This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," June 5, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Good evening from Washington, I am Laura Ingraham and this is the Ingraham Angle. We are breaking major news on the Angle with an exclusive interview, believe it or not, Gennifer Flowers joins us live for her first interview in years. She has a new bombshell allegation against Bill Clinton. You are not going to want to miss this. Plus President Trump makes a statement by celebrating the nation instead of the National Football League. But first we have big breaking news from Capitol Hill on two fronts. Former FBI Director Andrew McCabe is reportedly asking for immunity before he offers testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley wants McCabe, Former FBI Chief Jim Comey and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch to testify when the IG Report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation is finally released.
On a separate front, Fox news Chief Intelligence Correspondent Catherine Herridge is reporting this, a law maker telling her that FBI espionage Chief Bill Preistap, who oversaw the Russia and Clinton Probes has been very cooperative with Congressional Investigators. Priestap was also the supervisor of FBI agent Peter Strzok who bashed President Trump of course, remember in several texts. The source says that Strzok played an even larger role than we thought initially in the Clinton email probe and the Russia investigations. Let's discuss all of this now with Congressman Ron Desantis, a member of the House and Judiciary Committees, House Oversight and Judiciary Committees Democratic Strategist Richard Goodstein and Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Robert Driscoll. Gentlemen it's great to have you, big breaking news tonight. Congressman Desantis, where do we begin?
Let's start with this immunity plea for McCabe. Every time you hear someone connected with Trump who might want immunity it's like, "Oh my God do you want to immunity, you must be guilty". But what's going on here?
REP. RON DESANTIS, R—FLORIDA: Well look James Comey sent Andrew McCabe stood tall, was just this model leader and now he wants immunity because he knows he's in jeopardy with his conduct over this investigation, both the Clinton and the Trump investigation. I would not give him immunity. I would make him go and if he pleads the Fifth Amendment, then he should plead the Fifth Amendment. But the idea that he should get some type of get out of jail free card for this is not something I think the American people would want to see.
RICHARD GOOSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: So the President said in tweets about McCabe lied, lied, lied. He personally called McCabe's wide a loser, right classy move. The point is--
INGRAHAM: What you are talking about, we have very limited time, let's keep this focused on the Former Deputy Attorney General wanting immunity.
If he has nothing to hide, if he was above board, if he had permission to release information to the media, why is he asking for immunity? That's what you guys do at the Committee correct?
GOODSTEIN: What I'm saying is that. When the President asks for the Fifth Amendment pleads, what you just said, bring that back. Look the reason is--
INGRAHAM: When is the President asking for the Fifth Amendment?
GOODSTEIN: Well everybody seems to suggest that night be an--
INGRAHAM: I'm not everybody.
GOODSTEIN: If you've got a President who issues pardons willy-nilly, has no qualms about having the justice department go after somebody, so McCabe would be out of his mind not to seek immunity when you've got somebody at the top who basically overseas the justice department.
INGRAHAM: Richard, his own lawyer is saying he's concerned about his client being prosecuted.
GOODSTEIN: He should be when you've got the President going after people like crazy, right.
INRGAHAM: But this is a criminal referral, though that was made by the inspector general. I mean the inspector general laid the predicate for this, did he not Richard? I mean I get it that you don't like Trump and that's fine, it's big nation and I'm glad we have all opinions on the show. But this is someone who is a non-partisan consummate professional Inspector General called his credibility and basically said he's prevaricating to put it very kindly, in dealing with the media. And now he's been asked to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Robert you can chime in, you've got a lot of experience with this, and he wants immunity. I mean that's not the first time someone's asked for immunity but this is a wild series of developments we've had with the former Deputy FBI Director.
ROBERT DRISCOLL, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well it's a smart move from his lawyer because if he gets immunity from judiciary then he is free from prosecution by DOJ. So you'd rather have a day of embarrassment before Committee than do time but I think it's always a tradeoff between transparency and justice when Congressional Committees and DOJ are deciding whether or not to grant immunity. I mean the benefit to immunity would be he would testify on national TV with no ability to plead the fifth. He would have to say everything he knows and everybody would hear it. And I think Chairman Grassley would have to weigh that against waiting to see what happens with the DOJ prosecution which could take additional months.
DESANTIS: I think also, does he have evidence, there at least some reports suggesting that he may have affirmative evidence and Comey did know about this that he, McCabe has gotten nailed for, Comey said no he did not authorize that. So if he was producing something like that, that may be one reason that--
INGRAHAM: But he always backs up Comey right? He always backs up Comey when Comedy's--
DESANTIS: Oh I think they're referents are diverging out.
INGRAHAM: They are but before with the Trump conversation with Comey and he basically said yeah, Comey put in his memo to the files so they obviously were very tight.
DRISCOLL: On the leak he said Comey approved and Comey said he didn't approve it. So they're in direct contradiction on that.
