Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," February 18, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: All right, I'm Laura Ingraham, this is "The Ingraham Angle" from Washington, tonight. The crumbling case of Jussie Smollett and the shameful rise of the hate crime hoaxes in the age of the President, President Trump. Now, while the national media was happy to push the Smollett narrative, we'll speak exclusively to a local reporter who was suspicious from the start.

And breaking just moments ago, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein set to officially step down next month. Very sad. Joe diGenova has been calling for this for a long time. He's here to react with that and a lot more.

And what do former FBI leaders think of that Andy McCabe's interview with 60 minutes last night. Two will join us later in the hour, you do not want to miss it. Unfiltered thoughts from men who are actually there and understood the professionalism required at the FBI.

But first, phony victims who inflict real pain, that's the focus of tonight's Angle. When the Jussie Smollett story first broke, many in the media seemed positively giddy. They were thrilled to push the story that MAGA hatted thugs attacked a black, gay, liberal actor, all in the name of Donald J. Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: After the attack at a star of the TV show "Empire," Jussie Smollett.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Actor and musician Jussie Smollett from the hit show ‘Empire' was attacked and beaten early this morning in Chicago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A Hollywood star whose black and gay and now the victim of a heinous crime.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The idea that racial slurs and maybe even some of the homophobic slurs being used toward him. You can see how serious this crime is right now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Absolutely despicable, this is America in 2019.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Only as the Chicago Police Department investigated Smollett's story. None of it added up. Now police sources are telling various networks that Smollett himself choreographed the attack, paying a pair of Nigerian brothers to carry it out.

Even giving them money to buy rope at a local hardware store to make the news. The trio even rehearsed the encounter in advance, yet just last week the ‘Empire' actor was afforded a friendly platform on GMA to shop and defend his anti-Trump script.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUSSIE SMOLLETT, ACTOR, EMPIRE: I can only go off of their words. I mean, who says, (Beep) this MAGA country.

ROBIN ROBERTS, HOST, GMA, ABC NEWS: Why do you think you were targeted?

SMOLLETT: I can just assume I mean, I come really, really hard against 45. I come really, really hard against his administration. And I don't hold my tongue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: And the Oscar goes to well. But eventually those stubborn things called facts got in the way and suddenly CNN's Brian Stelter and others are now doing the backstroke.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN STELTER, NEWS ANCHOR, CNN: There was a rush to judgment I think it was mostly in the celebrity press and among activists and among Twitter people. I think it was really careful reporting by news organizations.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If it turns out that Smollett did indeed orchestrated this attack, paid the attackers then he's done infinitely more damage to the African American community, people of color.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's a lot to be concerned about here so let's start with the fact that we don't have all the facts, yet we should get them. I think one thing we've learned from how the story is unfolded is what let's wait and see.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Finally, let's wait and see. Well, some journalists seem to fallen into a state of absolute mourning. In the words of the AP's Lindsey Bahr, "The outrage has now been replaced by surprise, doubt and bafflement as the singers, actors and politicians who came out to support the ‘Empire' star struggle to digest the strange twists the cases has taken. Some conservative pundits meanwhile have gleefully seized on the moment."

No Lindsey, you're wrong. It was the left, the political media and Hollywood establishment that seized on the moment because this Smollett tall tale advanced their anti-Trump zealotry.

Now we're learning just the inverse is true. Media and political heavyweights were once again willing to slander innocent people, an entire class of people in a desperate attempt to justify their hatred of Donald Trump.

The democratic 2020 front runners tripped over themselves to fan the flames of the Smollett attack. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris called it, "a modern day lynching and urged anti-lynching legislation in response to the attack.

Well on Sunday Booker suddenly took a more sober, careful approach saying he wouldn't further address the matter, "until all information actually comes out." How convenient. If only he had exercised such caution when the story first broke.

Of course, he tried to get off the defensive really fast so contending at a town hall that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J.: We know in America that bigoted and biased attacks are on the rocks in a serious way and we actually even know in this country since 9/11, a majority of the terrorist attacks on our soil have been right wing terrorist attacks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The man had absolutely zero shame. Ditto for Kamala Harris.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF.: Which tweet, what tweet?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The - about saying that it is a modern day lynching, that -

HARRIS: Sorry.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jussie Smollett.

