This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 23, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
INGRAHAM: Good evening from Washington. I am Laura Ingraham and this is "The Ingraham Angle." We have another jam-packed hot show for you tonight. Jim Comey is attacking Donald Trump again but a report says that he left the FBI in such a mess that agents are actually begging to Congress to let him testify about it. Also President Trump holds a roundtable on MS13. We talk to Michelle Malkin on how to rid America of, I don't want to call them animals, that's an insult to animals but that evil. And believe this or not Facebook, I think this has to be a joke, wants you to send them your nude photos. Raymond Arroyo explains it in our seen and unseen segment. But first the unbridled power of the surveillance state. That's the focus of tonight's "Angle."
Was the Trump campaign comprised of private citizens surveyed by the Obama administration? Was information collected and then retained about them? These are questions that should frighten every American, no matter what your political affiliation. Was the government spying on its citizens? Well we know for certain that Carter Page who was on this show earlier this week was targeted and surveilled by the FBI. He was approached by an FBI informant who was reportedly sent out to make contact with Page and other Trump campaign aides. The big question is, did President Obama or high ranking Whitehouse officials know of and authorise spying on a political opponent, mainly Trump and his campaign staff. Well this is certainly not the first time the government has surveilled citizens or captured information on them. I want to take you back to a hearing from 2013 when Senator Ron Wyden posed this question to then Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
RON WYDEN, FORMER SENATOR: What I want to see id if you can give a yes or no answer to the question, does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?
JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: No sir.
WYDEN: It does not?
CLAPPER: Not wittingly.
INGRAHAM: then yesterday Clapper appeared on the View where he tried to defend himself against Trump's charges but he is basically just a liar.
CLAPPER: The President is calling me lying machine well. Booker Stem's probe is an exchange I had with Senator Wyden five years ago in March of
2013 about a surveillance program and he was asking me about one I was thinking about another. So I made a mistake but I didn't lie so that's what
INGRAHAM: Yeah occasioned of a lying. Even Meghan McCain could see through the fiscations.
MEGHAN MCCAIN, ABC HOST: So what you're referencing though is when you are talking about James Snowden blowing a whistle on the NSA illegally spying and 2013 when you asked about it you said no. So that is a lie and I think-
CLAPPER: No it isn't a lie, I'm sorry, I didn't lie, I was thinking about something else.
INGRAHAM: What the heck was he thinking about, that's a lie. And it's amazing to me that Clapper continues to go on national TV and shamelessly with a straight face denies what we already know to be true. Information leaked by Edward Snowden, national contractor completely contradicts Clapper claims. The question from Wyden was simple and clear. And Wyden himself has called out clapper for all this repeatedly. But I think the most damning moment of Clapper View appearance was this one.
JOY BEHAR, ABC HOST: Was the FBI spying on Trump's campaign?
JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER UNITES STATES DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: No they were not. They were spying on, that's not a term I particularly like, trying to understand were the Russians infiltrating, trying to gain access, trying to gain leverage--
INGRAHAM: I like how he does this "spying" and how he doesn't like the term. He is the man who oversaw massive surveillance and Intel collected by spies. He has a problem with the word spying. Are you kidding me? The laughing thing makes it really believable. None of this was lost on the President who today tweeted "SPYGATE could one of the biggest political scandals in history". The he doubles down.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I mean if you look at Clapper he sort of admitted that they had spies in the campaign yesterday inadvertently. But I hope it's not true but it looks like it is. We now call it Spygate, you're calling it Spygate. A lot of bad things have happened.
INGRAHAM: Well bad things Mr President have been happening for some time now. Remember when Clapper and Sally Yates were confronted by Senator Chuck Grassley about the unmasking of Trump officials. They were surveilled remember at Trump Tower.
CHUCK GRASSLEY, SENATOR: Mr Clapper and Ms Yates, did either of you ever request the unmasking of Mr Trump, his associates or any member of congress?
CLAPPER: Yes in one case I did. I specifically recall but I can't discuss it further than that.
GRASSLEY: Did either of you ever viewed classified documents in which Mr Trump, his associates or members of congress had been unmasked?
GRASSLEY: You have. Can you give us details here in this case (inaudible)?
CLAPPER: No I can't.
GRASSLEY: Ms Yates have you?
SALLY YATES, FORMER US STATES ATTORNEY: Yes I have and no I can't give you details.
INGRAHAM: There is little doubt in my mind that we have witnessed an outrageous abuse of our Intel and law enforcement agencies. Not because Brennin or Comey or Clapper were convinced that Russia was rigging the election but because they wanted to hobble a much bigger threat, Donald Trump. The Obama crowd was so brazen and so confident that they were doing the right thing that I think in the end they were actually really sloppy.