INRGAHAM: Yeah so they have diverged. Let's move onto the IG Report and then back to another Strzok issue. This IG Report, the President obviously very frustrated again, I wouldn't be tweeting about lives delayed but the President is going to tweet, he's the President and he's going to tweet. But on the issue of the IG Report, why do you think this is delayed? We keep hearing it's going to be out any day--
DESANTIS: I guess that's the problem Laura, we have a bureaucracy that is just not accountable to anybody. So we had all these major problems and the Democrats are actually the ones who wanted this report initially. So in order to hold people accountable, if it takes a year and half to conduct an investigation? So I'd say the time is just too much--
INGRAHAM: What's the point, you need a speedy trial, you need a speedy resolution, it's 500 pages. However, Robert Driscoll, I will get back to Richard too but Robert, could the McCabe request for immunity have some relevance in this delay in the Inspector General's Report?
DRISCOLL: I think people are overblowing the delay. I mean I have represented people in this situation. When the report's done, everybody who's represents someone who's in the report, gets their little chunk of the portion that mentions their client, gets to review it alone in a room and not take it with them and has about a week to get back with any comments to the IG, who then decides whether or not to take them into account or not. So the fact that its two weeks after it's done, is about on time. I'd be concerned if it took another week or so but right about now is about when it should be coming out in my experience, from when the report is done to when you work through that process. And in this circumstance, there's a lot of high-powered lawyers involved, I'm sure are billing lots of hours, making objections, hopefully--
INGRAHAM: A lot of lawyers make a lot of money here.
GOODSTEIN: Can I say something in support of the Congressman?
GOODTSEIN: I also want this report to come out as soon as possible but I think I have different reasons. One, I think we are going to hear what Giuliani was getting in the way of information from the southern district from FBI agents which allowed him to basically say, before it happened that the second Comey letter was going to come out. Secondly I think what we are going to see is that Comey, yes acted inappropriately in ways that helped the Trump campaign. He sat on information about the Russian investigation about the Trump campaign and was way out there in ways that broke the rules both in July and in October by what he said about the Hillary email investigation so I'm with you, I agree. I hope it comes out tomorrow.
INGRAHAM: What do you guys make of this new text? Well it's not a new text, it's an un-redacted text. And this is a text between Peter Strzok and Lis Page. Now we learn this today because this was released as part of the500 pages of text released by the Senate today and here's what this looks like. It says, "You'll get our onus lures approved?" Just so you know that lures is FBI lingo for spy so the question tonight, were these spies potentially sent into target the Trump campaign going back to December of 2015? And if so that could be fairly explosive, could it not Congressman because Jim Comey said this investigation began in July, July 31st to be exact of 2106. That text, again we'll learn more about and I know the House is not exactly where the Senate is on this. But when you read that text, it certainly appears that they were looking to put more lures into the campaign in 2015, several people are reporting this tonight we'll learn more I believe, but what do we think about that? Why did they redact that word `lures'. That was redacted--There's a link), it comes back saying lures there, lures again, lingo for spies.
DESANTIS: Exactly. That was initially redacted. So the question is why would that have been redacted? Is that referring, I mean oh Cohen is a potentially foreign spy but I think this idea that Crossfire Hurricane started this on July 32st, clearly that's not true because you had Comey, you had McCabe and Lynch deciding not to brief Trump in April when they were supposedly concerned about Carter Page. You had Stefan Halper reaching out to the campaign before that so this did not just start on the 31st of July.
INGRAHAM: Well Comey testified in May of 2017--
DESANTIS: And I think he's had exposure as a result of that testimony.
INGRAHAM: So you are saying he--
DESANTIS: I don't think he was telling the truth there no. I don't think that's true.
INGRAHAM: Is there any way that he would have known, if this was true, if this had started earlier perhaps in May. And Bill Priestap, a question about him?
DESANTIS: Priestap travelled to London. So he's the head of counter intelligence, Peter Strzok was number two. Now Priestap has just said Strzok was really the main guy in both the Hillary and Russian investigations. Obviously he wanted Hilary President, he hated Trump with a passion but Priestap himself travelled to London in May of 2016, that was again, two months before Crossfire Hurricane started.
GOODSTEIN: Again, I'm going to disagree with the Congressman a little bit here. What's twisted about this at the end of the day, when Strzok remember drafted the Comey letter 10 days before the election. It was his idea to kind of put that out there. He's also said bad things about Burney, about Chelsea, about Holder, in addition to Trump, the same things that Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz were saying during the campaign. The fact is the FBI helped, when you look back, helped Trump by sitting on the information about him and hurt Hilary by breaking the rule and putting everything out there.
INGRAHAM: Was it that embarrassing?
DESANTIS: The reason why they put the letter out was not to help Trump, it was to protect their own behind. Strzok wanted to protect his behind and Comey's behind, that's why they did it. You're right, in July Comey should not have come out and done that, but once he came out and gave the press conference, he kind of had to do the letter. I think the letter was a mistake and he should have handled it from the beginning.