HARRIS: Okay, so I will say this about that case. I think that the facts are still unfolding and I'm very concerned about obviously the initial allegation that he made, about what might have happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: I like how she does this and then laughs. It's really funny, not. Well, of course, the dim bulbs in the entertainment industry were also eager to advance the MAGA lynching story, taking Smollett at his word despite circumstances but let's face it, we're really fishy from the outset.

Canadian actress, Ellen Page made the pilgrimage to Colbert where she made the mistake of delivering her own lines.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELLEN PAGE, ACTOR: The Vice President of America wishes I didn't have the love with my wife, connect the dots. This is what happens. If you are in a position of power and you hate people and you want to cause suffering to them, you go through the trouble, you spend your career trying to cause suffering.

What do you think is going to happen and people are going to be beaten on the street.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, this is a classic example of wish fulfillment syndrome. When you want something so desperately that you're able to ignore the obvious warning signs. Now think about it this way, the left has stakes so much of their own identity and credibility on the plot line that Trump is a really bad man, that they need him to be a really bad man.

One who inspires vitriol and violence like the sort that the ‘Empire' actor alleged. Now Smollett himself is rapidly anti-Trump and speculation is swirling. That he orchestrated the faux attacked to propel himself to some type of hero status in Hollywood.

In other words kind of think of it the new superhero Jussie, the MAGA slayer. Well, the same rush to judgment though happened recently with the Covington Catholic High School boys when allegations became liberal gospel.

The white kids in the red hats may as well have been wearing white hoods. Like Kavanaugh accusers Christine Blasey Ford and Julie Swetnick before him. Smollett was allowed to dominate a news cycle because his allegations ultimately reflected badly on President Trump or so he hoped.

But where's the justice when the social justice warriors are actually the ones purveying fraud, hatred and poison? Nick Sandman, that Covington Catholic kid is a right to sue everyone who accused him of racism and I hope he wins big.

Brett Kavanaugh had his life turned upside down in the most humiliating way and we're still waiting for the DOJ prosecution of Swetnick and Avenatti and meanwhile, Blasey Ford herself, collected over $800,000 through a GoFundMe account, supposedly applied to cover her security costs.

And as for that Feinstein staffer who likely leaked her original letter, we're still waiting on the Senate Judiciary Committee findings there. But the fact is most of the left wing false accusers operate with impunity because conservatives usually choose to just move on.

That's a huge mistake. If these phonies like Smollett aren't made to pay for their defamatory tall tales, we'll just see more of it as 2020 approaches. Even the man who is in the false narrative hall of fame, seems to kind of agree.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL SHARPTON, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: If it is found that Smollett and these gentlemen did in some way perpetrate something that is not true, they ought to face accountability to the maximum but let's not like this is some Left wing hoax that some are saying on social media.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Oh no, this is not a left wing hoax at all, Al, okay? What is it then? Well, speaking of frauds, maybe Andrew McCabe can argue that the President himself hired Smollett and the Nigerians at the behest of the Russians to carry out the whole thing.

Hey, they might as well try to bring all these fraudulent storylines together. Think about how much fun that will be. And that's THE ANGLE. Joining me now is someone who's done some of the best and some of the most honest reporting on this case from day one.

It's Rafer Weigel and he's a reporter with our Fox affiliate in Chicago and he joins us now. Rafer, when did this story to you, start looking really suspicious?

RAFER WEIGEL, FOX 32 CHICAGO REPORTER: Well as soon as we heard about I first off want to apologize for my casual dress here. I'm actually on a mini vacation with my son here in Las Vegas so I dressed for Cirque de Soleil, I didn't dress for your show.

INGRAHAM: No problem, you're excused.

WEIGEL: Okay, thank you. As soon as police let us know about it, I immediately called my sources at Chicago PD my colleagues and I in the media locally, we were skeptical from the very beginning and so were police but that's our job to be sceptical.

You know it's the old adage, if your mother tells you she loves you check it out so when we started reporting this story in Chicago, we did not report that Jussie Smollett was attacked. We reported that Jussie Smollett says he was attacked.

I've grown up in Chicago, I've lived there most of my life and you know, this was a pretty outlandish claim that he made, given the geography of Streeterville which is a very heavily populated area.

