This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 28, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TAMMY BRUCE, FOX NEWS HOST: I'm Tammy Bruce in for Laura Ingraham, and this is the "Ingraham Angle".

President Biden has pretty much destroyed all of Trump's economic gains, inflation is spiking, and his plan to save us is to spend a ton of money that we don't have. Ben Carson is here on that.

Plus, some Stanford students not only want cops off their campus, but off the earth. We will show you the shocking video. And as colleges across the country are forcing students to get the COVID vaccine, one student is telling Laura that she does not want to be part of this medical experiment. That interview later in the hour.

But first, we start with this question. If the lab leak theory is indeed true, as this show has been saying, what role did our own medical bureaucracy play in this fiasco? We already know the NIH funneled taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat Coronavirus research, which even Dr. Fauci admits. But he still denies funding so-called gain of function experiments.


SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): You gave them money and you said don't do gain the function research?


KENNEDY: And they said, we won't?

FAUCI: Correct.

KENNEDY: And you have no way of knowing whether they did or not, except you trust them. Is that right?

FAUCI: Well, we generally always trust the grantee to do what they say.

KENNEDY: How do you know they didn't do the research and not put it on their website?

FAUCI: There's no way of guaranteeing that.


BRUCE: Caught your eye. Of course, Fauci isn't saying he personally opposes gain of function research. In fact, back in 2012, he offered his full- throated support for these risky experiments, writing in a journal article, "The benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks. It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature, and the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might appear to be risky."

Joining me now is Steven Mosher, author of "Bully of Asia", and president of Population Research Institute. Also joining me is Dr. Scott Jensen, family physician, and Michigan gubernatorial candidate. Gentlemen, thank you for joining me tonight.

It's funny. We do see all the time human beings thinking that they know everything and what could go wrong? But now we have a sense of what could go wrong. Dr. Jensen, when we think about gain of function research, Americans are hearing a lot about this phrase, what exactly is this that Fauci is such a fan of? And he doesn't think is at least risky to be - have to be worried about.

SCOTT JENSEN, FAMILY PHYSICIAN: Well, I think Dr. Fauci is deflecting a bit. But frankly, gain a function has three things, not two things associated with it. One, is it's an effort to try to make an organism more (inaudible) more pathogenic, creating a worsened disease? That's one. The other thing is gain of function would come into play if you were going to try to increase the transmissibility.

But the other thing that matters quite a lot is that you're going to try to expand what targets that virus, that organism, that disease might target. So it's all three of them. And I think sometimes, Dr. Fauci conveniently forgets that it also includes who you're going to target. And I think when we look Dr. Fauci has said along the way, it's hard to trust, because this is the same guy who said that we shouldn't wear masks, and then herd immunity should be 60 percent, and that wearing double masks after being vaccinated wasn't (inaudible) it was.

BRUCE: Yes. I mean, this is this is remarkable. Steven, I want to talk with you about this as well, because these are very serious questions. We're only now kind of coming out of the pandemic. We've got vaccine questions, of course. And yet this is sitting in the background as we wonder about who funded this as we sent money in. And you've got Fauci's comment about the benefits outweighing the risk. What do you say about that?

STEVEN MOSHER, POPULATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE: Well, I say that our own medical bureaucracy, believe it or not, played a role in the creation of the deadly virus. I mean, as you mentioned, Tammy, Dr. Fauci back in 2012 was advocating gain of function research. Despite the fact, there was a moratorium on such risky research.

So what did we do? We taught Chinese scientists how to carry out gain of function research in our own labs at Galveston and at the University of North Carolina, that's Fauci funded research. And then to make matters worse, we actually sent money to China. He doesn't know how the money was spent. I don't. Money is fungible. We do know that the Chinese were very, very interested in learning how to do gain of function research, not necessarily for scientific reasons.

I mean, Fauci was wrong to support such dangerous research, but his motives were scientific, right? He wanted to stop dangerous pathogens from nature.

BRUCE: Sure.

