This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 17, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Hey, everybody, I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” from Washington tonight. It's Friday, but there are going to be a lot on tonight, and we're happy you're with us. We'll take you all through it.

We have shocking reports, as we're learning that thousands of illegal immigrants are being dropped off in cities across the country. We're going to tell you where it's happening and what should be done next. Very important information.

Plus, Democrats in the House today, all supported something called - and I put it in quotes, "The Equality Act." It sounds nice on the surface. Well, we'll dig into it. And you'll see what's inside. We'll see how they're pushed for these politically correct results could put young girls and religious organizations at risk.

Plus, Raymond Arroyo is here with a very dirty Friday follies, revealing the body part Americans do not wash and why you should think twice before jumping into that public pool this summer. And wait until you see what Congressional Dems were doing instead of legislating this week.

But first, Attorney General Bill Barr sitting down for a wide-ranging interview with Fox News earlier today and it's driving the critics nuts.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Attorney General Bill Barr, short on specifics, long on rhetoric today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This Attorney General is the Attorney General of President Trump's fantasies.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He acts more and more like a total mouthpiece of the President. It is more than disappointing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Absolutely incredible. Barr has done nothing but damage his credibility with law enforcement.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, you might as well just slap an ex-KGB badge on our Attorney General.


INGRAHAM: It was disgusting. What did Barr actually say, though, that was so controversial? Well, not a whole lot. And he did preview how the investigation into the investigators might play out and why. Well, let's unpack each of the significant takeaways one-by-one. Now it's important for all of you tonight to understand every bit of this.

First, here's why Barr initiated this investigation.


WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL: No one has really looked at it. I think there's a misconception out there that we know a lot about what happened. The fact of the matter is, Bob Mueller did not look at the government's activities. He was looking at the - whether or not the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians. But he was not going back and looking at the counterintelligence program.


INGRAHAM: Second, the AG reveals the more he digs, the more questions he has.


BARR: I've been trying to get answers to questions, and I found that a lot of the answers have been inadequate. And I've also found that some of the explanations I've gotten don't hang together. So, in a sense, I have more questions today than I did when I first started.


INGRAHAM: He also explained why the nature of the players behind this campaign to spy on Trump was unusual even to a seasoned vet like Barr.


BARR: This was handled at a very senior level of these departments. It wasn't handled in the ordinary way that investigations or counterintelligence activities are conducted. It was sort of an ad hoc small group. And most of these people are no longer with the FBI or the CIA or the other agencies involved.


INGRAHAM: And fourth, and perhaps most importantly, Barr reveals why it's in the public's interest that he pursue potentially the corrupt origins of the Russia probe.


BARR: If we're worried about foreign influence, for the very same reason, we should be worried about whether government officials abused their power and put their thumb on the scale. And so I'm not saying that happened, but I'm saying that we have to look at that.


INGRAHAM: Bingo. Now, given the challenges, only someone of Bill Barr's stature could weather the petty political attacks and actually remain effective.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you took this job, did you think Democrats would make you the target?

BARR: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You were ready for that?

BARR: Yes. I thought I was in a position where this kind of criticism really wouldn't bother me very much.


INGRAHAM: He's just completely not affected by any of this. It's buzzing all around him. He just does his job. And all of this drives the resistance crazy.

Joining me now with reaction, Harmeet Dhillon, attorney and member of the Trump 2020 Advisory Council; John Eastman, Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute and Constitutional Law Professor at Chapman University; and Ari Fleischer, former White House Press Secretary and Fox News Contributor.

Ari, I want to start with you. I want to hit that last bit of the video we just played. Barr seems to almost - he kind of almost welcomes all these partisan barbs, and they're really nasty being thrown at him. So how important is it that these new investigations unfold without any other interference?

ARI FLEISCHER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, it's vital. And if the Democrats hold themselves to the same standards they tried to hold the Trump administration too, they'd be guilty of obstruction of justice themselves the way they're going after the Attorney General.

Laura, you played that long clip of the Democrats criticizing Barr. Do you remember when Eric Holder, Barack Obama's Attorney General, called himself Barack Obama's wingman? Those were his words. He called himself his wingman. Do you recall, I mean, people going nuts saying how can he say that, he's supposed to be independent?