At least seven Trump associates are suspected of being surveilled. Steve Bannon, Michael Cohen, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn and son-in-law Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, Cater Page and George Papadopoulos. We also know that at least four top Obama officials regularly requested that the names of Americans be unmasked. For Samantha Power this was reportedly a near daily undertaking during the 2016 campaign that year of 2016. Now here is why all this deep state intrigue matters. The Obama team had a material interest in spiking the material email probe in making way for the Trump Russia investigation. Their career and their legacies hanged in the balance. As Andy McCarthy of National Review rightly points out in a column today, "had Hilly won the election, many of these officials would have retained their jobs. And would have been able to cover up any schemes they were in during the Obama tenure. They simply could not permit Trump to take the Presidency and once he was in striking distance, I think they got really desperate. Desperate to wrap up that Hillary probe so that maybe she could take the Whitehouse like they always thought and desperate to collect dirt on Trump to destroy any chance of that candidacy. It is a rich irony that the very people who claim that the wanted to stop Russian interference in our elections adopted the tactics of a totalitarian state like Russia to stifle political opponents ad to subvert the election of Donald Trump.
Given all of that, it made me howl when Chuck Schumer said this yesterday
CHUCK SCHUMER, NEW YORK SENATOR: The President's behaviour is the kind of grossly autocratic behaviour we'd expect in a Banana republic not a mature democracy.
INGRAHAM: No chuck a banana republic is a place where citizens, specifically political opponents are spied upon, falsely charged and unjustly imprisoned. What Trump is attempting to do is to expose the corruption in our Intel and law enforcement services which Congress and the President must exercise their oversight over. In the wake of 911, Conservatives were willing to trade our privacy for security. We are now being photographed how many times a day. Can't even count. Our money and our persons are trapped at home and abroad. While we the people ad our elected officials should not be endlessly trailed or treated like dangers to the state and we certainly should not be spied upon for political reasons. The ever expanding surveillance state is a threat to our freedom and some within these agencies think they are omnipotent and above the law.
They are not. This is a President who will not be controlled and who will not be manipulated. And his is insisting on full transparency. That's a novel concept that the deep state better get used to. And that's the Angle.
Let's discuss the deep state run amuck with NRA TV contributor and secret service agent Dan Bongino with me here in the studio. Fox news contributor and Washington examiner chief political correspondent Byron York and Danielle Brian, the Executive Director of the project on government oversight.
BYRON YORK, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well the thing that struck me, you mentioned congressional oversight at the end of that. That's the thing that's going to tell us what happened and what's as striking is how difficult it has been for Congress to find out what was going on. Think about the dossier. We first hear about the dossier, it's kind of fishy.
Then we find out later it was funded by the Clinton campaign. Then we find out later that the FBI actually wanted to hire the author of the dossier to continue the work during campaign. Then we find out that it was used to get a wiretap warrant for Carter Page. We just find out more and more and all the time, every step of the way the FBI and the justice department are dragging their feet and resisting efforts to find out those things I just mentioned. The same thing is happening now.
INGRAHAM: And overly adapting perhaps documents that they are finding out later that the names were --, it's kind of exculpatory for the people that they were targeting. Dan Bongino, I want to play for you Jim Clapper who was TV again tonight with Judy Woodruff and said this.
CLAPPER: It's what I would call my informed opinion that given the massive effort the Russians made and the number of citizens that they touched and given the fact it turned on less than 80 000 in these states, to me it exceeds logic and credulity that they didn't affect the election. And it's my belief they actually turned it.
INGRAHAM: He proven to be a liar and now he's on TV saying that the reason Donald Trump was elected is that a corrupt (basically) dictatorship in the Soviet Union.
DAN BOGINO, FORMER US SECRET SERVICE AGENT: you know Laura, Jim Clapper should debate Barak Obama who if you remember gave a speech in the rose garden in the transition period where he mocked of the idea that the Russians could overthrow and overturn an election. He thought it was hysterical. So Jim you should debate the person who appointed you, Barack Obama. But Laura the biggest open question is what people like Jim Clapper and John Brennan and the FBI former director Jim Comey are running from, what is the genesis moment if this campaign? What is point zero? Nobody can seem to explain that. I notice that you cited Andy McCarthy who has been doing great work. He brought this up in another article that he wrote. Why did je keep referencing Lake Spring for this initial meeting where this whole thing was discussed and not a specific date, all these people met for this really important meeting about Russian collusion and elections and Laura, nobody can remember the date? Seems kind of strange doesn't it? And the reason is they viewed the Carter Page and George Papadopoulos appointment as Trump foreign policy advisors as opportunities to spy, not threats to our republic.