MOSHER: While Fauci saw a potential cure for emerging diseases, the Chinese Communist Party, I think, saw that new and deadly viruses themselves might be useful militarily. In my view, they deliberately set out to create deadly pathogens that they could release upon the world, and COVID-19 is a result of these experiments.

BRUCE: Well, that's what's so strange about this, Steven, is that if we're recognizing that someone might be interested in changing a natural virus to be a bioweapon, why would you go to the Chinese Communist Party to do that research for you? And you've said that we're the ones that taught them how to do it.

And then of course, we have to presume that what they do at Wuhan, is if that it won't even accidentally escape. And yet, there is clearly some dynamics where we've seen there is video of the researchers there handling bats with their bare hands, getting bitten, blood going everywhere. It seems to be a strange choice to cozy up to the Chinese for this.

MOSHER: Well, it does. And it really worries me that after the new administration took office, they quietly secretly ended the State Department's investigation into COVID's origins. I mean, we can't - we have to uncover China's crimes. We can't help China cover up its crimes.

And the fact is last fall when Mike Pompeo started this investigation, it looked like all roads were leading to the Wuhan lab. And yet, why would we cut this off? Just because the evidence is piling up. I mean, the first three cases now of what appears to be the COVID-19 disease are lab workers from this Wuhan lab back in November of 2019.

BRUCE: Yes, indeed.

MOSHER: What does that tell you?

BRUCE: Yes. Now Dr. Jensen, I want to bring you in here for a last word. As we look at now the questions that people are finally taking seriously, where do you think this leads in the end?

JENSEN: I think Robert Redfield, a couple of months ago, the former head of the CDC, he came on and said, I have to reconsider what I've been thinking. To me, that was a huge shot across the bow. He is basically telling us, he's not buying into the conventional narrative.

Dr. Fauci is the same guy that more than a year ago said that if someone disagrees with him, it's either noise or distraction. I think frankly you folks are, you're honing in on him, and he's getting nervous. And he's giving a little bit at a time. He's starting to feel cornered.

BRUCE: Well, gentlemen, thank you very much. That sounds like classic group thing to me. I really appreciate your insight on this issue. Clearly, existentially important.

Now, while Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer waste time obsessing over a totally unnecessary January 6 commission of vote, by the way, which failed earlier today, a bipartisan group of congressmen are trying to create something that this show has called for a COVID origins commission.

Likewise, the second house bill would allow the families of COVID victims to sue the Chinese government for damages. But that's not all. 209 GOP congressmen sent a letter today to Pelosi demanding she ordered Democrat committee chairs to join their colleagues in investigating the origins of COVID. One would think that that would be an easy decision.

Joining me now is one of the letter signatories, Texas Congressman Chip Roy. Congressman, thank you so much for joining me tonight.

Now, now you're saying and we know that Nancy Pelosi doesn't listen to anybody, but you say that the Democrat committee chairs are, in fact, refusing to put any resources into funding the origins of COVID, finding out just to confirm, because without knowing where it came from, we certainly are at risk for it to happen again, aren't we, sir?

REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): Well, Tammy, thanks for having me on. Yes, I mean, your previous guests just outlined all the concerns. A year ago, I joined my colleagues in sending a letter, asking that we look into what was going on over Wuhan and making sure that we can go pursue the truth.

We know that in 2018, we had those two important reports from the State Department saying, hey, you got a lab here that's out of control. They're researching on bats and coronaviruses, and then you have what happened in November of 2019 with those scientists in Wuhan, and then you saw what happened with Dr. Li Wenliang, the Chinese clamping down and shutting it down. So we wanted to know the truth.

But you know how many hearings, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats who run the House of Representatives have had, in the words of Dean Wormer from Animal House 0.0. That's how many hearings, and that's unacceptable. We need to do our job in the House of Representatives oversight. We need to find the truth with what happened in Wuhan. We have 600,000 dead Americans, about 100,000 small businesses closed, children who have been relegated to wearing masks in schools, not being able to be in school. We need answers about what Chinese were doing and we need answers about what our NIH was doing.