Bill Barr is a seasoned, experienced Attorney General, and that's exactly what we need now to figure out what, if anything, was done improperly when they authorized all these wiretaps and surveillance techniques to be used against Trump.

INGRAHAM: John, the tweet that just came out about 20 minutes ago from our old friend, Jim Comey, the following. He writes, "The AG should stop sliming his own department. If there are bad facts, show us, or search for them professionally and then tell us what you found. An AG must act like the leader of the Department of Justice, an organization based on truth. Donald Trump has enough spokespeople."

Boy, they're all singing from the same hymnal. John?

JOHN EASTMAN, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR, CHAPMAN UNIVERSITY: Well, they are. And I think James Comey in particular is a little bit worried where this investigation is going to lead. So they're trying to discredit it on the front end.

The facts we do know, Hillary Clinton and the DNC illegally laundered money to Fusion GPS to pay for a dossier with Russian intelligence sources, part of it, we learned that this last week. And they did that in order to authorize spying on the opposition political campaign. I mean, this is a scandal of historic proportions. And I'm pleased that Attorney General Barr is finally willing to get to the bottom of it.

INGRAHAM: I mean, there's something that is so absolutely hilarious about how unaffected just unaffected he is by - he just - this is like batting it all away. He doesn't get emotional or dramatic about it.

And Harmeet, he also was asked about the Mueller report's obstruction decision itself. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Were you surprised that he came back with no recommendation on that obstruction charge? Did that surprise you?

BARR: Yes, that surprised me.


BARR: Because the function of a prosecutor is to make a call one way or the other. He gave an explanation for it and it's pretty much reflected in the report.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're OK with him testifying?

BARR: Absolutely.


INGRAHAM: Harmeet, interesting there. He was himself surprised that there was no obstruction recommendation, but he doesn't care. If Mueller wants to testify, Mueller can testify. He doesn't look like someone who has anything to hide. He's not worried about stonewalling the Democrats for information. He's like "Go ahead."

HARMEET DHILLON, MEMBER OF THE TRUMP 2020 ADVISORY COUNCIL: Right. I mean, he is unflappable in the face of this type of histrionic demagoguery calling him a KGB agent and so forth.

But I think he was actually pulling his punches a little bit in that particular response, Laura, because it was not appropriate for Bob Mueller to put all of this dirt and smear and negative information out there about the President in this report and then not be able to pinpoint any particular crime.

That's the type of smear and report that we used to see with the independent counsel, which has been discontinued and meant to be sort of an impeachment report. And it's not what the Special Counsel report is supposed to be. It's supposed to be something that talks about crime or not crime.

And so, by punting on that and really putting this dirt out there, I think he did a disservice to his reputation, Bob Mueller did. And so Barr doesn't want to touch that. He's leaving Mueller to fend for himself on that, which I think is appropriate, but it does--


INGRAHAM: All right.

DHILLON: --some criticism.

INGRAHAM: All right, panel, I want to get to another developing story tonight. New Special Counsel records are showing that former National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, reported multiple instances before and after his guilty plea where he or his lawyers got calls from individuals connected to the administration or Congress.

Now, his brother, Joe Flynn, told Fox's Catherine Herridge, he was set up.


OE FLYNN, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR MICHAEL FLYNN'S BROTHER: Because of his vocal criticism of the Obama administration and specifically the intelligence community, which he came out of, my suspicion is that they were doing everything they could to trip him up and to trap him.


INGRAHAM: Ari, is this just an upset brother or is there something to this do you think?

FLEISCHER: I don't know. I think you've got to have the - let that story play on and find out exactly what they're talking about, who the people are. But what concerns me the most, Laura, just in terms of good government, is the transition by the Obama people to the Trump people was full of booby traps and time bombs, and two of them went off against Michael Flynn.

With Michael Flynn, it was, number one, using threatening the Logan Act, go after him for his contacts, appropriate contacts that the incoming national security advisor should have with foreign officials. And then, secondly, unmasking him and leaking that information, unmasked information to the press. That itself is a crime, the leaking of that classified information.

And there were certainly other time bombs and booby traps the Obama people left behind. For example, the dossier briefing to President Trump, which then was immediately leaked the facts of it to CNN. And of course, when they downgraded top secret information to secret information so more people in the government would have it, and that way, that could leak further embarrassing Donald Trump on the collusion allegations.

