for a color-blind society America and equal opportunity and all that, he shut me down by saying that I was crazy not to be judging by race. And when I suggested ever so nicely that he sounded like Bull Connor, I do believe he said we're done and shut me off. So I'm not surprised in the least that he would do this. The question is, why put a left commentator there as opposed to just a hard news group? But that's where they are.

INGRAHAM: They don't have all that many hard news people left over at CNN. I think that's one problem.

BOLDEN: That's a zinger.


INGRAHAM: Scott, this was something that wasn't surprising, I guess.

BOLDEN: It's a Democratic debate.

INGRAHAM: But every question was, the president is basically a racist. So what do you think? Do you think he is a racist? That is kind of where we were going.

BOLDEN: Everybody on stage probably answered the same way. There is no real difference, in my opinion, whether you're racist or you traffic in it, or that you say racially offensive things. You're going to be judged whether you agree with it or don't agree with it. You don't have to use the "n" word to be called a racist.

But we ought to get away from the racial division. That question is not problematic in and of itself, but I wish that they would have gone beyond that and talked about economic racism or the economic divisions that come from the history or the historical nature of racism to get those types of answers.

INGRAHAM: A lot of people were saying that we needed more solutions talk on lifting people out of poverty. And maybe this worked in Sacramento. Why are we doing this in Baltimore? And they didn't really do much of that. It's easy to hit Trump. That's the easiest thing in the world for them to do. The hard thing is to say what we have been doing hasn't worked.

BOLDEN: Or what we have been doing with the federal government and federal aid and federal agencies --

INGRAHAM: It's $15 billion in Baltimore.

BOLDEN: Exactly.

INGRAHAM: We've got to keep going. Next up we have in mourning Joe Scarborough touting his nickname for Mitch McConnell being put to music. Watch.


MIKA BRZEZINSKI, MSNBC HOST: Joe interviewed renowned musician Ben Folds. Folds brought up Joe's recent moniker for Mitch McConnell, Moscow Mitch. Folds was impressed by the term and said it inspired a new song which he debuted last night.


BRZEZINSKI: Pretty good. So now to -- I love it actually.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: We need to get a full recording for "Moscow Mitch." It's going global.


INGRAHAM: Oh, my gosh, they're so obsessed with themselves and their own sense of self-importance. First of all, no one in America knows what they are talking about. It doesn't cut through. But Jeff, it reminded me of a song that was modified to praise a certain former president.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Obama is on fire. Obama is on fire Obama.


INGRAHAM: I'd say the Trump economy is on fire. But at least she has pipes. She can sing. But Jeff, how many more songs do we need to ruin and then extol on cable television in the morning?

LORD: Oh, Laura, I have a list of four Beatles classics, remakes that are definitely in order after the last Democratic debate when they were taking shots at President Obama. My core suggestions would be "Obama's lonely hearts club band," "I don't want to hold Obama's hand," "Obama gets a ticket to ride," and "You've got to hide Obama away." I think those would be great.


INGRAHAM: All right, gentlemen, last night, CNN, Jim Acosta, he seemed really disappointed about the Trump rally that he covered. Watch.


JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: There was some ugliness that broke out in the crowd earlier this evening. You were asking about whether or not the crowd was chanting "send her back." They didn't do that, but the hot button issue of immigration could certainly be felt as a protestor was holding up a sign that said "Immigrants Built America." Trump supporters tried to rip that sign out of that protestor's hands, and a brief scuffle did break out here at this rally in Cincinnati.


INGRAHAM: If that wasn't bad enough, I want you to look at this banner they had up during the whole hit. No chants so far. They were wishing for something to be outraged by, trying to compel it with that banner. Come on, shout something that they say is offensive, like send him home. None of that happened. Thoughts?

BOLDEN: I think Donald Trump was really smart not to identify the squad or naming of them. He did a broader attack on the cities themselves. The scuffle, that's just the carry over. We're going to have those scuffles. That's still not good.