INGRAHAM: I thought she was going to win. Robert on this issue with the texts though, again we are going to learn more, but they redacted the word `lures', again the lingo for spies. FBI is not supposed to use the word spies, so they use that word, non-contiguous, unidentified, informant. So `oconus' was there, that acronym and then `lures' was un-redacted, now you see what it was saying. That's again, you get all our `lures' approved? I love the little smiley face, couldn't they have used an actual emoji? They never use that. And it goes on for--
DRISCOLL: Well I think so much of this has to do-I think the timeline has the most damaging thing for people here because people using a bureaucratic term when they say, `an investigation was opened'. Well that means nothing if there was investigative activity going on before the investigation was opened. So even the FBI said, "Well some of these contacts from our informants/spies occurred leading up to the investigation". Well it kind of like did God create the earth? Who created God? Who created that, who created that? So somebody has to approve the--
INGRAHAM: Who approves what, when? Hold on, this thing was supposed to have begun kind of started ,sort of when that list of Trump foreign policy advisors, national security advisers came out and Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, their names were on it in the spring of 2016. But now if this goes back to 2015 again, if this is, what were they worried about? I mean Strzok, they were petrified of Trump. Who knows, maybe they thought Trump was going to catch on, maybe, who knows.
DESANTIS: One of the later Strzok-Page texts the next fall was, Potus wants to know exactly what we are doing. So when did Obama know about this and when was he briefed on this, I don't think he was in the dark about this the whole time at all. I think that Obama knew exactly what was going on.
GOODSTEIN: Can we just remember that we've had whole segments on shows like this about the Strzok Secret Society, about the Strzok lost emails. So let's try to figure exactly, yeah I agree we need to get to the bottom of this but to kind of assume--
INGRAHAM: Yeah I know I'm quoting (caveats) here, I agree with you. But those are technical acronyms that are used within the bureau. Those aren't like love messages between the two of those, I'm sure people are fascinated by those two but those are technical terms. So it seems like did you get approval for these lures and waiting for the answer.
GOODSTEIN: But there were no spies. There was one guy who basically made a couple of approaches to people who had been targeted by the CIA and the FBI right?
INGRAHAM: Well we know that it want just Carter Page. Now the report came out in Daily Collar Foundation that also Steven Miller was invited to that same event. What else do we know about that?
DESANTIS: Papadopoulos and then they reached out to Sam Clovis and here's the thing, in New York Times in their big article, they said at least one person so there is the possibility that there was more than just Stefan Helper who was just trying to initiate these contacts.
INGRAHAM: Yes so July 2016, the event at the University of Cambridge, it looks like they were trying to get all the Ecobate Nationalists like Miller, I mean you like Russia, you come over here. Come on Steven Miller is really a Russian plant but, again, the timeline is important because we don't have documents, do we? We don't have a lot of FBI documents from the time period before July 31st, that's why you're gradually getting the texts, we want the documents.
DESANTIS: They are refusing to produce the documents.
GOODSTEIN: But let's remember, we heard from Papadopoulos and the others that the Russians are trying to get dirt on Hillary. Not one person in the Trump campaign went to the US authorities, not one. That's a little bad. I think that's bad.
INGRAHAM: Do you think this Papadopoulos, this character, he's trolling bars in London and he's like, "I'm going to go back to Trump Towers and I'm going to be the cool guy, I'm going to set up a meeting with Trump". He is like the worst person having a campaign, come on.
DESANTIS: But Alexander Downer, in a recent interview, he said, "I've never heard about any emails, I heard dirt I didn't hear emails". So--
INGRAHAM: That's really an ambassador, right? I think we have to have a deck of cards in Iraq where you have to X every off face with every title. Guys fantastic, as always. And up next in the "Angle," I'm going to reveal the real reason that he Democrats' big midterm election dreams might be turning into a kind of a nightmare. Don't go away. The Headless Houseman. That's the focus of tonight's "Angle." If you are wondering whether the Democrats are on the verge of blowing what is traditionally a huge opportunity to pick up seats in the midterm election cycle? Well you may be on to something. Now normally the party in power loses seats in the cycle following a Presidential election. So Democrats thought that picking up dozens of seats was going to be pretty easy. All they needed to do was to run against Trump, nationalize the election and the House majority would be theirs. But now they must confront or try to distract from Trump's stellar economic record. Now they are in a difficult spot because they have to convince voters to vote against their own pocket books this fall, and that's a tough climb. But let's ask a few fundamental questions here. What's the future of the Democrat Party and whose going to lead it? Massachusetts Democrat Congressman Seth Moulton, addressed the question on MSNBC earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KASIE HUNT, MSNBC HOST: Who is the leader of the Democratic Party?
SETH MOULTON, DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN: Who is the leader of the Democratic Party?
MIKE BARNACLE, MSNBC HOST: That's what she asked. She asked you that.