All of this was the handwork of Obama's people. And so, Laura, I've always asked the question, what did President Obama know and when did he authorize it? And too needs to be found out.

INGRAHAM: Yes. I think there are a lot of people there raising questions in their minds and also now publicly about the former President of the United States himself, given his closeness with the Attorney General at the time.

John, I want to ask you, as a professor of law at Chapman - we had an interesting moment. Nancy Pelosi appeared at a Georgetown Law School event and decided to chime in on impeachment in this issue. Let's watch.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: I think the President every day gets grounds for impeachment in terms of his obstruction of justice, as he never say blanketly I'm not answering any subpoenas. But everybody today is in instant gratification. You got a subpoena, we want somebody to go to jail. No, it takes time.


INGRAHAM: John, I'm - I'm kind of at a loss to even understand her. But - so, now you're - now you should be impeached because you stand not for the executive's authority to not turn over everything to Congress? I mean, wow, that's a lot of impeachable presidents over our history.

EASTMAN: That's right. Almost every president objects to broad subpoenas because there's a thing called executive privilege. Congress has oversight authority. They don't have the authority to interfere with the operation of the executive. And that's why we have executive privilege.

But, look, there's an old adage, the best defense is a strong offense. And I think the Democrats, because they lost the election and lost control over hiding the secrets of what went on back in 2016, are going on offense to try and make it look like everything that they actually did was Trump did himself.

And when the real collusion comes out, we have been hearing so much over the last couple of years of Trump's collusion falsely, that it will kind of take the sting out of what really happened, which is the Hillary Clinton campaign colluded with the Russians. I mean, there's no doubt about it now.

INGRAHAM: Yes. Well, by the way, the President tweeted tonight. We're almost out of time, but here's his tweet just a short while ago. "My campaign for President was conclusively spied on. Nothing like this has ever happened in American politics. A really bad situation. Treason means long jail sentences, and this was treason."

Harmeet, we're almost out of time. But treason? Yes or no?

DHILLON: Well, it could be. I don't think we have enough facts there, but even The New York Times is beginning to say what Professor Eastman just said, which is that it was the Clinton campaign that willingly took information from Russians and then unfortunately duped even the Deputy Attorney General to signing off on putting that in front of a court to spy on Americans. That is illegal. Whether it constitutes willing treason, I think we have to suspend judgment until we find out more.

INGRAHAM: Always the cautious lawyer. I love it.

All right, guys. Thank you so much. Great panel.

And coming up, thousands and thousands of illegal immigrants are being bussed all around the country. Are they coming to your town? And Nancy Pelosi caught in a big, big lie. Dinesh D'Souza, next.


INGRAHAM: Well, “The Ingraham Angle” has been on the front lines of the illegal immigration crisis in this country. We showed you that last week. It's just not a border state issue anymore, though. It's a national concern.

And you just heard, the majority of the illegal immigrants crossing our southern border told me that they're not staying in those border communities. No, they go north. And we have exclusive access inside one of the CBP processing centers and can attest that they are at capacity. Dozens and dozens are packed into facility that is not meant to be permanent.

The CBP says it is currently making contingency plans to transport family units to other border patrol locations across the country, specifically in northern and in coastal communities that have the capacity and necessary computers and so forth to handle this processing.

In the meantime, the Trump administration is looking to hire a private contractor to support the transport of some quarter of a million illegal aliens over the next five years to shelters all across the country while they wait for their asylum claims.

Now, to be processed is complicated. You don't just put someone's fingerprint in the system. Think about it. We'll have 250,000 illegals just deposited into cities and towns across the country. Now the fact is, most of the family units illegally crossing our borders are released into local communities where they're eventually caught. Now, they're given a notice to appear in court and they're dropped at a central location nearby.

Now, take the State of New Mexico, for instance. A lot of people aren't covering New Mexico, but it's a big story. Just this week, the small city of Deming declared a state of emergency after, in the small little place, 170 migrants were sent there and released. Last week and in response, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham paid $4,000 out of state money to transport 55 illegals to neighboring Colorado.

Well, illegal immigration is crippling New Mexico. It's a border state. And again, it rarely gets talked about when we discussed this immigration crisis. And by the way, the Colorado Governor wasn't thrilled because he wasn't even told that these 55 asylum seekers were being sent to his state.