BRUCE: Now, look, some sometimes people don't want answers, because it could be difficult to get those answers and it can be frightening sometimes. But we clearly cannot allow this to happen again. The answer is not to make sure everybody's got Lysol in their kitchen.

Now, sir, Fauci made it clear this week that if we never find the supposed animal that gave COVID to all the humans, that will still not add any credence to the lab like theory. Let's listen to this for a moment.


SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Have we found any animals that carry COVID-19 that could have been the source of the transmission to humans thus far?

FAUCI: Thus far, not.

GRAHAM: At what point in time would it become more likely it came from the lab if we don't find an intermediate animal host? How much longer?

FAUCI: I don't think we can give a time element on that, Senator.


BRUCE: Yet it's that kind of things, sir, that when we have this one argument about even - forget about origins, but the nature of the transmission seems to be like we're all being gas lit. What's your take on that?

ROY: Well, I agree. And I appreciated that questioning over in the Senate, I wish we could have questioning in the House of Representatives. Unfortunately, we're not getting to do that. That's why we put this letter out. And I want to say thank you to Steve Scalise, my friend, who led that effort. Over 200 of us are on the letter to demand that we get answers.

But look, here's the thing. I'm frankly not all that interested anymore on what Dr. Fauci has to say. I mean, that guy has been more self absorbed and more concerned about his own reputation rather than worrying about what we need to do for this country. And follow the science, follow the truth, do the right things for the people, not scaring the hell out of the American people and shutting down businesses, and not going after what was going on in China. And that's what our job ought to be in the House of Representatives.

BRUCE: Congressman, it's turned into this fear incorporated, it's like that has been the focus. And the damage done to the CDC and the NIH has been extraordinary. Science is supposed to be science, and yet we've had politics throughout this. Thank you, sir, for joining me tonight. I appreciate it.

ROY: Thanks, Tammy.


BRUCE: Yes, have a great night. Here now, everyone, is Laura.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: There's one really important takeaway from the COVID pandemic, and it's that we need to immediately consider decoupling from China. I mean, our entertainment industry, education system, businesses, and of course, the financial markets.

Now, President Trump actually took action to do just that in 2020, with an executive order that forced stock exchanges to delist companies that were working, believe it or not, with the Chinese military. Well, that's a good start. It's important. But more needs to be done. Because the CCP benefits greatly from the hundreds of Chinese companies that are still listed on U.S. stock exchanges.

Now, this is why my next guest is calling on President Biden to expand the Trump executive order and make sure that it extends to all Chinese companies aiding the CCP not just the ones directly tied to the Chinese military. Joining me now is Michael Stumo, the CEO of the Coalition for a Prosperous America.

Michael, a lot of people are afraid to say this out loud, but do you think there could be a groundswell building now given everything we know about China's long-term goals to delist completely these companies?

MICHAEL STUMO, COALITION FOR A PROSPEROUS AMERICA: Yes, I really do. In fact, Congress passed a law last year that said that any Chinese company that doesn't comply with our securities laws, and they don't, within three years need to be delisted. But in the meantime, we're helping Chinese - Wall Street's actively helping Chinese Communist Party owned or influenced companies raised trillions of dollars, as you said. The New York Stock Exchange, other capital markets, those are companies building weapons to threaten us troops, helping the CCP commit genocide, building dirty coal plants to produce cheap solar panels, and advancing their plan to dominate the industries of the future, the exclusion of our workers.

INGRAHAM: Well, Michael, we just learned how involved China is in our media. Now, new documents filed with the DOJ revealed that China Daily paid more than $1.6 million for advertising campaigns in Time Magazine, the LA Times, Financial Times, and Foreign Policy magazine. It also paid another million to American newspapers to print copies of its own publications.

Now, Chinese state-run media paying our news organizations to print propaganda. That's how desperate our media happened to be for ad dollars, but what are we actually accomplishing here, Michael?