INGRAHAM: Yeah Byron wrote a great piece on that Wall Street Journal, picked up on it today. Danielle, Dab just mentioned President Obama. We found an interesting piece of tape from 2013, let's watch.
BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And what I can say with confidence is that when it comes to our domestic operations, the concerns that people have back home in the United States of America that we do not surveill the American people or persons within the United States that there are a lot of checks and balances in place designed to avoid a surveillance state. Danielle
DANIELLE BRIAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ON THE PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT:
Well unfortunately that is not correct. And one of the points you were making before is post 911 there was a huge over reach and we gave, well in some instances the intelligence community took a lot of powers that weren't even authorised. Since then some of them have been pulled back. USA freedom act actually started pulling back some of its books, surveillance concerns that we had. But what President Obama is saying there is not right. There is a type of Pfizer surveillance that is still capturing Americans and this is part of what we are seeing in what's come up with some of the Trump associates. And what's so frustrating is there was an opportunity in January when the Pfizer act was being re-authorised to reform this and create checks balances so Americans didn't get captured I them and it didn't happen. And there are three reforms that still have to take place.
INGRAHAM: They still use national security letters where they avoid the usual type of scrutiny and check and balances-
BRIAN: There are no check and balances in those. But in the case where 702 surveillance when you have a target who is a foreigner, it doesn't have to even be a bad guy. If Americans in this case we have seen some of the cases where Trump associates are speaking for example to the UAE Prince and so in theory they are surveilling him but they capture the conversations of Americans. But those kinds of surveillance have no warrants. There is no checks and balances at all. And even if someone I think Carter Page has been talking about if they get caught up in these, even if you were a criminal and you were going through our criminal system if you were surveilled you have the right to be told about this.
INGRAHAM: Oh no you don't get any right.
BRIAN: None of that happens. We don't know how many Americans have been caught up in this.
INGRAHAM: Byron there is an effort to say kind of that we should be grateful that these informants were out there. This was on Dan Goldman of ASNA today, watch.
DAN GOLDMAN, ASNA: So look this President, the head of the executive branch continued to bash the career professionals who are day in and day out trying to enforce out laws and save our national security is incredibly debilitating. It's incredibly destructive. The Republicans need to stand up and say this unacceptable anymore. There is no deep state and we need to stop talking about it.
YORK: This is a problem. March 21st 2016 Donald Trump goes to the Washington Post editorial board. Remember he had been under a lot of criticism. Who are your policy advisors.
INGRAHAM: Give me a list.
YORK: He gives them a list and on it was Papadopoulos and Page. And shortly after that James Comey and Andrew McCabe brief the attorney general Loretta Lynch about this. Later on they brief what's called the national Security Council Principle's committee, which is everybody. It's the secretary of state, defence, CIA, the attorney general, Whitehouse chief of staff, UN ambassador, everybody. And they consider giving what's called a defensive briefing. Call somebody high up in the Trump campaign and listen you have somebody up there who has unsavoury connections with Russians. We fear that this could be a threat to your campaign--
INGRAHAM: They decided not to do it.
YORK: They decided not to do it twice.
YORK: We don't know why they didn't do it.
YORK: Well if they were doing all this defensive campaign, certainly a defensive briefing would have been a thing to do.
INGRAHAM: But Dan here, we know that Susan Rice was doing a lot of unmasking. And this picked up on Samantha Powers' part, top official Obama administration during 2016. We know they wanted the names of Jared Kushner and others, by the way he got a security clearance today, so all the critics of him, he got his clearance. And that's has just kind of gone away. That's the reason why I mentioned it in the angle today is people forget. The unmasking of the names of Americans while she sitting in her office going I want to know, why did she have to know that? Why would that be in her purview at that moment, we still don't know that?
BONGINO: Remember Laura Samantha Power still insists that it wasn't even her who insisted on these unmaskings. She is like hey they may have used my name but it want me. Here's another one for you Laura that seems to have-- there's so much darkness in this that you have to dig through the dirt to get to the dirt underneath the dirt. The foreign intelligence surveillance court did an audit of these queries into the NSA database. You can see it.
It's out there online, it's all out in open source now, and found out that there were third party contractors given access into the NSA database to do queries and that Mike Rogers was very concerned about this and conveniently goes and briefs Trump up in Trump Tower during the transition period to which Trump exits Trump Towers after that goes up to Bedminster and doesn't do meetings afterwards in Trump Towers.
INGRAHAM: All right guys. So Danielle, real quick, final thoughts.
BRIAN: I really think what we have to remember is that Mike Horowitz the DOJ inspector general, he's a serious guy and I am glad that he is looking into this.
INGRAHAM: And no subpoena power though and he can't do any prosecution. So it's great we will get a report but what we'll do with the report, that remains to be seen. Great to have all of you on, fantastic panel. Meanwhile the President is lashing out at Jim Comey who made the stunning evidence to back it up.