And we've just learned a week ago that border patrol agents in Laredo intercepted a truck containing 120 illegals who were trying to enter the United States. 11 of them were juveniles, all from Central America.

And finally, it keeps getting more shocking. A potential serial killer who's in the country illegally has been arrested in Texas. Police say Billy Chemirmir of Kenya, who was previously arrested in the death of an 81-year- old woman, has also now been charged with killing at least 11 more elderly women. Even more frightening, police said then that investigators were reviewing about 750 unattended deaths of elderly women for possible links to this illegal immigrant. We'll continue to follow this story.

And despite all of what we just told you, Democrats for months have been saying there's no border crisis or Trump caused the border crisis. Nancy Pelosi yesterday somehow forgot all of the things that we talked about and had the gall to say this.


PELOSI: We have never - not said that there was a - there is a humanitarian crisis at the border--


INGRAHAM: Oh, yes. OK. No one ever denied it. Oh, please. Now, let's help jog her memory, shall we? Here's some of what we've heard from the left over the last few months.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This so-called crisis at the border is fake.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is a crisis of his own making because it was a campaign pledge.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: This artificial crisis of the President isn't going to justify his appropriating money for a wall that Congress is unwilling to give.


INGRAHAM: But that was just those other Dems. Nancy herself never said anything like that, right?


PELOSI: The President's manufactured crisis--

The President decided that he imagined or whatever at the mythology of a crisis at the border.

President Trump must stop holding American people hostage, much stop manufacturing a crisis.

Mr. President, the evidence of what's happening there does not support the crisis that you describe.


INGRAHAM: We still have to send them over a pitchfork for that classic American gothic shot.

Joining me now with reaction, Dinesh D'Souza, conservative commentator, filmmaker.

Dinesh, it appears that Pelosi is attempting to gaslight Americans here. What do you think?

DINESH D'SOUZA, CONSERVATIVE AUTHOR & FILMMAKER: Well, I've been scratching my head, because on the face of it, there's a blatant contradiction. She has repeatedly said that there's no crisis. Now suddenly she seems to say there is a crisis. So, how can you resolve this contradiction?

I think there's only one way to do it. And that is that there are actually two separate crises at the border. There is Trump's crisis and then there's Pelosi's crisis. Now, Trump's crisis is that the border is too porous. People are pouring in. Illegals are getting in. MS-13 gang members are getting in. Now, Nancy Pelosi denies that that's a crisis. She - when she says that there's no crisis, she means that Trump's crisis does not exist.

Now, what is Pelosi's crisis? Pelosi's crisis is the exact opposite. Her crisis is that there is - that the border is not porous enough, not enough illegals are pouring in. so when she says that there's a humanitarian crisis, she means that there are hungry, sick, starving people at the border, we need to let more of them in. So that's - that's I think the way to resolve this apparent contradiction. She actually wants to see more illegals.

INGRAHAM: Well, Dinesh, the CNN made a big deal this week of pictures that are heartbreaking. I mean, there are children who are in outdoors or on the ground, there are Mylar blankets. They're pouring out of these processing centers, children and adults, and they're being held in places where they're not meant to be held because those are processing centers, they're not permanent detainment areas where people are detained for days and days and days.

The Congress doesn't want to give HHS, which takes care of these unaccompanied minors, they don't want to give them money. So they complain about, well, look at how these people are. And then they won't - they won't admit there's a real problem, do anything about it, stem the problem, or even say, yes, we have to either have semi-permanent structures or permanent structures until these people get their immigration hearings.

So everyone is pointing fingers at one another, but you have to have a solution to stop this madness because it's endangering the lives of kids and frankly the American people.

D'SOUZA: Yes. We have to realize that this kind of humanitarian crisis that Pelosi is referring to is actually worldwide. In other words, when you think about people who are sick or starving, that's happening in India, that's happening in Thailand, in China.

So you have to ask why the particularly solicitude for this particular group of starving people in Mexico. And the answer is political. In other words, it's not that Nancy Pelosi wants to share her wealth or the wealth of America with India and China. Not at all.