INGRAHAM: Yes.

WEIGEL: A lot of people walking around. You know, something as extreme as this, wearing red hats, carrying bleach, putting a noose around someone's neck, it seemed very unlikely that in that area nobody would have stepped in.

INGRAHAM: Hey Rafer, I have a question.

WEIGEL: They would have video-taped it with their cell phone and -

INGRAHAM: I'm sorry to interrupt this, Rafer, hold on. I have so many questions. Did anyone from the national media call you and say, look, Rafer, you know the area, a long-time resident of Chicago, what are you hearing?

Because I was seeing a lot of people - it was almost gleefully jumping on this story because it fulfilled a narrative that a lot of people on the left or who lean left want to believe, that Donald Trump hates all these people.

WEIGEL: I'm generally a defender of my profession when we get attacked but at the end of the day, we did mostly drop the ball. I mean, we did not at Fox 32 but my media cohorts definitely did when they immediately reported that he was attacked without getting all of the facts.

And when I tweeted out the skepticism that I was getting from within the Chicago Police Department, I was attacked and I didn't take it personally because I did know that they were - you know these were people who wanted a specific narrative.

But I felt confident of my sources that you know, everything that I was learning was accurate. They told me you know, you can bet on this yes, he was carrying the subway sandwich on video when he walked back into his condo. You know, yes, we didn't find this on video anywhere.

So you know, I just stuck to the facts.

INGRAHAM: Yes, they did, didn't they? Now you were attacked and I think everyone watching first of all, thank you for coming on while you're supposed to be with your family, really appreciate it because everyone would have wanted you on their show tonight so thank you for coming on.

This is what Black Lives Matter spokesman said, Deray Mckesson. Okay? He said, I realized today that Chicago reporter Rafer Weigel s responsible for much of the misinformation disseminated by Chicago PD sources about Jussie Smollett as he literally just repeats whatever the police say."

And there were other similar things. Chad Griffin also said something very similar about leaks that were given to local reporters and basically this is why victims of hate crimes, what they fear and why they often stay silent so the microscope was then trained on you and your local reporter colleagues at other networks who are just got like, guys, who walks into their apartment with a noose around their neck? Or waits to take the news -

You know, none of that made sense to kind of just regular work a day reporters and yet, you're attacked.

WEIGEL: Well, I didn't take it personally. I mean, you know, at the end of the day real journalism shouldn't be partisan but I understand, this is a story that became heavily politicized from both the left and the right. Everybody wanted their own narrative and all we wanted to do at my shop was to just stick to the facts.

We do have an intimate relationship with Chicago PD, we have sources in there. They've told us things about this investigation that we are not reporting because we don't want to compromise the investigation, it's a delicate balance.

You know we want to hold them accountable but at the same time we also you know, we have to deliver what we know and sometimes we are getting things from sources that maybe they don't want us to report.

For instance, the fact that the brothers admitted that they were paid, that they did rehearse this and that it was staged. You know, from what I understand, Jussie Smollett was on his way in to talk to police and once it got out that these brothers had essentially rolled over on him, he changed his mind.

And I talked to his crisis manager, Anne Kavanaugh, this morning and she said that they right now, they don't have any plans to bring him in so I mean, in terms of the reports of the grand jury, TMZ came out with that. Police tell me that's premature.

That would only be a last resort if Smollett does not come in voluntarily and right now, they're hoping he still will and it's weird because his attorney said that they're cooperating but right now it does appear that they are.

INGRAHAM: All right, Rafer, thank you so much for joining us and for your reporting on this in a sober, pragmatic and unbiased manner. We really, really appreciate it. By the way, we also learned today that as Rafer just reported, so Smollett is refusing to meet with police.

That according to this statement from his as you heard, crisis management consultant. Yes, he has hired a crisis management consultant. Now Anne Kavanaugh who Rafer's also talking to is saying, "Smollett's attorneys will keep an active dialogue going with Chicago police on his behalf. We have no further comment today."

So at what point does the Chicago Police Department compel Smollett to speak to them. Look, what they did to Roger Stone, they showed up like 17 vehicles and guns drawn. I'm not saying they should do that by the way but I'm just talking about the over-reaction with Stone.