STUMO: Well, as you mentioned, President Trump produced or signed an executive order in November that would require the companies that are listed by the Department of Defense as being owned or controlled by the CCP that U.S. investors can't invest in them anywhere in the world and that they can't be listed in U.S. markets. So we can't invest in them in Frankfurt, in Shinjang - sorry, in Shanghai or anywhere in the world. That's the first time we've ever done sanctions against Chinese companies.

So last week, China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom, were finally determined to have to be delisted from the New York Stock Exchange. That's a good start. We're worried that President Biden, we want him to continue that and to broaden it to companies that are--

INGRAHAM: Yes. We got that point. But we got to move the ball down to field here, because it looks like American academic institutions are also way tied into China. They get a lot of money from Chinese students, all vetted by the CCP, to come here, to study here, and then our institutions building university campuses in China. So what does that tell us? And why is that, frankly, even tolerated at this point?

STUMO: Well, it really shouldn't be the Confucius Institute here in the U.S. are just methods to control our universities, universities affect their education, the way they talk, the way they research issues, and it really needs to stop. It's an arm of the CCP as well.

INGRAHAM: All right, Michael. Great to see you. Thank you.

BRUCE: Biden's putting in motion a plan to get the middle class and mortgage your children's futures. Dr. Ben Carson is here on how we can fight back. That's next.



JANET YELLEN, TREASURY SECRETARY: The recent inflation that we've seen will be temporary. It's not something that's endemic. I expect it to last however for several more months and to see high annual rates of inflation through the end of this year.


BRUCE: Oh, there you go. What she's not telling you is that President Biden is trying his best to make sure inflation isn't just a phase, but the new normal. The President is putting forward the largest federal spending plan in history, a whopping $6 trillion. Of course, you won't see any of that money. In fact, you'll be made poorer.

Under Biden's proposal, Trump's tax cuts for low and middle-income Americans will be allowed to expire in 2025. If these cuts aren't replaced or extended, Biden would be breaking his promise to not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year.

Joining us now is Dr. Ben Carson, former HUD Secretary and the founder of the American Cornerstone Institute. Dr. Carson, thank you for joining me tonight.

I think that none of us are surprised that Joe Biden is breaking a promise, I think many of the things that are said are like from a grab bag, just to perhaps get elected. This clearly can be tragic if we continue to allow it to unfold. What is your take on this, sir?

BEN CARSON, FORMER HUD SECRETARY: Well, the sad part to me, having spent my entire professional career as a pediatric neurosurgeon and concerned about the welfare of children, is seeing what we are doing to their future. These things cannot be done without consequences. And it was Thomas Jefferson who said it is immoral to steal from future generations. This is exactly what we're doing, in creating mounds of amazing debt that somebody is going to have to deal with.

Not only that, but even currently, you look at the impact of flooding the system with money, but not having the equivalent abundance of services and goods that automatically creates inflation, as Milton Friedman eloquently talked about. And we are - it's almost as if we've read all the books and we say, yes, we too want to have the same problems that Argentina had and then Venezuela had, and then all the countries who did the same thing have somehow we're going to be different? I don't think we're going to be different. And we're smart enough, we should be. I think the average American person knows that we are creating a monstrous problem for ourselves.

BRUCE: Well, sir, we lived through the Carter years, right, we've seen a lot of different presidencies. We've seen that with what President Trump did that this is not normal, that leadership matters, that standards can be set. And it is very strange, sir, for adult people, men and women, Joe Biden's been in office for almost 50 years now. For them to suggest things that we know historically, there is not one successful effort to implement this, that this spending of money it's almost like it's Monopoly money at this point, like it's water.

CARSON: That's correct. And nowhere in the world, nowhere historically, has the big push to serve socialism worked. It always seems good in the beginning when you still have a pile of money to deal with. But as Margaret Thatcher said, "It's great until you run out of other people's money". And you will run out of other people's money, because first of all, people won't be making as much money, but also many very successful people will take their money and go elsewhere. That's exactly what happened in France some years ago, when they became wild with their taxes. And that's exactly what will happen to us as well. Not to mention the fact that we put a big stop sign on the manufacturing and some of the things we're drawing people here. It's just going to have a horrible consequence.