The reason that the Democrats have a special interest in the illegals is they want to sort of transform the demographics of America, even though illegals can't vote. Over time, illegals have children, their children are American citizens, they grow up, they can vote. And moreover, the blurring of the distinction between legals and illegals, which is not only what the Democrats do, the media does this all the time--

INGRAHAM: Oh, yes.

D'SOUZA: --it's aimed at perpetrating the lie that Republicans "hate Hispanics," so hate Mexicans. So, by focusing the notion of legal immigrants in America, they can convey this idea that Republicans are somehow against immigrants, which is in fact not the case.

INGRAHAM: It's - well - and you are an immigrant, speaking of - speaking of the issue.

Dinesh, thank you so much. We appreciate it tonight.

And coming up, why the swimming pool could be the most dangerous place for you this summer? No. And what Democrats are doing instead of legislating? All that and more, Friday Follies with Raymond Arroyo, next.


INGRAHAM: It's Friday, and that means it's time for -- it's Friday Follies. The health dangers of swimming pools, unwashed body parts, and Democrats personal reading rainbow. Joining us with all of the details, Raymond Arroyo, Fox News contributor. I've had to get through this without laughing. This is like a Harvey Korman, Tim Conway laughing moment.

RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: Hold yourself together.

INGRAHAM: What are Democrats, though, this is very important, doing right now instead of fixing this border crisis?

ARROYO: As you know, Laura I'm a big advocate for literacy. I've always supported it. There's nothing like reading a good story aloud. Unfortunately, 25 Democrats have taken it upon themselves to read the Mueller report as a protest. This could set public reading back for decades.


SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D-N.Y., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired.

REP. JERROLD NADLER, D-N.Y., HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: -- Facebook representative testified --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- the Trump campaign showed interest in WikiLeaks.

REP. MAXINE WATERS, D-CALIF.: Surrounding Russian influence in the U.S. presidential election.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When linked to the special counsel's oversight.


INGRAHAM: "To Kill a Mockingbird."

ARROYO: Couldn't they have read "Treasure Island" or "To Kill a Mockingbird?" What are they accomplishing by reading the Mueller report? Not only is it poorly written, we know how it ends. We know how it ends. I prefer Levar Burton.

INGRAHAM: No, no. But Sheila Jackson Lee does have a dramatic flair.

ARROYO: Absolutely.

INGRAHAM: She might be able to do voiceover.

ARROYO: I've got to get to something important, something shocking I learned. And with summer coming, people should be aware of this. According to a new study by the Water Quality and Health Council, 51 percent of Americans use a public pool as a communal bath.


ARROYO: They get in the pool in lieu of showering. All that dirt and sweat diminishes the effectiveness of the chlorine, making these stats even more terrifying. Brace yourselves America -- 40 percent of Americans adults admitted they pee in the pool, 24 percent of Americans go in the pool within an hour of having diarrhea. This is why I don't go near water parks, public pools. Don't do it.

INGRAHAM: Wait a second. OK, see, all of those people --


INGRAHAM: All of those people -- have they showered before they've gone in? That's why it says when you go to a club or something, shower before you go in. But you are a fairly aquatic person, aren't you Raymond?

ARROYO: No, I am not. My aquatic life is confined to the shower.

Laura, you saw that thing floating in the pool. Do you know fecal matter can last 10 days even in a properly treated pool.

INGRAHAM: This is a new low for this show. This is a low.

ARROYO: No, no, no. You were asking me earlier. Doesn't the chlorine help?

INGRAHAM: Yes, the chlorine fixes it.

ARROYO: CDC figures, ladies and gentlemen.


ARROYO: Hepatitis A, 16 minutes it takes chlorine to kill it. Giardia, a parasite, 45 minutes. Here's the killer, Crypto parasite.

INGRAHAM: What's that? You just made that up.

ARROYO: It takes 10 days for chlorine to kill it. I'm reading these stats.

INGRAHAM: You just made that up.

ARROYO: But before we go on, the Democrats have gotten through volume one of the Mueller report.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Following the Oval Office meeting the president's personal counsel called McGahn's counsel and relayed that the president was --


ARROYO: Harper Lee, it ain't. Speaking of stinkers, you found a bizarre social media --

INGRAHAM: Yes. It asked whether people clean their feet in the shower. It was Instagram, Facebook.

ARROYO: It starts as did you clean your leg.