To provide some insight, we're joined by former LAPD Detective, Fox news Contributor, Mark Fuhrman. All right, Mark, I've been dying to talk to you about this case. Number one, from the beginning we had said here on this show, these are really serious allegations, they sound really bizarre but every fact should be followed, every lead - I mean, so this is what we said and it started to get odder and odder as time when on.

But he won't speak to police now and I don't think he's going to speak unless he's compelled to. Does that surprise you?

MARK FUHRMAN, FORMER LAPD DETECTIVE & FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No, not at all. I don't think he's going to because he has nothing to say except for the truth, that they're certainly not going to listen to his lies, they've got everything prepared to actually destroy every kind of alibi, lie or fantasy that he's going to create.

So when you look at this right from the beginning, then the red flags are huge. First, this is not Trump country in Chicago. And the second thing, it wasn't much of a beating. All I saw for injuries was a little scratch on his right cheek. The suspects let him keep the phone in which he was talking to his manager at the time of the attack and the manager heard the yelling and screaming.

So when you look at all this and then no property was taken, there wasn't much of a beating, it's one of those raised eyebrows things that the first officers feel when they get there and they tell the detectives and they go, okay, let's go through the motions but this smells and it smelled from the beginning.

INGRAHAM: Yes, from the beginning. I mean, again, you want to believe people and they make such an incredibly, I mean serious and disturbing allegation. I mean, it's hard to believe people do this but it happens. It happened with Kavanaugh, it happened with the Covington Catholic kids.

It's happened in other cases and it looks like it could very well happen here. Now Mark, so you raised all the red flags in the beginning. I think a lot of people are afraid to talk about those because then you're being you know, critical of someone who's a liberal, African-American, gay and then all those hateful pejoratives come directed to you.

So people were kind of afraid to say that. But now we find out that the police went into the apartment or the place where the Nigerian gentlemen were living. And they ceased a number of things from that apartment and they are cooperating fully with the police.

Can you go through why those items are so important to this investigation? The magazine and bleach and so forth?

FUHRMAN: Well, everything that was involved in Smollett's description of the attack on him, that's what they're looking for in the search warrant. So they have been unavailable, they've been in Nigeria so during this whole time, I think the whole investigation for Smollett really came apart February 11th when he failed and refused to give them unredacted phone records.

That was the first problem. Then they knew that their suspicions were probably true. When they got off the plane and they arrested him and they issued the search warrant and they went in.

When they got these items, now would they know that these two men have been connected to get into the apartment and now they found evidence that further connects them. Now they had to explain it all. When they got to the station, I'm sure they were separated. I'm sure that they were confronted with the evidence and I'm sure they rolled over in a heartbeat.

And they rolled over simultaneously in two different rooms with the exact same story, they corroborated. I wouldn't doubt they gave them polygraphs.

INGRAHAM: Yes.

FUHRMAN: They probably - they probably gave them a money path, how the money was paid. So -

INGRAHAM: And the magazine and the letter that arrived at January 22. They ceased the magazine and maybe those letters were found cut out of that magazine. So this whole thing is - well, the developing facts, we're going to follow where they take us.

Mark, thank you so much for joining us. As just in Smollett and the Covington High school boys fiasco, there are other hate crimes hoaxes that we want to share with you tonight. Dinesh D'Souza will tell us what they reveal about our current culture and a lot more. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: The Smollett hoaxes, one of many that fit a pattern, angry Trumpkins unleash vicious and hate filled attacks against sexual or racial minorities. Now here are just a few of more than dozens that are out there. In December 2016, a Muslim woman said she was attacked by three white Trump supporters in New York City on the subway.

She said they tried to rip off her hijab. Well, it never happened. And then one day after the 2016 election, a student in Bowling Green Ohio said that white males wearing Trump shirts threw rocks at her and hurled racial slurs. Protests in the university town hall ensued.

The student made up the entire incident. And in September of last year, a woman told police on Long Island, she was driving home when four teens confronted her and yelled, Trump 2016.

And then they told her, "she didn't belong here." That too was made up. Here now is Dinesh D'Souza, conservative filmmaker and author. Dinesh, what does this tell us about the current political climate and the culture today?