BRUCE: It's almost as though that's a horrible thing to even have to consider that they want this to occur, but we will have to make sure they're not successful. Dr. Carson, thank you for being with us tonight. Your insights are always terrific. Thank you, sir.

CARSON: Thank you, Tammy.

BRUCE: Now, instead of heading off inflation, the Democrat-control Congress went full steam ahead on the January 6 commission. Of course, we really know what that's all about, targeting and punishing Trump supporters. So thankfully, Republicans blocked the commission legislation from passing out of the senate earlier today. They accomplished something. But now Democrats are pushing for a Select Committee.

Joining us now is Harmeet Dhillon, attorney and CEO of the Center for American Liberty. You'll know that name, her name and the name of her organization, because of the extraordinary work they do in encouraging freedom and working on civil rights issues. Harmeet, aside from the political motivations of everything that Congress is doing, would a commission or a Select Committee actually get anything done and get any answers that already the FBI and the DOJ are working toward and investigating? What it would accomplish anything different?

HARMEET DHILLON, CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN LIBERTY: Well, absolutely not. Tammy. You pointed to this in your opening about it. This is purely sort of the election time come early here, campaign season come early. And you can see that from the absolutely vicious tweets and comments that democrat politicians and candidates are putting out there about Republicans voting it down.

And so to the Republicans who voted for this wrongheadedly, they should pay attention to this fact, whether they voted for it or not. Democrats are smearing all Republicans with this. Not people who were there at this riot, people who broke and entered into the Capitol, but all Republicans.

So this is a political theater, and we should see it for what it is. And we should let the criminal process play itself out. Certainly, there's a very aggressive criminal process happening, I think, overzealous. But this type of thing only interferes with that, interferes with the testimony and just keeps the focus off of fixing the problems in our country. And it's a political stunt.

BRUCE: Right. And it just - it continues the division. And that seems also to be the mission is to continue to have us at each other's throats to malign 75 million Americans as terrorists. It's this fear-based malignancy that perpetuates itself. I do have a few other legal questions since I've got you, I'd like to ask you about.

The Daily Caller is suing Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago for only granting interviews to journalists of color. Do they have a case in this regard?

DHILLON: Oh, they have a very good case. This is both a First Amendment and a 14th Amendment problem. We have a long history in the United States of making sure that when politicians give access to the press, they must do so on an even handed basis.

And the left established a precedent against President Trump when he was in office that in his private account he couldn't even block followers. So this mayor is blocking reporters on the basis of their race. So get out the checkbook, Chicago. They're going to lose this one.

BRUCE: Well, this is the way to do it, I think, is to sue. And briefly, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill denied tenure to the "1619 Project" founder, Nikole Hannah-Jones. She says she's now considering suing the university alleging anti-democratic suppression. Does she have a case on this?

DHILLON: Well, look, most academia, including UNC, in my home state of North Carolina, is liberal. And so the fact that they even added a liberal academic institution, they couldn't tolerate this. I think it speaks very well for academia. But look, when you dig into her comments on the three sets of lawyers that she has, she is basically claiming that regardless of her scholarship, she is entitled to tenure, because previous people who held her chair got tenure. Nothing about the merits and she's had bipartisan criticism of her shoddy journalistic and artistic endeavor. So I think this is the right decision, good for UNC Chapel Hill.

BRUCE: Yes. That's a very good point. And yes, it goes back down to entitlement again. Harmeet, great job. Again, thank you for joining me tonight. Appreciate it.

DHILLON: Thank you, Tammy.

BRUCE: Have a good Memorial Day weekend.

Anti-cop radicalism taking over the Stanford University campus. Plus, Laura speaks to a University of Chicago student who is bravely speaking out against her school's vaccine mandate. Stay right there.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When I say f- the, you say --

CROWD: Police.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There you go. F- the --

CROWD: Police.


CROWD: Police.


CROWD: Police.


CROWD: Police.