MOULTON: Does my silence say something?
HUNT: Yeah it does.
MOULTON: I mean this is the challenge that we have right now and I don't think that people are looking at Leader Pelosi, with all due respect to her, and saying here is the future of our party.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Pray tell why not. Well so who is the future of the Democratic Party? He was honest there. Let me think, California Senator Kamala Harris?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELLEN DEGENERES, THE ELLEN DEGENERES SHOW HOST: If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?
KAMALA HARRIS, CALIFORNIA SENATOR: Does one of us have to come out alive?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: How about New Jersey Senator Cory Booker?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CORY BOOKER, D—NEW JERSEY: Why is this so important, why is this so disturbing for me? Why am I practically seething with anger? Your silence and your amnesia is complicity.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Very angry. What about Massachusetts Senator, Elizabeth Warren?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELIZABETH WARREN, MASSACHUSETTS SENATOR: And my Aunt Bee has walked by that picture a thousand times, remarked that her father, my papa, had high cheek bones like all of the Indians do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Or Joe Biden? Yes I said Amtrack Joe Biden who even now is touring the country on a book tour.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Stand up Chuck, let them see you. Oh God love you, what am I talking about?
You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunking Doughnuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.
You know I wish we were in high school and I could behind the gym.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: And punch him in the mouth. Did he say punch him the mouth there? We could have just done the whole show on Biden because we were in the car early and I was screaming laughing with Raymond okay, if you are in a bad mood, watch Joe Biden on YouTube. And by the way, he told us that Trump uses violent rhetoric, Biden's always ready to punch someone out.
While meanwhile billionaire Starbucks founder Howard Schultz is also reporteldy mulling a move into politics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOARD SCHULTZ, STARBUCKS CEO: It concerns me that so many voices within the Democratic Party are going so far to the left and I ask myself how are we going to pay for all these things? In terms of things like single payer, people espousing the fact the government is going to give everyone a job and I think we've got to get away from all these falsehoods and start
talking about the truth and not false promises.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Well okay but there's only one problem, for Democrats, Trump has been speaking truth and has been delivering real promises as President.
Now, he's connected with the forgotten voters the Democrats now seek and he's actually made their lives better. Trump's Real Clear Politics Approval Rating Average is now at 44.6%. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 17 years. And the RCP Politics Average on the direction that the country is going in is up to nearly 40% up from 27% two years ago under Obama. So all that's eft for the Democrats to prattle on about are all these side issues, like Cable News Catnip, irrelevant to the loves of most people.
Do Americans really care whether a cabinet secretary bought a used mattress at the Trump Hotel? Why did he do that by the way? Or was it Jared Kushner get his security clearance or the endless speculations about the whereabouts of the First Lady after surgery? Well if you are like most people, you care about pocket book issues. Your safety and your culture in decline all around you and your children. All the things that Trump is fearlessly addressing and winning on. So the left gripes and moans about the only things they have left to them, which is basically the small stuff.
It's meant to distract the President and lure him onto their turf. I am telling you, it is not working. They are going to need a new game plan if they are going to get to the two big things that the Democrats lack, a
leader and an agenda. And that's the Angle.
Let's discuss this with Monica Crowley, Senior Fellow at the Center for Policy Research, famed Pollster Frank Luntz and Chris Hahn, former aide to Senator Chuck Schumer. All right Chris, have at it because it's your party
and you'll cry if you want to, go ahead.
CHRIS HAHN, FORMER AIDE TO SENATOR CHUCH SCHUMER: Well look, we didn't know that Donald Trump would lead the Republican Party to two and half years ago and look what happened. We never knew that Barack Obama would lead the Democratic Party in the midterms in 2006 and the Democrats swept to power in 2006. The Republicans swept to power in 2010 with the Tea Party Movement that had nothing to do with one individual Republican. And I truly believe that in this midterm election, you're going to see the Democrats make great waves. Not because of some big national leader that they pick, but because individual candidates that run in races show that the Trump agenda is not doing what it promised.
HAHN: And also remember this, a lot of people who support Donald Trump, even if they like him right now, there's a good percentage of people who still don't trust him and want to see a Congress that will put a proper
check on him and that's what they are going to vote for in November.
FRANK LUNTZ, REPUBLICAN POLLSTER: Your introduction is the best description that I have seen, you really don't need us here today. Number one is Nancy Pelosi is the most unpopular politician in America today.
Number two is that the Democrats cannot point to anything that they have actually done, all they've got is obstruction. And number three, with the economy as strong as it is, I'm surprised you didn't talk about Tax cuts because with ever month more people realize they are keeping more money in their pockets. When you give them three reasons to vote Republican, all the GOP has to do is two things, one is get a vote on speaker before election date to force the Democrats to actually cast a vote for Pelosi. And the second is one more piece of legislation such as a job requirement for food stamps, that's the kind of thing that makes a difference.