INGRAHAM: Yes, and the reactions were bizarre. We did an online poll on Twitter right before the show, and until now, we have thousands and thousands of people, 68 percent said they did wash their feet, and 32 percent said they did not wash their feet in the shower. Here's what some of the responders said. Chris Metcalfe on Twitter said "I think they're passively clean by the soapy water on the floor of the tub."


INGRAHAM: Dave Morin Photo tweeted, "Please, Laura, I'm not telling you what I wash in the shower."

ARROYO: Why are you so fascinated by this topic? I really want to know.

INGRAHAM: It did make me think it could cause injury in the shower with the soap under your foot if you are standing and the soap --

ARROYO: You do the ostrich thing like I do. You put one leg up, and you clean it, and then you put that down, and you clean the other.

INGRAHAM: Raymond wears socks in the shower. He never shows his feet. I only know that because he's told me.

ARROYO: My feet are pristine, I have to admit. But you do clean them.

INGRAHAM: By the way, Taylor Swift does not wash her legs. She told Ellen recently.


TAYLOR SWIFT, SINGER/SONGWRITER: When you shave your legs, isn't the shaving cream is like soap, right? So that counts.



ARROYO: That's like saying shampoo cleans your ears.

INGRAHAM: We have an interruption here. What's happening.

ARROYO: Do we?

INGRAHAM: We want to check back on the House Democrats one more time. What are they doing?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- that he did not think it was sustainable or for Comey to stay on as FBI director for the next four years.


ARROYO: I'm sorry, Laura I was cleaning my feet during that segment.

INGRAHAM: Isn't it strange, though.

ARROYO: Trying to keep myself awake.

INGRAHAM: Isn't it strange, though, how people on social media will post things. And you know they're stupid, but then it gets you to thinking about it.

ARROYO: I don't think about this, Laura. Look, one way or another, whether you're cleaning your body and the soap is on the corrugated surface --

INGRAHAM: This is a slow news night.

ARROYO: -- that will help to clean whatever is there, unless you've been walking through a mud pit or you're playing lacrosse or something. How dirty are you?

INGRAHAM: I have seven boys coming over to my hours tomorrow.

ARROYO: In your tub.

INGRAHAM: For a birthday party. I'm thinking about the pool. That's what I'm thinking about.

ARROYO: With extra chlorine.

INGRAHAM: They're all going to shower before they get in the pool.

Coming up, how a piece of Democrat legislation will allow biological boys into the girls' locker room, and a lot more. That coming up next.



REP. GREG STEUBE, R-FLA.: We all know that allowing biological males to compete against biological females is not an overlapping protection. It is instead a violation of women's rights to engage in competitive sports on an even playing field.

NADLER: This morning we have heard phantom fears about the allegedly harmful effects of the Equality Act on religious freedom and women's rights.


INGRAHAM: Today, a bill known as HR-5, misleadingly labeled the Equality Act, passed the House with every Democrat voting for it. Republican Congressman Virginia Fox said of the bill, "If the devil is in the details, we're in for a lot of devilish surprises."

Let me tell you about this bill. It sets out to prohibit LGBTQ discrimination across the country, including in federally funded education programs, and many believe that it would result in horrible outcomes, especially for girls participating in sports who will be put at a gross athletic disadvantage.

And then there's the concern about religious organizations who, because of their conscience concerns, well, they can't fully participate in the new concerns about LGBTQ, and that they will then be sued into submission by, well, of course, greedy trial lawyers. So this may create a huge mess.

But let's focus tonight on one group that the bill seeks to protect, and the medical consequences of subjecting young bodies to hormonal treatments and even surgery. Dr. Paul Hruz is an endocrinologist and wrote that these treatments for gender dysphoric youth are drastic and experimental.

Dr. Hruz, there's a lot of politics involved in the passage of this legislation today. But I have a question after reading a lot about this, why is the medical community so afraid of considering the impact of hormone treatment and surgeries and so forth for the young?

DR. PAUL HRUZ, PEDIATRIC ENDOCRINOLOGIST: It's very important to recognize that what is being put forward with the goal of truly helping these individuals that are suffering is based on very, very poor science, and any efforts to draw attention to poor science and the potential of very negative and serious consequences of these hormonal interventions really has not been given the attention that it deserves. And it's very unique compared to this particular condition in comparison to other diseases that we care for as physicians.