BRUCE: That's a way to win friends and influence people. That was an Abolish Stanford protest, a group of students who want police off of their campus. Their parents, of course, must be so proud. You heard them chant defund the police, but it doesn't stop there. Their other slogan is "Cops Off Earth" which other than being grammatically very bad, it's also rather threatening.

Joining me know Chaze Vinci, Stanford University student and correspondent for campus reform. Chaze, thank you very much for joining me. Stanford has got a great reputation. It's considered one of the better universities. I'm from the University of Southern California, so it's not as good as USC, but that seems to be a little crazy. Do all the students on that campus really want this?

CHAZE VINCI, STANFORD UNIVERSITY STUDENT: There's been a series of protests on Stanford's campus focused on total police abolition. They're being organized by a group of radicals known as Abolish Stanford, many of whom are communists. This is a very vocal but strong minority on campus. Participants, as you mentioned, have been saying things like "f- the police" and want to see an end to law and order. They won't stop with abolishing Stanford police. They want to eradicate police off the face of the earth.

BRUCE: I will tell you, Chaze, couldn't they just go to Minneapolis and they could see what it's like to even just have not as many police. Or they could go to Detroit or Baltimore, all these great American cities. We know what happens when there is no police. It almost sounds like they don't want to be committing crime. Who would want no police at this point?

VINCI: Colleges are where radicals go to test their ambitions, and they spread like wildfire from these institutions. As you mentioned, they recently hung a banner saying "Cops Off Earth." When they say cops off earth, they mean it. These are future global leaders, and they have international ambitions. They are anti-Semites as well who are allied with Palestinian liberation movements and have made themselves a known enemy of Israel on social media.

BRUCE: This is what I think is very important, and perhaps your campus reform you guys are doing this. A lot of people don't know this. They think they are just regular kids who went to school and then turned into this because it's important, whereas in fact these are extremely radical, and that's even an insult to the word "radical," but these are nonsensical, chaotic, anarchic dynamics that we know are meant to destroy society at its foundation. And if you ignore it, if you don't take it seriously it can have impact. Is it having impact on that campus in particular, do you think?

VINCI: Absolutely, I've seen some fellow classmates of mine radicalized by these absolutely absurd beliefs. They won't stop at abolishing Stanford, as their namesake implies. They want to abolish our republican institutions. These revolutionaries want to learn about revolution, how about they look to the Constitution and the founding of the country. We should be learning about the revolutionary impact of the Constitution and the rights it secures as citizens under God, not these Marxist doctrines.

BRUCE: Chaze, fortunately the a majority of Americans agree with you, and we've got to take this seriously and make sure that it's known that it's not good to be put up with. It just doesn't make any sense. It's also dangerous because they are serious, and we have seen the damage that has been done throughout the country. Chaze, thanks for joining me tonight, I appreciate it. Great job.

VINCI: Thank you for having me.

BRUCE: Now, let's go back to Laura.


LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Hundreds of colleges and universities across America are mandating COVID vaccines for students heading to campus this fall. This is despite the fact that none of the vaccines have been approved by the FDA, which begs the question, why are schools forcing this?

Joining me now is Audrey Unverferth, who is a University of Chicago student and cofounder and editor in chief of "The Chicago Thinker." Audrey, so, the University of Chicago, which is a phenomenal school, doesn't so much buy into all the P.C. nonsense that so many universities do, but it is requiring proof of vaccination for you guys to come back in the fall? Tell me why you're against this.

AUDREY UNVERFERTH, CO-FOUNDER, "CHICAGO THINKER": Right, right, my thoughts exactly. First and foremost, thank you for having me. It's an honor to be here. And I'm really, really saddened by the fact that my university is now mandating that all students take the emergency use authorized vaccines in order to return to campus this fall. I honestly believe that students and parents should have the liberty to choose whether or not they engage in this medical experiment. I personally do not want to take the vaccine.

And to be clear, if people are comfortable with the vaccine, if they want to be vaccinated, that's totally fine. But on this issue I'm pro-choice, and I believe that I should have the right to make an informed decision about myself and the risks with both the vaccine and with COVID.