INGRAHAM: Monica this what Doug Schoen, remember Doug was the pollster for Bill Clinton and he worked tirelessly and right after that '94 Newt Gingrich historic win and he said this last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOUG SCHOEN, DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER: Well let me say it bluntly. The Democratic Party is in a civil war between the moderates, a shrinking group that speak for and represent in my own way. And the surging progressives who represent basically socialism and a series of policies that guarantees
outcomes, rather than opportunities.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: I mean is that fair Howard Schultz sounded kind of moderate in that sound bite, he said "Look we can't keep on spending all this money that we don't have". He sounded a little more like Bill Clinton frankly than he did someone like a Cory Booker or a Elizabeth Warren.
MONICA CROWLEY, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah so if Howard Schultz decides to run Laura, he's going to get run over like a mad truck. Because the Democratic Party of today is Barack Obama's Democratic Party. Barack Obama remade the party as a far left institution and when we talk about does the Democratic Party have any natural leaders? Given that Bill Clinton just blew himself up and this is Clinton is still whining why me, the de facto leader of the Democratic Party remains Barack Obama. It is his ideology that is guiding this party and anybody who wants to have success in this party has got to be a member of the radical left. That's does translate into widespread electoral success in this country. Obama was the exception to the rule, he was an extraordinary candidate, but what we have seen since then is that that coalition that he put together that won for him in 2008 and then in '12 was unique to him. Mrs. Clinton couldn't recreate it and certainly nobody else can on the Democratic side can.
INGRAHAM: Well they are registering all these kids to vote. They got all the gun control kids, they are out there going around on a bus, they're doing all sorts of stuff. They say they have energy and mojo and they're going to turn out to vote. Chris Hahn, Chris Matthews made some interesting comments about creeping elitism in your party. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC COMMENTATOR: A true Democrat, lower case d, thinks to know better than anybody else. That's what a Democrat is and a party regains that with White, Black, Hispanic people, everybody starts to think of themselves as one of them, instead of being better than them. They go back to the party of the people, and they are not there yet. There's so much elitism in the Democratic Party. It's so outrageous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: It the old bubble of the quotes of Tom Wolfe, the late Tom Wolfe said, "There's America. The coasts are like the parentheses". I think that's what he is kind of talking about.
HAHN: I don't disagree with that but I think you can find in any party. I think that you can find people that think that they are better than anything. And look, everything that Doug Schoen said in that clip, I could show you a clip from 2010 that's says the same thing about the Republican Party. How the people --
INGRAHAM: And that's how you won a historic victory exactly. I wrote a book about called `The Power of the People'.
HAHN: Exactly. But we have these situations where the people are, there is an insurgence coming on right now in the Democratic Party. It's slightly to the left of where it's been. And that's going to bring a lot of energy with it and it's going to sweep to power. And we are going to have our own Louie Gomertz get elected this year, who people are going to be like, "how is that person a Congress person?" But that's going to happen in 2018. Watch it, it will happen.
INGRAHAM: Well I see the people like Tester Montana who are stand up and supposed to be this big moderate force, even Joe Machin or Claire McCaskill, Joe Donnelly but they're not the cool crown in the Democrat Party. They are kind of like the ugly step children of the Democrat Party, that's my sense. But you're out there polling.
LUNTZ: I'll give you specific. Joe Kennedy, the Congressman from Massachusetts. He's a whole generation younger than Nancy Pelosi, what would happen if they put him up as leader? Or Joe Crowley from New York?
The Democrats have a whole generation that are waiting to come through. She won't give up and that is a big mistake for them. On the Senate side, Democrats had a significant opportunity to pick up as many as three of four seats, they are not going to this time. I actually think that now, look at the generic numbers. The Republicans are in a better position today than they have been in any time in 11 months. You know I'm a pessimist, but I'll tell you that the GOP is putting together the ingredients for success. What they better not do is they better not divide themselves and they better focus on the economy if they want to bring those voters in.
HAHN: You wouldn't bet on them now Frank, not even a little bit?
LUNTZ: But look at Mitch McConnell, I know what you were going to say.
INGRAHAM: Mitch McConnell on the recess. Monica has to get a word in here. Cancelling the August recess, I've been begging them to do this for months and months and months. I think we talked about it a couple Angles ago. Monica, that's exactly -- we are doing the people's business. Let the Democrats go to the beach or do whatever they are going to do.
MONICA CROWLEY, LONDON CENTER FOR POLICY RESEARCH: Yes, and I think he made absolutely the right move today. I just hope and pray that they follow through on it and actually do work through August, because you will recall, Laura, that last year Senator McConnell made the same move and said we are going to work for two weeks through August. They didn't even last through the first Thursday of the first week. So I hope that they mean what they say on this and that they will be there and they will confirm the president's nominees and get these spending bill through and to price points, they've got to get spending up for the wall.