DINESH D'SOUZA, CONSERVATIVE AUTHOR & FILMMAKER: Well, the first thing it tells us is that these a fake racial incidents have become normalized. When the Tawana Brawley case broke a generation ago, this was a bogus racial incident involving an African-American woman who had claimed to have been abused and battered.

It was anomalous, people really have to scratch their heads because this was such a freak episode but now there's a procession of these bogus incidents, of which the Jussie Smollett case is only the latest.

Now I think for people watching, they're a little baffled because they probably think what kind of dementia causes someone to do this. Why would somebody fabricate an incident and I think that we're dealing here not so much with personal dementia but what can be called ideological dementia.

You touched on it earlier. There's a narrative here that they're trying to advance. The narrative is that the MAGA supporters, the Trump people are a bunch of racists. Now it's obviously a tribute to the Trumpsters that they are not racist because the Jussie Smolletts despite being black, despite being flamboyantly gay are going out there, looking for people to pick on them and nobody is.

So the facts are not supporting the narrative at all so they figure, why not make up the facts, why not adopt the facts to the narrative rather than the other way around and I think this is the demented psychology, the demented progressive psychology that drives these racial, faked incidents.

And the second reason for them is that they get away with it.

INGRAHAM: Well and this is one of my point Dinesh, is that conservatives are quick to sort of say, let's move on, I don't want to dwell on this and the fact that we don't have people in jail after what happened to Brett Kavanaugh with that Julie Swetnick, what Avenatti was pushing, all the promises of evidence of how he was drugging people, spiking the punch bowl, gang rapes.

You know, people just want to move on from that. I say, no way. Otherwise that stuff continues. Same deal with this Smollett case. It occupied everybody's time and the Chicago PD was demonized and of course, Trump supporters are made out to be these horrible, awful, terrible, rotten people.

Because look, your people are doing that to this poor actor.

D'SOUZA: It's important to realize that the Jussie Smollett incident is a hate crime. It's a hate crime but in the opposite direction. Remember, if Jussie Smollett basically wanted to go and beat himself up, that's not against the law.

The real crime here was attempting to pin this blame on a bunch of people who did nothing, on innocent people and it is this idea of trying to ultimately frame Trump supporters for something that Smollett himself perpetrated.

So he is the perpetrator, masquerading as the victim. It's very important that he be held accountable for that. Otherwise the left basically thinks, let's keep trying this stuff, when it works it works, when it doesn't, we get away with it.

INGRAHAM: Dinesh, excellent analysis, as always. Thank you so much.

And it's not enough to reveal these stories as hoaxes. As we are talking about tonight, it's my very important that we run the whole gamut of these phony scandals and hoaxes and what happens after them. Is anyone ever going to do time? Is anyone going to get sued and is it going to stick?

We are going to learn more about this because today Covington student Nick Sandmann's lawyer says he's intending to file defamation suits this week.  Yay. And that got us thinking, whatever happened to the criminal referrals recommended for Michael Avenatti and Brett Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick? And what about the leak of Christine Blasey Ford's story? We reached out to the Senate Judiciary Committee and the DOJ and the FBI today. Only the FBI got back to us. They say they had no comment.

Here now to weigh in, former U.S. attorney Joe diGenova. Joe, who's dropping the ball here? Where are the repercussions for this type of defamatory and I would say criminal behavior?

JOE DIGENOVA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY IN D.C.: The Department of Justice for years has tried to avoid getting involved in these cases and they are trying to do the same thing now. Bill Barr arrived today as the new attorney general, and he's going to have a new deputy attorney general, and I think he will make sure that these cases are looked at.

The Julie Swetnick and Michael Avenatti case where they clearly submitted false affidavits and information to the Senate committee under oath should be prosecuted. It should be put in front of a grand jury for this reason - - we must prevent people from making false accusations during confirmation hearings so that they do not become, again, what the Kavanaugh hearing became. I personally believe not only did Swetnick live. I believe that Christine Blasey Ford lied.

INGRAHAM: Absolutely. Absolutely.

DIGENOVA: I believe her entire -- I believe that her entire testimony was a falsehood, and I believe that she should be put in front of a grand jury and have her testimony investigated to the fullest. There is no doubt in my mind and in my opinion that she testified falsely against Brett Kavanaugh. But this must be investigated across the board, or we will encourage people to do the same thing in the future. We cannot have that.  People --

INGRAHAM: Don't you agree that Republicans always talk a good game in the moment. And you and I discussed this. You were here. Sol Wisenberg was here. They were all tough, like we're going to investigate, we're referring, and then all of a sudden you get nothing. Nothing happened.