TRUMP: I did a great service to this country by firing James Comey. And excuse me, a lot of people have said it and you go into the FBI and a lot of those great people working in the FBI, they will tell you I did a great service to our country by firing James Comey.
INGRAHAM: Well FBI agents were so disgusted with Comey that they are practically begging Congress now to make him testify, up next.
President Trump and Jim Comey are accusing each other of lying over Spygate. That's what Trump called reports that the FBI had an informant in his presidential campaign. Comey Tweeted today, "Attacks on the FBI and lying about its work will do lasting damage to our country. Trump responded by suggesting that Comey should worry about the upcoming IG Report.
TRUMP: If you look at what he did, if you look at all of the lies, tremendous lies. If you look at all that's going on, I think that James Comey's got a lot of problems now--
INGRAHAM: Among those problems according to a report from the Daily Caller, a rank of FBI agents want to testify to Congress that politics and incompetence at the top are destroying the bureau. Let's discuss that with Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee who recently sent a letter to FBI Director Chris Ray requesting information on Comey's briefing of Trump on that infamous Russia dossier. Senator great to have you in the studio.
RON JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOMELAND SECURRITY COMMITTEE: Hello Laura
INGRAHAM: Tell us what's going on here, there are so many different threads and it's hard to unpack. Let's try to keep it simple.
JOHNSON: There is a lot of smoke. And certainly what I'm trying to do is trying to get to the bottom of this. But Laura this is like a 1000 piece Jigsaw puzzle and Muellers' probably got a few 100 pieces, IG Horowitz has a few less because he doesn't have that speed and power. He can't bring in witnesses from outside of government. The press has more pieces than members of Congress.
INGRAHAM: Well they are getting all the leaks.
JOHNSON: Precisely and we need to understand what are those leakers trying to accomplish? They are trying to get ahead of the story before the public has the truth. This entire investigation is completely backwards. This is a political investigation. I think Congress ought to get the information first, write its reports then seek criminal activity, refer that to the justice department for special council. The problem with criminal investigation is that it makes it very difficult for Congress to get any information whatever. But we do have some information and the way I am trying to lay it out is in timelines. For example Chuck Grassley is talking about the most recent Tweet that is gaining some prominence. On August fifth, "the Whitehouse is running this". Combine this with a Tweet that we got in a lot of trouble for publishing in one of our reports.
INGRAHAM: Let's put it up first so people see. This is a quote from Grassley to Rosenstein today in a letter, correct? And he said, from Lisa Page and Peter Strozk they want all those texts "as one example of the an official's name was redacted in reference to a text about the Obama Whitehouse `running' an investigation, although it's unclear to which investigation they were referring to. Going back to my question in the Angle, who knew about this?
JOHNSON: Again we have so many redactions we can't put the pieces of the puzzle together. There's again a lot of smoke. You combine that with the Tweet that we published that I just got bashed for in the press. A month later September second, this is from Page to Strozk, "Potus wants to know everything we're doing". This is after they have exonerated Hillary Clinton again that's what we are going to get an IG report on soon. And again Horowitz did an excellent job and McCabe caught him lying and laid out 32 pages exactly why the deputy director and director of the FBI lied to the FBI. If anybody ought to know that it's a crime that's the man who should have done. So it's no longer Marty McCabe and these type of texts right here are just unbelievably revealing.
INGRAHAM: The question I asked in my opening angle, who basically knew?
How this was going down. Carter Page is the reason you're opening up this big investigation where you end up putting an informant out there and you end up surveilling the Trump Tower and Kushner and all these guys are getting their phone calls listened to. And then this Russian billionaire being visited by the FBI in September of 2016 and they try to get him to agree to the seclusion thing going on. Like what are you talking about, they were looking for, I mean help us with the collusion stuff. And even this Russian billionaire that hates Paul Manafort, only Garaposka said I can't stand him but this is ridiculous.
JOHNSON: It doesn't take much of the imagination to look at this and say this is a set-up. And then again when you see the Whitehouse is running this, Potus wants to know everything we are doing. You have to start putting two and two together at 25 -50 pieces of that 1000 page --
INGRAHAM: Are you good at doing Jigsaw puzzles? Are you good at it?
JOHNSON: I get a little frustrated. Right now we are waiting on the IG report on the Clinton email and hopefully the Clinton Foundation. That's really been our investigation. Three years we've been waiting on this information. So we'll get that. We are on the case. I am writing to Christopher Ray, what the process of document production, who's doing the redaction, what's the criteria, what was it, now we have John (Losh), what is it now, can't even get that information.