CHRIS HAHN, SYNDICATED RADIO HOST: They are staying but they are not staying just to confirm. They are staying to watch the president. They are very concerned about what the president may or may not do and how it will affect --
INGRAHAM: That's not it at all.
LUNTZ: Make up a better -- I understand your job is to make stuff up.
Make up something more --
INGRAHAM: OK, McConnell will be on our show exclusively tomorrow night, so we're going to talk to him about all of this. It could be an amnesty deal in the making, who knows? But stay right there, fantastic panel, all of you, love all of you.
Now we're going to have some other breaking news now on Bill Clinton in just a moment when Gennifer Flowers joins me for her first interview in six years. Wait until you hear what she is now ready to reveal next.
INGRAHAM: Bill Clinton is stumbling as he tries to explain his past in the me to era Me Too era. Clinton lost his cool yesterday on the "Today" show while insisting he does not owe Monica Lewinsky an apology. He was flustered again last night while claiming he does not owe her a face-to- face apology.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: I apologized to my family, to Monica Lewinsky and her family, and to the American people before a panel of ministers in the White House, which was widely reported.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: I can barely hear him anymore.
Tonight, Bill Clinton will have something else to explain because Gennifer Flowers has a shocking revelation and joins us now for an exclusive interview, her first in six years. Gennifer, it's great to see you.
GENNIFER FLOWERS: Great to be with you.
INGRAHAM: I know this must have been wild for you to watch this over the last few days, all over again. First, your initial reaction to watching him. He clearly had the body language, he had the arms crossed. He was very angry that this reporter asked him kind of some fairly logical questions I would imagine.
FLOWERS: Right. Right. Well, my first impression was he is just not as good a liar anymore as he used to be. He's not on his game where that's concerned. I think Bill is afraid. I am advocating that Bill be prosecuted for his sex crimes just like Harvey Weinstein has been arrested and Bill Cosby is about to be sentenced. Why not a Bill Clinton? He's nervous. That's why he is acting that way. And probably has some health problems and it has affected his ability to respond as well as he used to be, and tell lies as good as he used to.
INGRAHAM: You were a young woman, 27 years old, when you first got involved with him. He was married and you were not, and you started having this relationship. At some point you've now decided that it became a nonconsensual harassment relationship, which doesn't really comport with how you were originally classified this. So now how are you all these years later claiming that it was nonconsensual at some point?
FLOWERS: It's very interesting because back in 1977 when I met Bill, we didn't have the laws to protect us. We as women, I was in the workplace in a man's world. I just had to do the best that I could. When I first met Bill Clinton it was when I was sent out on my first story by myself after my training with my cameraman. He came out on to me that night. I told him to knock it off. He proceeded to continue to come onto me for three months before I decided that I wanted to have a relationship with him, which at that point was consensual. But in today's standards, and in hindsight, it was definitely sexual harassment. I was a little bit ashamed to admit that because, in a way, I felt guilty because I was a willing participant at a point. So I felt guilty about saying that I was sexually harassed in the beginning. But I definitely was, absolutely. And then --
INGRAHAM: Hold on, when he is they want him prosecuted, Gennifer --
FLOWERS: Why not?
INGRAHAM: Not for what -- because sexual harassment, that's a civil case. But for a criminal prosecution, you're referring to Juanita Broaddrick, obviously.
FLOWERS: Absolutely Juanita. He raped Juanita. I've met Juanita. She is a beautiful person. Like Hillary I wanted to be in denial. I wanted deny these things could happen because I felt like that wasn't the person that I had known. But when I met her the first time and realized that she was a very genuine person and had no reason to lie about that, I had to come to terms with the fact that he was very capable and did do that. Why shouldn't he be prosecuted for rape as Bill Cosby has, and Harvey Weinstein who was just arrested? Why shouldn't he be? Why don't they arrest Hillary as a coconspirator because she has allowed him -- she has been the person that has let him go and the enabler that has let him go and do what he has done to women.
INGRAHAM: By the way, we reached out to the Clinton Foundation, to Bill Clinton's personal attorney David Kendall about this story and about your new allegations, and we did not get a response, so we did attempt to do that.
FLOWERS: Of course not.
INGRAHAM: I want to play a snippet from Bill Clinton, this was also from the New York event last night. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL CLINTON, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: I support the Me Too movement, and I think it's long overdue. And I have always tried to supported it in the decisions and policies that I've advanced.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: He says he genuinely supports the Me Too movement, Gennifer, and he wants people to believe him at this point.
FLOWERS: That's the fourth biggest lie, and you know some of what the others are. He would say that, of course. What would he say but that he is in support of it. He has been a huge abuser of the Me Too movement. And I would like for the Me Too movement to be so kind as to recognize myself and Paula and Juanita and Kathleen and many, many other women starting many years ago that have come up with claims of sexual harassment by Bill Clinton. They haven't given us any respect as far as I'm concerned. We're the "me not" movement. That's what we are.