INGRAHAM: Yes. We have a lot of scuffles with Antifa that we can talk about, too.


INGRAHAM: All right, panel, thank you very much.

And breaking news in the Covington Catholic scandal, who are the politicians and journalists who now find themselves on the wrong side of that lawsuit? Oh, boy, we're going to name names. It's there when we come back.


INGRAHAM: It turns out the experts were wrong again. This time about the Trump economy, again. Anchors, reporters, economists have spent the last few months swearing, almost wishing we were headed toward a recession.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is Trump leading the country into a recession with his economic policies? New signs point to yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now to 2020, and not the race for president but the recession many economists fear is going to hit that year.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: June will mark 10 years since the end of the great recession, since this expansion began. Of course, what goes up must come down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You could easily find the American economy in a recession certainly before the election.


INGRAHAM: Now a reality check. The economy continues to outperform expectations as evidenced in the July job reports out today, 164,000 nonfarm jobs added in the month of July, and unemployment is held steady at 3.7 percent, near a 50-year low. Wages also continue to increase with the 3.2 percent year over year gain beating expectations, that's big.

And this might be the most important. A whopping 370,000 workers entered the workforce, meaning more people who have been out of the labor market are now confident enough to jump back in, no sign of recession.

While others might hype the demise of the American economy and hope for it, we're going to continue to bring you the facts about what is really happening. Better luck next time, experts.

And now to a FOX News alert. The eight Covington Catholic high school students who were smeared by the media back in January have filed a defamation suit against high-profile politicians and media personalities. For the full story we go to FOX News chief correspondent Jonathan Hunt. Jonathan?

JONATHAN HUNT, FOX NEWS CHIEF CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Laura. The eight Covington students filing this libel lawsuit are not named, simply referred to as the Covington boys. The action comes just one week after a federal judge dismissed a similar defamation lawsuit against "The Washington Post." That was filed by Nicholas Sandmann, one of the students involved in the well-known encounter with Nathan Phillips, a Native American on the mall in Washington D.C. in January. Phillips played a drum and sang as Sandmann and his classmates gathered around.

The students were criticized by some as being aggressive and described as, quote, MAGA hat wearing teens. Among those named in the new lawsuit as having libeled the boys, the comedian and actress Kathy Griffin, Ana Navarro, a Republican strategist and frequent CNN contributor, Maggie Haberman, a "New York Times" reporter, and Senator Elizabeth Warren.

The lawsuit says in part, quote, "Several of our senators, most-famous celebrities, and widely read journalists collectively used their large social media platforms, perceived higher credibility, and public followings to lie and libel minors they met, based on an event they never witnessed." And it says, quote, "Over the ensuing hours and days the kids experienced threats, personal attacks, and life altering public attacks." The suit seeks up to $4.8 million in total damages against the 12 people named. Laura?

INGRAHAM: Jonathan, thank you so much. And we'll be right back.


INGRAHAM: I was thinking back on this week and what an incredible newsy week this has been for the country despite the fact that it's end of July, early August, usually dead. But the debates showed us a lot about this Democrat Party, where they are now, where Obama in some circles was considered too moderate. They didn't even mention Bill Clinton. So it's moving further to the left this week, provided plenty of evidence.

And we were there to cover it for you. And you've all been so far ahead of the curve. You have been watching this show for past almost two years now. And I have to say a special goodbye to one of our great producers. We're going to miss her very much. Lauren Woodhull, who has been at this show since its inception, is going to be going on and doing a lot of great work for FOX Nation. She's actually going to be producing our FOX Nation show "Laura and Raymond," so she'll still be with us, but not on the day to day show. Lauren, you have done a great job for us and continue to do fabulous things for FOX and all the loyal FOX viewers and FOX Nation viewers.

We have a big week of shows coming up next week. Don't forget to check out my new podcast. It dropped yesterday. Just go to PodcastOne.com, get caught up with all the week's shows.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.