INGRAHAM: How do you do your oversight? It's not supposed to be this taffy pl-I know there is this historic kind of tension among the branches of government. No one wants to be accountable, people don't want to show everything. But I don't ever remember it being this bad. I don't remember.
JOHNSON: What has surprised me is we haven't had FBI agents come forward
to me. They will go to the press.
INGRAHAM: And they want to testify on what?
JOHNSON: We heard that when Comey exonerated Clinton that they were going to blow a gasket basically. Why haven't they come forward? Come forward to my committee, we'll protect you.
INGRAHAM: You should also bring the Russian billionaire in, get him on video, get the Russian lawyer, get Veselnitskaya. They didn't talk to her.
Get in (Tera Polska), get him to testify.
JOHNSON: It will be nice to get a little more evidence before we start doing those interviews. But we may start doing those interviews just to get the evidence.
INGRAHAM: They'll tell you a lot. Senator thank you for coming in tonight.
JOHNSON: Thank you.
INGRAHAM: Just imagine how bad things must be at be FBI if agents are practically begging Congress to ask them about it. Let's discuss that with retired FBI agent Jim W, he served in the bureau for 34 years. He's a former FBI undercover agent in the book Chasing Phil by David Howard. This just gets wilder by the moment. Your thoughts on the state of things now.
JIM WEDICK, FORMER FBI AGENT: Highly unusual Laura, agents want to come forward and testify. But here's what's happened, changes have been made.
FBI Director Ray has fired McCabe. Still others have been forced into meaningless jobs like Peter Strozk and others have been forced out like Lisa Page and Michael Kortan. I talk to retired agents all the time. I run FBIretired.com a website for website for retired agents. Some agents just leaving, I talk to them. They now have the ability, they think, to not be put aside or hurt if they come forward and so they are willing to come forward. And they do want to testify. They're sick of what happened. They think that the FBI guidelines have been violated, incredibly violated and they want to talk about it.
INGRAHAM: Jim, FBI agents they are not thrilled about going to testify before Congress normally right. This is not like they are dying to testify before Congress. How extraordinary it is for them to want to go tell their story about what they think the agency should be and what happened to the agency. For the agency to turn into a political cajole, to be used against political opponents, all the hard work the men and women are doing in the agency for decades, it calls the whole thing into question, which is horrible because I happen to know a number of people who used to work for me work at the FBI. These are the greatest people. And they must be infuriated, have to be.
WEDICK: They are incredibly annoyed, mad. I had an agent just tell me the other day that when he goes into a group of folks he doesn't readily mention that he is a retired FBI agent anymore just because of this incredible, outrageous controversy.
INGRAHAM: And Jim, you knew the informant. Tell me about him. You had some dealings with him, the informant, the professor.
WEDICK: Stefan Halper. The strange thing about that, agents forgot history. Stefan Halper, back 1980, he was doing spying actually for the Reagan administration and he was getting documents from the DNC on foreign policy and he was handing over them to the bureau as an informant. And so here now we go 30 years later, it's happening again.
INGRAHAM: It's a long career.
WEDICK: Exactly. And here is the other thing, Laura. You need to know, the guidelines say if you are going to use an informant to infiltrate a political organization, you need a clear criminal predicate. National security is not a criminal predicate.
INGRAHAM: Bingo. Jim, that is the critical question. We have got to have you back. Great segment, especially with Senator Johnson here. It seems like a lot, by the way, is a joke today about what is happening on social media, but you will not believe the next story we're going to tell you with Raymond Arroyo, what Facebook wants from you now. Stay there.
INGRAHAM: It's time now for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we expose what is really behind the big cultural stories of the day.
Why Facebook wants you to send them your nude photos. I can't believe we're even doing this segment. Here to explain all this is "New York Times" bestselling author of the "Will Wilder" children series and FOX News contributor Raymond Arroyo. What is the story, Facebook wants your nude photos?
RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: They want your nude photos preemptively.
INGRAHAM: Why do people have nude photos?
ARROYO: That is a bigger question. But they want to fight revenge porn where people who are in relationships post indiscreet or nude pictures of their partner when the relationship ends.
INGRAHAM: Who are these people?
ARROYO: I bet we could name a few but we won't.
Here's what they want you to do -- submit your photos, the most secretive photos you have, to Facebook. They then encrypt them, they take what they call a fingerprint of the picture, so not the picture themselves. They say they don't store the picture. It will be off the server in a few days.
And they will block that image from ever being posted on Facebook.
Here is the problem, Laura. Who is looking at these images? How long are they on the server? And the bigger question, Facebook had a 50 million person breach last year they admitted to. In March they admitted to this.
How sure are we that they can protect the images and that the employers aren't copying them?