INGRAHAM: Why do you say that?
FLOWERS: It just seems like the Clintons are bulletproof. It doesn't matter what they do, they seem to get away with things, and this would be another instance of that. He hasn't been held accountable.
INGRAHAM: How are you doing in your life.
FLOWERS: That's a good question why --
INGRAHAM: A lot of people think -- I think the Me Too movement, a lot of good stuff going on, but sadly a lot of it is politicized.
FLOWERS: I agree, very much.
INGRAHAM: And people like Juanita Broaddrick, they don't count. People like Kathleen Willey, they don't count. How are you doing, by the way? We're out of time, but how are you doing after all these years? You look great, by the way, but how are you doing?
FLOWERS: Thank you, God bless you. And I love you, by the way. I'm a big fan.
I'm doing fine. I'm getting ready to do a little reboot of my book. And I lost my mother in July of last year, so that has been a huge thing to overcome. But I'm doing good. Thank you for asking. I'm good. Thank you for having me.
INGRAHAM: Absolutely, Gennifer. We really appreciate your perspective. The Clintons, they never do seem to go away, and we appreciate it. The president, by the way, reminded the nation today, President Trump, why we stand for the National Anthem. Up next we're going to tell you the real story behind the canceled Philadelphia Eagles White House visit.
INGRAHAM: President Trump celebrated America instead of the Super Bowl champions at the White House today. The president disinvited the Philadelphia Eagles yesterday after learning that only a few players plan to attend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We stand to honor our military and to honor our country and to remember the fallen heroes who never made it back home. We stand together for freedom, we stand together for patriotism, and we proudly stand for our glorious nation under God.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: We should note that FOX is reporting that no Eagles kneeled during the protests during the National Anthem last year, although some did raise fists. But today we did learn about a new timeline that suggests that the Eagles may have been trying to set the president up here. Well, FOX News chief White House correspondent John Roberts discovered the Eagles appeared to be playing games with the administration. They learned that the Eagles originally submitted more than 70 names to attend the event, mostly players. Then yesterday they said only two or three people and the mascot in the costume would attend. The Eagles even tried to reschedule for next week when the whole world knew the president is going to be in Singapore. Let's debate what's really going on here with former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain and civil rights attorney and a talk radio host Leo Terrell. All right, Herman, the Eagles did not kneel during the National Anthem, which I think is a great thing. They didn't kneel. There are a lot of them who don't like President Trump, obviously, but my view is, they should have just come to the White House. Come on. This is now ridiculous. You don't have to like everything President Trump does. The people's house, fans love to see you at the White House, it's a fun event, it's not political. Your reaction?
HERMAN CAIN, 2012 GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: My reaction is they were trying to embarrass the president. Everybody in the world knew that next week was focused on the summit between the USA and North Korea. To ask the president to reschedule is an oxymoron. The man is a little bit busy trying to run the country, trying to settle international affairs. So the whole thing in my opinion was to try and embarrass the president. I have been invited to the White House several times, and each time I go. If you are invited, you go or you don't go. You don't say, could you take a rain check? That does not work.
INGRAHAM: It's not on your schedule.
CAIN: You change your schedule. He is the president of the United States, and I happen to believe that they were trying to embarrass the president. And he said you are not going to embarrass me. You are uninvited, and he had every right to do that because he is the head of the house for the United States of America.
INGRAHAM: Leo, that sounds pretty reasonable. President Obama -- I think of an entire team, basically an entire team decided and did the same little thing with President Obama, a little trick-aroo, I think he's be, come on, this is racist. It's discriminatory. It's classless. But with Trump, it's like, oh, yea, they are going. Isn't this brave? Go ahead.
LEO TERRELL, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Hey, Laura, can I submit the following fact to you and Herman. Here's the following fact. Jerry Jones, sworn deposition where he stated very clearly that Donald Trump told him this is an issue that he can't lose. He is using this flag issue to hijack the midterm election. You said earlier in your broadcast, Donald Trump talks about pocketbook issues. This is an issue he is playing the American public on. There is no question about it. This issue is about racial injustice. And why is he spending time worrying about the NFL? I will tell you why. Because it resonates with people because he has hijacked this issue. Ask Jerry Jones. Look at the deposition. And the problem is simply this. For him to single out the Philadelphia Eagles, who never kneeled during the regular season, is outrageous. And more importantly, they are not going to the White House for a simple reason. They don't like the president. They have that right. That's what makes this country great.
INGRAHAM: Classless. Leo, Leo, let's just say, if you did it to President Obama, I would say the same thing. It is classless. When the president of the United States invites an entire national -- it's not regional, it's a national championship team to the White House, you do what Nick Saban did with Alabama, Crimson Tide, roll Tide. Actually the whole team goes and they stand and they are polite and they shake the president's hand. That's what you do. So I think a lot of these players are great guys, but this was classless.
TERRELL: But what about the Jerry Jones statement?