DIGENOVA: Well, of course the referral --

INGRAHAM: I think we might have lost Joe. We might have Joe. We might have lost Joe. But I think I know Joe was saying. His point is the referral has to then go somewhere. You can't just say we are referring it and then never follow through. I'm telling you, the left never let's go.  They hold on and they have like a death grip on an issue case, and you've got to give them credit, because they don't say let's just move on. They say how can we make the next point? Joe, thanks so much.

And get this. Some folks on the other networks are seriously referring to disgraced former FBI director Andy McCabe asked a, quote, "patriot." Up next, two former high-ranking FBI officials are going to tell us what they think about his actions. And did you see that "60 Minutes" interview? Oh, my goodness. We are going to play parts of it when we come back. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: What former FBI director Andy McCabe admitted on "60 Minutes" last night should alarm all of you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER DEPUTY FBI DIRECTOR: I didn't know when I'd be out of the job, so I just put my head down and got to work trying to stabilize the people around me and do the things that I felt we needed to do with the Russia investigation, getting cases open, and getting a special counsel appointed.

Is there an inappropriate relationship, a connection between this president and our most fearsome enemy, the government of Russia?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you saying that the president is in league with the Russians?

MCCABE: I'm saying that the FBI had reason to investigate that. We talked about why the president had insisted on firing the director and whether or not he was thinking about the Russia investigation, and did that impact his decision? And in the context of that conversation, the deputy attorney general offered to wear a wire into the White House. Now, he was not joking. He was absolutely serious.

The discussion of the 25th Amendment was simply Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK, just to sum up what he just copped to, the newly promoted McCabe, out of political disdain, took upon himself to become the ultimate resistance hero. He's setting in motion a counter intel investigation against a sitting president of the United States, pushed for a special counsel, and openly discussed removing the duly elected president, commander-in-chief, from office. And folks on the other networks are calling this guy a patriot?

What do former high-ranking FBI officials think about all this? Let's discuss with a couple of the greats, Kevin Brock was the former FBI assistant director for intel, and Terry Turchie was the former deputy assistant director of counterterrorism in the Counterterror Division.  Kevin, you recently penned a piece calling McCabe's reemergence embarrassing. Why?

KEVIN BROCK, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR INTELLIGENCE: It's a huge embarrassment. And I think Terry will agree that for former FBI agents, and I've heard from a lot of current FBI agents right now that what Andrew McCabe is doing and what he did last night further misled the American people and actually manipulated the American people, because now suddenly he's a victim. After perpetrating, along with Jim Comey, severe damage to the FBI because of their now what we know clear biases, he is going on a book tour to sell books.

INGRAHAM: Everyone is selling books. All of former FBI guys are all pushing their books. Got to make money.

BROCK: Which is just amazing to us. So he is trying to rehabilitate himself. But the damage is done, and he continues to do more damage. He has claimed, as you just pointed out, when he became acting director, he went on a binge of opening cases against the president of the United States. On the "60 Minutes" interview last night, he was deceptive and misleading.

INGRAHAM: How so? Give us a little --

BROCK: He stated that he had clear and articulable facts for opening up an FBI --

INGRAHAM: What were those facts? I'm still waiting for the facts.

BROCK: He said the president criticized our investigation, that was number one. Not a reason for opening up a case. He said that the president directed James Comey to let Michael Flynn off the hook. No, he didn't. If you go back and look at James Comey's notes, he didn't say that. He said that Rod Rosenstein's was pressured to put the Russia investigation -- so there was all these things that don't rise to the level of opening up legitimately --

INGRAHAM: But he looked really earnest, Terry. He looked really earnest.  This guy Malcolm Nance was on MSNBC, he's a former counterterror specialist, and this is how he describes, Terry, McCabe last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MALCOLM NANCE: These phrases, taking down an elected president, a bureaucratic coup. This is Donald Trump's characterization of what the patriots at the FBI and the Department of Justice who were defending the Constitution of the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Terry, that's all he was doing, defending the Constitution.