INGRAHAM: But what if other people have other nude photos. This whole thing is -- let's call this segment -- forget "Seen and Unseen," the end of the civilization segment. Tom, make a new graphic. End of civilization.
Tom is like I don't make graphics.
ARROYO: We should move on.
INGRAHAM: A New York man who is 30 years old.
ARROYO: My gosh.
INGRAHAM: Sued his parents or was sued by his parents. We call these people boomerang brats. You throw them out to the world and then they come back and they stay at home.
ARROYO: He's a 30-year-old. He says look, I'm trying to be a father. He has a child of his own. He said I'm trying to be a father. I need to live with mom and dad. They gave him five notices to get out, five eviction notices. They even deprived him of food.
INGRAHAM: Is that him?
ARROYO: Finally he sat with another network and said this.
INGRAHAM: Do we have the audio?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why couldn't you guys resolve this without the court?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would consider much of what they were doing to try to get me out as attacks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: A third of millennials, Laura, are at home with the parents.
INGRAHAM: As attacks?
ARROYO: The parents were attacking him. They asked to go get a job and get out.
INGRAHAM: How about get a haircut? He looks like Cousin It. That was scary.
ARROYO: Here is the scary thing. A third of the millennials are at home.
INGRAHAM: Look at him.
ARROYO: This has gone up from 25 percent to 34 percent.
INGRAHAM: He is stroking his hair. He doesn't have money for haircut.
ARROYO: Well, tough times.
INGRAHAM: Here's what you do, if your kid is threatening to come home after he went to college or something, turn the room to a home gym with no couches or anything like that.
ARROYO: And then the judge ordered them -- by the way, the judge has ruled the kid has to vacate, the man has to vacate. And they are calling for an investigation by adult protective services. I hope that is for the parent and not for the son.
Now the big story of the night, big story.
INGRAHAM: Stormy Daniels is getting a key to what, another stripper pole?
ARROYO: No, no. Today she got the key to the city of West Hollywood.
This is the mayor John Duran. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAYOR JOHN DURAN, WEST HOLLYWOOD: As you know, Lady Godiva rode naked through streets of England to protest injustice in taxes, and we have our own Lady Godiva here in the city of West Hollywood. She has held her head up with dignity and she's fought back. And when she fights back and Mr.
Avenatti fights back, they are fighting back for all of us to get our country back into our hands.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: This is a city --
INGRAHAM: "Dignity," did he use the word "dignity"? Do you spend a lot of time in West Hollywood?
ARROYO: They have asked for impeachment for Donald Trump.
INGRAHAM: Impeach that mayor.
ARROYO: Nothing says you are being honored like getting a key to the city in front of a sex shop owned by a drag queen porn director. This is the level of honor bestowed on Stormy Daniels. And the great star reacted this way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STORMY DANIELS: I'm not sure what the key opens. I'm hoping it's the wine cellar.
This community has a history of standing up to bullies and speaking truth to power. And I'm so very, very lucky to be part of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ARROYO: You know, Laura, they said she was a profile in courage. She is a profile in cleavage. I hope that key opens the door to Talbots so we have full coverage.
INGRAHAM: I threw my blue card in the air.
ARROYO: We didn't talk about the NFL policy. No kneeling, $20,000 penalty if any player does it for that club. This is going to change things.
INGRAHAM: They were losing money. They had to do something.
ARROYO: You bet.
INGRAHAM: Thanks, Raymond, great as always.
Up next, President Trump determined to rid the country of the bloodthirsty and the barbaric MS-13. We will show you how he is going to bring the fight to their turf.
INGRAHAM: President Trump held a round table discussion in Long Island, New York, today on defeating the savage MS-13 gang. Law enforcement, elected officials, as well as gang victims were in attendance. Trump has vowed to destroy the El Salvadoran gang whose control whose motto is "Rape, Control, and Kill."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Democrats, Nancy Pelosi as an example, are trying to defend MS-13 gang members. I called them "animals" the other day, and I was met with rebuke. They said they're people. They're not people. These are animals. And we have to be very, very tough.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Now Long Island is where MS-13 gang members beat and stabbed to death 16-year-old Kayla Cuevas in 2016.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My daughter Kayla was a beautiful girl. She had dreams. And they took that away from her. You said the other day that the individuals were animals. You are correct. They are animals in how they kill, how they get these kids and they torture them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Joining us now from Colorado Springs, "Conservative Review"
senior editor Michelle Malkin and in San Francisco, Clara Long, senior researcher for Human Rights Watch. Great to see both of you. Clara, let's start with you. You take extreme issue with President Trump referring to
MS-13 as "animals." Why?
CLARA LONG, SENIOR RESEARCHER HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH: Laura, thank you for having me. It's not OK to call anyone an animal. We see that kind of rhetoric showing up in human rights abuses around the world and in history.