INGRAHAM: The kids who are under the age of 18, who have not fully developed, even people who have gone through puberty, their sexual maturity in most cases hadn't been reached, correct, Doctor, until maybe 23, 24, 25 years of age? That's what I've been reading in the medical literature today.

HRUZ: That is true. And, in fact, aspects of both physical development and emotional development, we tend to equate everything that goes on related to puberty, but there's the entity called adolescence as well. And there's a normal developmental process that goes on in children where as they're trying to come to terms with changes going on in their body are also struggling to identify themselves in relation to their peers. And this is a normal process that we see in children.

One of the concerns of that is about this particular approach to treating these individuals that have a gender identity that is not in accord with their biology is that it will actually influence how they're able to make that normal integration, and really subject them to the need of medical intervention that has potential very serious harms to their bodies throughout the rest of their life. Without even considering whether there are alternative options to help them, and even recognizing that a large number of children that question their gender identity are going to, if merely left alone, are going to realign their identity with their biological sex.

INGRAHAM: The studies that have been done show 85 percent to 90 percent of children no longer experience feelings of gender dysphoria after having gone through puberty. In your mind, is that a correct figure?

HRUZ: The estimates vary, but it's the majority -- all of the studies that have been done, and there's been over a dozen studies and many of the earlier studies were small studies, have all consistently shown the same effect.

One of the most concerning observations was, however, if one tries to interfere with that normal pubertal development to stop normally timed puberty in children, that all of the children in the small study that was done looking at the effect of that, all went on to persist in that transgender identity, really changing that statistic drastically from the normal trajectory that we normally see.

INGRAHAM: We have Congress folks today saying that concern about this legislation is a bunch of fearmongering. Katie Hill from California, let's watch.


REP. KATIE HILL, (D-CA): This is fearmongering about transwomen playing in sports. Are you kidding me? I don't know if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle realize that they've met trans people, but they have. They definitely have.


INGRAHAM: So, Doctor, it goes to that. The conversation moves away from - - and specifically about transgendered folks, it's the politics that gets involved. But the reality medically is something that to me is just being completely overlooked. I read that there are 45 centers that have cropped up across the country, major medical institutions, that are devoted a lot of resources to the treatment of transgender -- transgenderism and reassignment surgery and so forth. That is an explosive growth in the treatment, and it's big money, is it not?

HRUZ: Well, it's actually over 50 now. And really the amazing concern about the growth of this particular approach to dealing with children that have this transgender identity is to adopt a single intervention that's based on very, very poor quality science. And even those that are advocating for this intervention that are involved in this intervention for children will acknowledge that the science really has not been done to really establish what the long-term effects are, and already the data that's coming forward raises serious concerns not only in how these children are going to normally move through the developmental stages and their identity, but the effects of the hormonal treatment having effects on the body that are going to be --

INGRAHAM: Fertility.

HRUZ: -- fertility issues, infertility, increased risk of cardiovascular disease. And the data really is not there. But we know quite a bit, and this gets back to the point of really clouding the difference between when we're talking about gender identity and the biological reality of sex. We know that giving hormones to individuals that is not in align with their biological sex is not the same thing as giving it to in levels that are normally present in women. And so many, many concerns about this.

INGRAHAM: Doctor, we've got to go, but this is something that must be studied, and it must be done meticulously, peer reviewed studies. We have children involved. Forget all of the other important implications that are political and religious. There are children involved, children. We're talking about our kids.

HRUZ: These children are very much being harmed, yes.

INGRAHAM: All right, Doctor, thank you.

HRUZ: And really --

INGRAHAM: Thank you so much, Doctor. Sorry, we're out of time.

HRUZ: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: We'll have you back. This is an issue that's not going away.

And coming up, is Alabama's new abortion law already on its way to the court? Shannon Bream is here next.


INGRAHAM: Missouri is the latest state to advance a new restrictive abortion ban today days after Alabama's sweeping new measure. Now the bills are drawing the ire of Democrats everywhere.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a fundamental assault on our basic freedom.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This may be the moment that women feared when they poured into the streets on the day following Donald Trump's inauguration.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even the public polling doesn't support something that draconian.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What they want to do is control women's bodies, and they use other women to help draft legislation to do that.