INGRAHAM: So if you don't show proof of vaccination, do you just Zoom the classes? Do you just -- you're not even allowed on campus? How is that going to work?

UNVERFERTH: Right, that's what's awful. So in just about a week and a half I will be a rising senior, and I love the university, I really want to be on campus with my friends this fall. But I'm being forced to choose. I can either get vaccinated and be on the quad with my friends, go to class in person, or I can stay home and go to class remotely via Zoom if I choose not to take the vaccine.

INGRAHAM: Sorry, Audrey, are you guys considering a lawsuit against the university for this?

UNVERFERTH: I've been getting that question a lot, and honestly, as a 21- year-old student I'm not quite sure what to do here. I really feel powerless, which is why I'm thankful to be on air with you tonight, because I don't know what to do to fight this. But it's really disturbing to me because these COVID vaccines have not been traditionally approved. They're emergency use authorized vaccines. We don't know very much about them. And furthermore, students my age are at extraordinarily low risk from dying from COVID. We're more likely to die from the common flu or pneumonia.

INGRAHAM: And I think the spread on campus is 0.2 percent or 0.02, some ridiculously low amount of spread. So that's surely not a concern. And by the way, "The Washington Post" is reporting that in legal filings and letters to employers and universities, attorneys from Siri and Glimstad focus on the expedited process known as emergency use authorization mandating that the vaccine clear that way they argue is illegal and unenforceable. So this is what some of the legal thinkers are mulling, Audrey. And so there may be an avenue here.

UNVERFERTH: Right. No, I hope so, and actually just today one of the other campus newspapers announced that the positivity rate for COVID at U Chicago right now is zero. So I hope --

INGRAHAM: Zero now.

UNVERFERTH: It's zero right now, which is crazy. And I hope that the legal experts start speaking up, continue speaking up about this issue because I am not alone. There are a lot of my colleagues both at "The Chicago Thinker" and beyond who really don't want to get this vaccine.

INGRAHAM: And a lot of the kids, Audrey, who have already had it, who have already had COVID, and that's another reason they don't want to get the vaccine I imagine.

UNVERFERTH: Right, right.

INGRAHAM: Unbelievable. Audrey, thank you for speaking out, and we will be following this.

UNVERFERTH: Thank you.


BRUCE: Zero at Chicago, wow.

So coming up, the worst media offenders of the week. THE INGRAHAM ANGLE has got its eyes on you. Jeff Lord and Mercedes Schlapp are here to break it down, all the takes for you. You don't want to miss it, stay right there.


BRUCE: It is easy to become numb to media bias these days, so THE INGRAHAM ANGLE is keeping track of the worst offenders of the week. Joining me now is Jeff Lord, there he is, former CNN commentator and contributing editor of "The American Spectator," I'm glad the word "former" of course is in there, Jeff. Also with me is Mercedes Schlapp. You never really want former anything, but even here, former White House strategic communications director, what a great job and title, and senior fellow now at the American Conservative Union, making a difference for all of America. So both of you, thank you for being here with me.

Let's begin with a three minutes -- I don't know if we're going to play the whole three minutes. It's an MSNBC segment on, well, just watch the spirit of


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Delaware Senator Joe Biden at an event on the Hill gently ribbing his Senate colleague before absolutely going to town on an ice cream cone. Joe Biden has been a senator, a vice president, and now a president himself. There has been a lot of change in his political career over the years, but the one constant is that Joe Biden really, really loves ice cream.


BRUCE: Wow, yes, he really, really does. I think he probably needed a cigarette and a shower after that report there. Mercedes, I seem to remember this headline when President Trump also really liked ice cream. It's like remember that new scandal, Trump gets two scoops of ice cream when everyone just got one, because you know why, President Trump was good and everyone else was bad. Mercedes, what's your take on this?