TERRY TURCHIE, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, FBI COUNTERTERRORISM:  Yes, he sure was. I'll tell you, Laura, first of all, I couldn't agree more with what Kevin just said to you. And I can't even watch this again tonight without my blood boiling. I'll make three points. Number one, as Kevin well knows, as all of us who worked in the FBI in those positions know, what he essentially told us last night is after having unverified information for a year in the form of the Christopher Steele dossier, and then going to the White House and being angry because former Director Comey had been fired, and not liking the president's demeanor and the way he delivered words, he decided to go back and that the man was a great threat to America. That's about what we got last night, and that's about what the FBI had.

It is embarrassing. It is just egregious. And I never thought in my lifetime I'd see this. And it's interesting that he opened that case in May of 2017. We had just come off by a couple months, March, April, going back to do January of 2017, where guess what had happened. We had the outgoing Obama administration unmasking people in the Trump transition team. Don't tell me that the collusion is now starting to come together and it's not all pointing to the president and Russia. It's pointing directly at politics in the top layer of the FBI. And Kevin knows and I know and anybody who has been in those spots up there on the seventh floor knows that the FBI agents who were working in those top positions were not following the rules, the guidelines, or all the policies put together for decades to protect this.

INGRAHAM: Guys, for both of you, what kind of FBI acting director convenes or takes part in a meeting about the 25th Amendment and removing the president? Is that part of what an acting FBI director's responsibility is, to pronounce over meetings or to take part in them?

BROCK: He should have immediately got up and excused himself from that meeting and said I will not be part of this discussion. First of all, the FBI has no jurisdictional interest or abilities in the 25th Amendment discussion, so he should have immediately recognized he had no role and should not have been in the meeting.

INGRAHAM: Terry, Bill Barr just sworn in last week as the new attorney general of the United States, former and now current. How does he proceed here? It's almost like the entire FBI has to be dismantled and kind of reborn to restore its integrity, because a lot of good people do work there. But it is so tainted now. This whole investigation was a fraud from the outset, and it is patently obvious to anyone who will take off their political partisan cap and just look at the facts. And I think Andrew McCabe gave it away last night. He gave it away. I thought it was so obvious they had nothing of Trump.

TURCHIE: Exactly. And I think the big problem confronting the new attorney general is this, and a lot of people may not want to get into this discussion. As we have a political party, the Democratic Party, turning harder and harder left, which in itself is a major national security risk, we also do not know exactly to this day exactly what happened in the FBI, whether there still exists within the FBI these kinds of issues, perhaps people appointed by McCabe before he left.

And we need to get to the bottom of all these things that are still out there in the universe and all these loose ends. People need to know who orchestrated all this, because it is absolutely just unbelievable that there is not somebody behind all of this that pulled it together and compromised the FBI. And we are not even getting into the fact we could've had anything from bribes to greed to ego. All of these things are factors here.

Kevin and I never saw in the FBI anything like this. In fact, we always prided ourselves, as we left, pass along the FBI we found a little bit better to the next generation. This didn't happen this time.

INGRAHAM: Rosenstein is out. Barr has his new deputy, Jeff Rosen, former partner at Kirkland and Ellis. He's a really good guy. Is it time to finally -- just like at the beginning of the show, you need repercussions for bad behavior. Will there be?

BROCK: I have already appeal and articles to the new attorney general to launch an investigation into the actions of James Comey and Andrew McCabe.  These two colluded and fed off each other's biases to do a lot of damage to the FBI.

INGRAHAM: Both of you, incredible conversation. I know you guys don't do a lot of TV. Thank you so much for joining us tonight.

Tennis legend Martina Navratilova is coming out her huge fire for what she said about transgender women competing in women's events. Now, is it a form of cheating? That white-hot debate next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Do transgender athletes have an unfair advantage when competing in women's sports? Tennis hall of famer Martina Navratilova, a gay rights advocate, said this week of transgender women competing in female sports, quote, "To put the argument at its most basic, a man can decide to be a female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organization is concerned, win everything in sight, and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to making babies if he so desires.  It's insane and it's cheating. I'm happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her."