INGRAHAM: Joining me now is Shannon Bream, host of FOX News at night and author of the brand new book, "Finding the Bright Side." We're going to get to the book in a moment. But this topic, Shannon, I'm so happy you're on the podcast, you were so awesome. We had so much fun. I didn't get to everything I wanted to get to, believe it or not, but the controversy surrounding this Alabama law, you actually write in your book about that moment in law school where people couldn't believe other people might disagree with their view that abortion was -- it was all the rage. But you stood up saying not everybody agrees with this. It reminds me of this crowd in the media saying it's all terrible, ignoring --

SHANNON BREAM, ANCHOR: I just thought when we had our Constitutional law class, it's a big first year class and everybody is in there. And the day we were going to have this Roe v. Wade discussion, I was really looking forward to it because I thought it's very interesting. It's a controversial topic. A lot of people argue that it wasn't rightly decided on a legal basis. And as I sat there in class going on and on and on, I realized that nobody was going to stand up and say, hey, there might be another side to this argument. Maybe it's at least worth considering. Because in law school you're trained to argue both sides of everything.

INGRAHAM: Listen to the people on TV, the anchors are acting like there's no one in the United States who disagrees with the prevailing elite view that a baby is not a baby, or it's born, it can be terminated, life can be terminated. They're stunned that there are millions of young people and women who believe that.

BREAM: And that's what we see at the March for Life when we cover it. It's the young people who are out there who say I've seen the sonograms of my brothers and sisters, so that's changed my feelings. It's interesting to see the younger generation feels that way. But I just thought, let's argue anything. You need to be able to argue both sides of it.

INGRAHAM: There's another opinion on this.

BREAM: It was a very one-sided class.

INGRAHAM: Nothing has changed in the class of media.

A lot of people are saying this is not smart by Alabama because it will get struck down maybe in the state court and that the Supreme Court doesn't want to go anywhere near this. What are your thoughts?

BREAM: Yes, it's interesting, because you know it has a lot of stuff to go to, obviously. You've clerked there. You know how the court works. And you have got to get four votes behind closed doors to get it to the forefront. It's such a huge leap. I think there are other cases that are much more likely to get to the Supreme Court. They're chipping away at things. Indiana has got some provisions that you can't have abortions for things like Down syndrome. I think you're going to see something that's more like that get to the court before this huge let's just throw out Roe v. Wade in one fell swoop. I don't think the court will take it.

INGRAHAM: Let's get to something really important. Date like a man.


INGRAHAM: Date like a man? Wait a second, what is Shannon getting into now? By the way, I love your mother. I've gotten to know your mother in the book. I adore her. She was so protective of you. But what is date like a man?

BREAM: I had had my heart broken by an especially tragic situation that somebody wasn't quite who I thought they were.

INGRAHAM: That's never happened --

BREAM: That's never happened to a woman.

I said, that's it. I'm going to date like a dude. I'm going to go out, maybe have some fun, a free dinner here or there. I'm sorry, that's very un-PC. But a cute guy, no emotional attachments. I'm not viewing any of these guys as marriage material, I'm not going to do it. But as soon as I did that and said, no thank you, I met my husband.


INGRAHAM: So that's the lesson?

BREAM: That's the trick. That's the trick. Just say I'm not interested in these guys. My husband, handsome baseball player in college, they all had a reputation for having a good time. I go on this first date with him thinking nothing will come with us. And the whole date I'm thinking this has got to be --

INGRAHAM: so I didn't get through that chapter. That's really good. Shannon Bream, it is great to see you tonight, as always.

BREAM: Thank you for having me.

INGRAHAM: Continued best luck on the book tour.


INGRAHAM: A big change is coming as we say goodbye to someone very important. Stay there.



INGRAHAM: That's all the time we have tonight. But we want to say a special goodbye to one of our favorite “Ingraham Angle” staffers. Alexis (ph) Popov (ph) is going on to bigger and better things. Alexis (ph), we're going to miss you. Did you have any fun over the two years?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was a blast. Are you kidding me?

INGRAHAM: Alexis (ph) is like party tonight. We're done with these people. Thank you for everything you've done. Keep in touch with us.


INGRAHAM: Be our spy out there in the culture. Alexis is one of the greatest. Don't forget, check out my new podcast. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team take it all from here. Have a good weekend.

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