INGRAHAM: Jerry Jones said if the players don't stand during the anthem, they're going to be off the team. That's what he said. Herman?
CAIN: May I point out two points. And Leo, please don't talk over me, because --
TERRELL: I never talk over you, Herman. I never talk -- Laura, that's a personal attack. Another personal attack.
CAIN: Allow me to talk, Leo.
TERRELL: I did not talk over you Herman.
INGRAHAM: He didn't talk over you. I probably did.
CAIN: Point number one.
TERRELL: Thank you, Laura.
CAIN: Point number one, Jerry Jones is not the president of the United States. Donald Trump is. Number two, patriotism is not an option. He's the president of the United States and he decided you will not make patriotism an option in my house which I am the head of for the United States of America. That's the big point here. It has nothing to do --
TERRELL: Let me respond.
INGRAHAM: Leo, real quick.
CAIN: There you go. There you go. There you go talking over me.
TERRELL: Mr. Cain, it's my turn, Herman.
CAIN: No, it's not. I have not finished, Leo.
TERRELL: He is a president but he's not a dictator. And just because he's the president doesn't --
CAIN: Leo, You are doing what I said I don't want you to do.
INGRAHAM: All right, guys, this is fascinating, but we have to get to Miss America.
CAIN: This what they do. This what they do.
INGRAHAM: I have to be the time dictator. I love you both. Miss America, next.
INGRAHAM: OK, the Miss America beauty pageant will no longer be a beauty pageant. It will be a competition. The organization announced today in a statement, "We are no longer a pageant. Miss America will represent a new generation of female leaders focused on scholarship, social impact, talent, and empowerment." But this competition will not include the swimsuit competition with the organization stating it, quote, will no longer judge our candidates on their outward physical appearance. Well, let's debate this, some of these things with Madison Gesiotto, a former Miss Ohio in the Miss USA Pageant. Now, this is wild because, if, Madison, outward appearance has no relevance whatsoever to this whole thing, then why don't you just do it on the radio? I host a radio show and a caller called in today and made that comment. I was screaming laughing. You don't have to do the makeup, the hair, just talk.
MADISON GEIOTTO, FORMER MISS USA CONTESTANT: They are exactly right. I'm not impressed with what Miss America Organization has decided to do. When you look in the dictionary at the actual definition of pageant, it is a beauty contest. And of course outer beauty is not as important as inner beauty, but at the same time it doesn't mean that outer beauty can't exist and that women should be shamed or banned from being able to express themselves and feel confident, have a positive body image and show off their physical fitness. There is nothing wrong with that. No one is forced to compete in Miss USA or Miss American. And there is literally nothing left. Not only did they eliminate swimsuit, they took away evening gown too.
INGRAHAM: I think they're going to alter, the evening gown --
GEIOTTO: Evening gown can be anything you want. You can just wear an outfit. You can wear athleisure if you felt like it.
INGRAHAM: Don't you hate the phrase athleisure, by the way.
GEIOTTO: That's the point.
INGRAHAM: One of the worst. I didn't know that it was in the 90s is when the bikini started. So it was like 97 I think they started doing the bikinis, which the men like it, but it is a little much on the bikini. But the one piece, I thought that was really pretty and dignified and also sexy and attractive. But what is this, just the Me Too thing, don't hate us because we're beautiful thing? What is it? I don't even understand?
GEIOTTO: I can't even keep up with the feminist movement and Me Too when it comes to the relationship to pageants, because the first thing they were saying is that women should be empowered and be able to wear whatever they want. Now all of a sudden women should not be able to wear whatever they want? I can't keep up. It's ridiculous. They're totally off base. They make no sense, and I don't think they are really making a positive impact on the Me Too movement.
INGRAHAM: And I also think that in a way they are implicitly casting aspersions on people like you. Now, you were Miss Ohio in the Miss USA pageant, and you just took the bar, passed the bar, congratulations.
GEIOTTO: Thank you.
INGRAHAM: So you're going to go on, be a lawyer. And so many people who are in these pageants and competitions go on to do incredible things. Maybe they are professional moms, maybe they're doctors, lawyers. But just because you are attractive doesn't mean you also don't have all these other things you want to do in life.
GEIOTTO: Exactly. It should never be mutually exclusive and that's what I think it seems like they are trying to make it.
INGRAHAM: Is there a real rivalry between them Miss America people and the Miss USA people?
GEIOTTO: The joke has always been Miss America is the girl next door, Miss USA is the girl you wish lived next door. So that's all I have to say on that. So there is definitely a rivalry still.
INGRAHAM: You are going to be a huge success. It's great to have you on.
GEIOTTO: Thank you.
INGRAHAM: And we'll be right back.
INGRAHAM: Come on, I bet you didn't know there was a rivalry between Miss USA and Miss America. And you thought all we cared about were the Strzok- Page texts. That is all the time we have. Shannon Bream is up next. Have a good night.
<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.>