The Nazis called Jews rats, Rwandans Hutus called Tutsis cockroaches. But listening to the clip of that mother who lost her daughter, I just want to explicitly state we should stay focused here on the pain of those victims.
INGRAHAM: She called them animals, all right, Clara. She is a mother who lost her 16-year-old daughter. I'm an animal person, so I agree that it's an insult to animals. But I don't get how Human Rights Watch -- Michelle, you can chime in here -- this is where the left I think, they always take it a step too far. Most Americans watching the decapitations, the brutal torture, Michelle, you have written about this for years and years and years. They have no problem calling this what it is. It's evil and animalistic, whatever we want to say, but this is a pure moment of evil to see what these people do.
MICHELLE MALKIN, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: It is. And I think evil does something in that it exposes people for their hypocrisy, for their double standards, and for their deflection. Human Rights Watch does a lot of good work, and a lot of the good work concerns calling out and blowing the whistle on and combating sex trafficking. And MS-13, for anyone who is informed and who has been reporting on this for years as I have when I started out my newspaper journalism career in Los Angeles and watched MS-13 metastasize across the country because of radical open borders ideology knows that these monsters in the MS-13, I will call them "monsters," that is what they are. If you're an animal rights person and don't want to call them animals, they are monsters. The way that they have subjugated girls who are homeless and who are weak and who are exploited by this illegal alien gang which has gone from violent crime to lucrative enterprise, criminal enterprise of child sex prostitution rings across the country.
And the ground zero of that is in Long Island. It was also in Montgomery County, Maryland, where I used to live. They have taken over suburban malls like the Gaithersburg Lakeforest Mall. And they use the homeless shelters and middle schools and high schools to subjugate the women. Where is human rights watch to unequivocally condemn the men, the monsters who are doing this to girls and women in our country?
INGRAHAM: Clara, your reaction? I think Michelle is right, you do great work, but I mean on this one you should be praising what Donald Trump is doing here. You don't seem to be.
LONG: We certainly -- we all agree that the United States has a responsibility, that localities have a responsibility to protect women, girls, people, and that no one can condone horrific violence being committed by gangs. Of course.
But the problem here is that the president is playing a game of bait and switch. He is proposing a solution to a real problem of MS-13 and of gang violence that involves cracking down on the asylum system, the asylum system, by the way, which is a system designed to protect the very victims of gangs, often noncitizens fleeing from other countries.
But nonetheless, it also distracts from real solutions to addressing gang violence. And those real solutions have to do with building trust between police and the communities. And doing good police work. That takes into account the concerns of the victims and that really seeks to address the violence the best way that we know how.
INGRAHAM: Michelle, I want you to respond. The "Wall Street Journal"
today building on what Clara just said had a headline that says, "Immigrant bashing helps MS-13." It's an opinion piece. Trump's rhetoric makes it harder for police to work with law-abiding Latinos against the gang, Michelle. And that is basically what Clara is saying.
MALKIN: So let me dispel the open borders ideology and the fog that clouds so much of this discussion and this debate on the left and on the open borders right. MS-13 is what happens when a government and a country allow open borders ideology to metastasize. All of us agree, say Human Rights Watch on the left and the "Wall Street Journal" open borders editorial board on the right, all of us agree that we shouldn't allow bad people to come into the country. And then when you have a president who actually says nope, I'm not going to let them come into the country and I'm going to deport them when they finish up their jail terms for doing things like subjugating women, raping people, using machetes to chop off hands and heads, and gang rapes and all of these brutal, heinous things that Human Rights Watch condemns in every other country except when it is happening in ours.
INGRAHAM: Clara, final thought.
LONG: I would take issue, Michelle, with the characterization of the origin of MS-13. MS-13 was a gang that developed in the United States, and then grew through hard immigration policies that deported people who had grown up here, who had lived here, and who had no other option.
MALKIN: Thanks to the 1986 Reagan amnesty. Let's stop repeating the mistakes of the past.
INGRAHAM: Clara, I've got to say, this is -- I know it's not a Democrat/Republican thing here, I guess. But I imagine you don't like Trump for a whole bunch of reasons. I'm just guessing. I'm really glad you came on the show. You can like Trump or not like Trump, that is fine.
But what he is doing to get rid of these people from this country who, as Michelle said, are doing the most heinous things to communities, including all the legal immigrants that you want more of, they are destroying communities.
LONG: But Laura, you cited this "Wall Street Journal" article that says that --
INGRAHAM: Open borders "Wall Street Journal," but go ahead.
MALKIN: But the way, the policy that the president is promoting is actually making it much harder to address the problem of gang violence in our communities because it's making people fearful of collaborating with the police. We have seen stories like that on Long Island.