Here now to debate, Cyd Ziegler, founder of OutSports.com, and Meg Kilgannon, a member of Hands Across America. Cyd, here are some of the tweets coming in about Martina Navratilova. We all grew up watching Martina, huge fan, huge tennis fan. This is Rachel McKinnon, "Martina Navratilova has removed all doubt she is absolutely transphobic." Another tweet, Trans Actural says "We're pretty devastated to discover that Martina is transphobic. If transwomen had an advantage in sport, why aren't transwomen winning gold medals left, right, and center, et cetera."

Cyd, biologically, isn't this pretty tough for women to compete against men who transition into a new gender because their bodies are still different, broader shoulders, stronger upper body, et cetera. How is it fair?

CYD ZIEGLER, LGBT SPORTS WRITER AND ADVOCATE: Thanks for talking about this. If you look across the history of transgender female athletes, not a single one of them has ever dominated their sports. Lots of people like Martina Navratilova throw up these boogiemen and of men who are somehow going to seek fame and fortune in women's sports. Martina knows perfectly well how undervalued women's sports are in our culture. So this bogeyman that she throws up is totally ludicrous. And again, no trans woman has ever dominated any sport.

INGRAHAM: But it's kind of just starting, right? But it's kind of just starting. To be fair, it's just kind of starting, correct.

ZIEGLER: I don't know. Renee Richards was playing tennis in the 1970s.  And there have been plenty of others.

INGRAHAM: I get it, I get it. In Connecticut, where I'm from, there's a real controversy involving track and field. And Andraya Yearwood dominates, and not fully transitioned, I guess, but dominates in beating everyone.

MEG KILGANNON, MEMBER, HANDS ACROSS AMERICA: Absolutely. They took state titles away from girls in that situation. This is a ridiculous argument that women are not going to suffer because men are competing in our sports.  That's just ridiculous on its face.

INGRAHAM: But what about the argument of equality? That trans-athletes want to compete in the area they want to compete in and they make it an inequality thing. So if you oppose them, you are horrible, awful, rotten person.

KILGANNON: Transwomen are men, and women should not be forced to compete against men. This is basic fairness. I'm really grateful for Martina for speaking out. She's going to make a lot of space for more women and more athletes to speak out on this and say what we really believe, which is the women should not have to compete against men in sports. It's very simple.

INGRAHAM: Cyd, you must be a big fan of Martina. She's openly gay, advocate, been out there for years doing so much for women sports, girl sports of high school. She's done a huge amount. I was a pretty big athletes, so I love that. So to call her transphobic, I think people just lose credibility when they start going after Martina Navratilova as some hater. Come on.

ZIEGLER: I watched Martina in the '80s in '90s. She's a hero. She's a hero for a lot of people, for women, for gay people. But on this issue, she's wrong. Men are not streaming into women's sports to cheat or steal metals away from women. Transwomen are --

INGRAHAM: So your argument is that they are not doing it? But your argument is they are not doing it. It is a biological fact that internal organs of men are bigger, right? The heart, the lungs, they have a larger capacity. That's not a hateful thing to say. It's just a fact. So --

ZIEGLER: Yes, but it's also a fact --

INGRAHAM: So if people aren't dominating now, if the top 100, or top 1,000 men in tennis wanted to get into women sports and were transitioning or whatever, they could dominate the sport pretty well. And I bet that's what Martina knows because she played at the top, top level.

ZIEGLER: I think there's a real debate to be had about what at elite level sport, what trans policy should be. And it also fact that when you stop testosterone and you start estrogen, many of you advantages change.

INGRAHAM: I don't think your shoulders or your hips -- we are out of time.  We should go a whole hour on this. Guys, thank you for joining us. Last Bite when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You read one story after another or hear it, and it's all based on one anonymous administration official, former administration official, right? That's not journalist. That's --

The responsibility for fake news begins with us. If we -- we bear some responsibility for that we're not taking ownership of that and addressing it. We just want to blame it all, you know, on somebody else. And that's not how life works, right?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Kudos to Lara Logan for laying bare what we all know about the media. Too many anonymous sources, not enough facts. Pause before you make a conclusion. Put an outrageous allegation out there. That's all the time we have tonight. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team take it from here.

And I have Shannon's new book in my office. I just got it, although it's not out yet. And I thought it was. So I'm promoting it all over the place and now people can't buy it. What is that?

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.