MERCEDES SCHLAPP, FORMER WHITE HOUSE STRATEGIST COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: First of all, that's fake news, because when we worked at the White House you can get as much soft serve as you need it, OK? But I do not understand, Tammy, what the obsession is with the Democrats and ice cream. You get Nancy Pelosi and she has a whole refrigerator filled with ice cream. And then the journalists, they are like Biden's and clubs where the hardest question they ask the president is what flavor ice cream are you eating. So it's not only two scoops for Biden, it's two scoops on a waffle cone, and that is a celebration for the liberal journalists.

BRUCE: Jeff, I have a feeling you have an opinion on this, yes?

JEFFREY LORD, FORMER CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Mercedes work for President Trump. I worked for President Reagan. I am sure that we can both guarantee that the press never would have treated Donald Trump or Ronald Reagan like this. I was physically present in the White House when the press corps was screaming, literally screaming at President Reagan, demanding that he answer this, demanding that he answer that. This is just absolutely pathetic.

That said, we know why it is being done, because they want to protect their agenda, protect the leftwing agenda. And so they need to protect Joe Biden, so that is what they are doing.

BRUCE: It's like baby talk trying to get somebody to be quiet, patting us on the head, telling us to go along.

On to the next one, as you know the other networks are still obsessed with January 6th. Here's what one reporter said about it. Listen to this.


CAROL LEONNIG, "WASHINGTON POST" REPORTER: I find this moment the 9/11 moment to domestically. There were attackers. Unfortunately, there are many, many people in the country who have been stoked to believe that those attackers were doing something patriotic. And Republicans have played into that.


BRUCE: Moving from something lighthearted to something awful like this. Jeff, that's an obscene comparison. It's just a remarkable kind of shocking thing to hear someone say. What does that even mean for you? And were the September 11th attacks not felt domestically? It's an astounding correlation.

LORD: Absolutely. This year I believe is going to mark the 20th anniversary of 9/11. And just to recoup or people who may not remember, who may not have been around, almost 3,000 Americans where mass murdered that day. This was horrific, this isn't even remotely close to what happened in the capital on January 6th. And for that matter, if they want to talk about that, good lord, there have been attacks on the Capitol in the Truman administration, five members of Congress were shot and almost killed on the floor of the House by Puerto Rican nationalists. When I was working in the United States Senate, a bomb went off in the capital. On and on these things have gone. This is not even remotely close to that, but particularly to compare it to 9/11 is truly insulting.

BRUCE: Mercedes, you couldn't be more right. What is shocking is that these are all things that should be taken seriously, that riot should be taken seriously. People are being charged with crime, several people died. I'd still like to know who killed Ashli Babbitt. What is your take on this amazing effort to conflate this with the mass murder of thousands?

SCHLAPP: Right, I think these journalists want to try to rewrite history. We know that 9/11 was an attack on the heart of America. And we saw thousands of lives being lost. There is actually a great opinion piece by Debra Burlingame talking about the fact that 3,000 children never got to meet their parents. So we have to put this into perspective. While the capital riots were inexcusable and the thugs should go to jail, and that's why you have the Department of Justice and they are investigating and doing their work, there is no need for a commission because this is all about the political theater for the Democrats. And they are going to keep trying to blame these Republicans.

BRUCE: Mercedes, we're up to the end. I got it, we are all passionate here, and the Burlingame op-ed is in I think "The Wall street Journal." Great point. Jeff and Mercedes, thank you.

Chuck Schumer has a Rick Perry moment. The Last Bite explains. We'll be right back.


BRUCE: Chuck Schumer wants you to know three very important things about his new bill.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, (D-NY) SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: I've said for three reasons. Number one, because it's bipartisan. Number two, because it is going to take effect. And I forgot the third reasons. I had three reasons. I said them in my speech. Do you remember? What is it? What? Oh, yes, it's positive.

We're very proud of it.


BRUCE: It happens, it happens to all of us.

I'm Tammy Bruce in for Laura Ingraham. Check out my show "Get Tammy Bruce" exclusively on FOX Nation. I'm also the president of Independent Women's Voice. Greg Gutfeld is next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, 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 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.