INGRAHAM: This is the argument. We need more immigration because otherwise we won't have enough cooperation with law enforcement. More illegal immigration and more legal immigration. If we don't have a flooding of people into the country we will never find the guy who robs a bank.
MALKIN: No, no, no.
INGRAHAM: No one is buying the argument. God bless you. No one is buying your article, because the "Wall Street Journal" has an opinion piece. The next minute you are trashing the "Wall Street Journal" I'm sure for what they're saying about the tax policy. God bless you. Great conversation.
Even when Trump by the way gives the left exactly what they want, they still fight him tooth and nail. You see this. Up next, the anti-Trump hypocrisy from the Democratic politicians that may actually upset their own voters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Prison reform is an issue that unites people from across the political spectrum. It's an amazing thing. Our whole nation benefits if former inmates are able to re-enter society as productive, law-abiding citizens.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: President Trump is seeking common ground on an issue long championed by the left, but many Democrats objected to a prison reform bill the House just passed.
Here to tell us why is Congressman Doug Collins of Georgia who co-sponsored the first step act, a Democrat Hakeem Jeffries of New York. Congressman Collins, thank you for being here late. You do something with Hakeem Jeffries, isn't he pushing impeachment of Trump? I can't remember. It all confuses me. But that is something people want more of, bipartisan work.
And yet the Democrats are kind of all torn up about this, except Hakeem and some others.
REP. DOUG COLLINS, (R) GEORGIA: I think what you find here is when you get a president who is willing to work on issues, when you get a president who is concerned about the working class and he's concerned about everybody in America, putting us first, that's when you begin to reach out and my partner Hakeem Jeffries on this, we understand that you can actually make a difference in people's lives. Isn't that what we are supposed to be about up here, is making difference in people's lives, giving hope to those who are in cells now. These are the kinds of things.
So when you vote against the bill, if you're a Democrat and you voted against this bill yesterday, you voted to keep the ladies shackled while they're giving birth in prison. You voted to not let recidivism, those who need help when they come back out, over 90 percent of our folks, Laura, come back out of prison. We want to make sure we are doing a good job spending federal dollars to make sure we put those away that need to be locked away, like MS-13. They need to be locked away forever or put away.
We need to take those who are coming back out to society and give them tools just like the president said to be productive citizens when they come back out.
INGRAHAM: Second chance at redemption is a powerful narrative in our literature and our country's history. So you give money, $250 million for new funding for prison reentry programs. We spend a lot money with recidivism so you end up saving money if it works. But it is dividing the Democrat Party. Kamala Harris against it, Cory Booker against it. Both of them are going to be running for president in 2020. They both want to shore up their left wing bona fides even though the left was for this. Van Jones said this on CNN today. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN JONES, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: If you hold out for everything, sometimes you get nothing. In the Obama administration, we held out for everything and we wound up with nothing. And I think at the end of the day, what we are going to learn about this country is that where we disagree, we are supposed to fight and fight hard. But let's not forget where we agree we are supposed to work together and work together hard, especially for people who don't have a voice.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Well, so he was supporting, he was at the event supporting the prison reform bill. He is being trashed. A tweet today, Oliver Willis on Van Jones. "Van provides window dressing so racist administration can point to their black friend without really doing anything."
COLLINS: It's amazing. What has become of many of these attacks on this and attacks on Van like that is tolerance in their view is to agree with me. What we have actually become is when we actually express views just like you said, you fight for the things you believe in, but you find areas of agreement. When you have a group right now, the left, that are saying we want more and we want more, what they are actually saying is we don't want to do anything. We like the issue. We like the fact that we're going to be on this issue and not help anybody.
INGRAHAM: They are worried about the black vote turning even five percent more for the Republicans. Giving them a chance, maybe listening to them, they don't want that. Congressman, I'm really glad you are doing what you are doing. Keep doing more of it. I know this is your third term in Congress. You want to be here much longer?
COLLINS: As long as we are doing stuff like this working with this president, yes, we'll continue to work.
INGRAHAM: All right, fantastic. Thanks so much.
And the media has been trying to convince us that schools are the most dangerous place in America for kids. A new report up next that may surprise you.
INGRAHAM: Before we go we want to show you a "New York Times" headline that may cause you to do a double take. Yes, even "The New York Times"
says that school is the safest place in the country for children. Might have gone the opposite impression of late from major media school shooting coverage, but "The Times" acknowledge that federal data show that between
1992 and 2015, fewer than three percent of children homicides occurred at school. Now and then, the old gray lady still finds some news that's fit to print.
That's all we have tonight. Now it's time to hand it off to the great Shannon Bream. Miss Shannon?
<Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>