This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," March 19, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, 'THE INGRAHAM ANGLE' HOST: Good evening from Washington. I'm Laura Ingraham. This is 'THE INGRAHAM ANGLE.' No missed martial arts, however. We have a hot show, hot topics, of course hot guest, hello. You are not going to want to miss a minute. The firing of the number two man at the FBI has the deep state squealing. We are going to ask a former top man at the bureau if there really is an unholy alliance between the FBI and the other folks in the Intel community to bring down the President.

Plus, do you believe students organized millions of anti-gun marchers and hundreds of protests this Saturday? We are going to tell you who really did. And also, the IRS admits to knowing about millions of cases of taxpayer fraud by illegal immigrants. Guess how many prosecutions? It will make your jaw drop. And we are going to tell you why it is suddenly raining apologies from the ladies of the left. But first, the lawlessness of the Democratic Party, that's the focus of tonight's 'Angle.'

Over the weekend, democrats bent over backwards, now, not to lament the outrageous lack of truthfulness by former FBI Director Andrew McCabe, but to lament his firing.


REP. MARK POCAN, D-WISCONSIN 'MSNBC': What the President did was one of the biggest, I think, character flaws that we see in him. He lacks human decency. It was cruel the way he did this to fire someone literally hours before they would've got their pension.

SENATOR DICK DURBIN, D-ILLINOIS 'MSNBC': President Trump announced we have 90 days to get McCabe before he retires. He put out basically a hit on him and said, 'Do this before he qualifies for retirement.'

REP. TED LIEU, D-CALIFORNIA 'MSNBC': I've never seen a President of the United States go after an individual. This is awfully mean-spirited.


INGRAHAM: Now frankly, he should have been sacked a long time ago, and you notice what the Democrats weren't discussing there? But let's face it, the government here followed a meticulous process and they did it all by the book, which is good. The Justice Department's Inspector General forwarded its findings on the conduct of McCabe to the FBI's office of professional responsibility and it was they who determined that McCabe should be fired -- the big decision.

INGRAHAM: Now, just so you all know, this office is staffed with career personnel, not Trump loyalists. So when the government learns of wrongdoing, shouldn't it act immediately without regard of who cares when someone is retiring? If it was wrong, it was wrong and that's what the Justice Department did here. Well, you will notice that none of McCabe defenders that you just heard mentioned the actual reasons for his dismissal because those are very inconvenient. He's charged with leaking information about an ongoing investigation, the one into the Clinton email scandal to 'The Wall Street Journal.' Attorney General Sessions said that McCabe lacked candor about those leaks and at times he did so under oath. That's a big no-no. Now, with a response on Friday night, McCabe claims the media leaks were done with the permission of the former FBI Director Jim Comey.

INGRAHAM: Now, that could be a big problem for Comey, why? Well he has already testified under oath to Congress that he did not engage in leaking, nor did he authorize any leaks. Someone is lying here. And we haven't even talked about Andrew McCabe's conflict of interest. He should have recused himself from investigating Hillary Clinton since his wife Jill, when she was running for state office in Virginia, received nearly $468,000.00 from Clinton Powell-Terry McAuliffe's pack. And by the way, for other Clinton bundlers contributed $130,000.00 to Mrs. McCabe's campaign, not a bad haul. That doesn't constitute at least the appearance of a conflict of interest for her husband, who was investigating Mrs. Clinton? It is patently obvious at this point that the Democrats and their media toadies will defend and/or ignore any lawlessness, so long as it achieves their political end, which is, what, to win back power in Congress and eventually run President Trump out of office.

INGRAHAM: I was thinking about this. This endorsement of lawlessness, looking the other way at conflicts of interest, this isn't an isolated incident for the left. Remember, these are the same people who applaud the compassion and the courage of public officials who push sanctuary policies in cities like Chicago, Hartford, Connecticut, and all across California. The average working person has to suffer as violent, illegal alien offenders roam free after being released from jail in places like Oakland and down in L.A., and by the way, these are the same people who made all kinds of lame excuses for the rioting and destruction by mobs in Baltimore following Freddy Gray's death, and ditto for the nights of looting and fires -- those terrible events in Ferguson following the police shooting of Michael Brown.

Now, recall that juries acquitted the police officers in each case. By the way, the same type of people who, going back to the Obama era, they didn't bat an eye when Eric Holder declined to prosecute IRS official Lois Lerner for discriminating against conservative 501(c) Groups, and didn't care that Eric Holder's stonewalled congress regarding the fast and furious scandal, which by the way, I forgot until today, which led to a criminal contempt of congress resolution against Holder. And of course, we all remember, there were no repercussions for Susan Rice.

Remember when she went out and lied to the American people about what spurred that attack on our government compound in Benghazi, Libya? In fact, the only person who was actually charged after four Americans were killed there, including the U.S. Ambassador, was a man named Ahmed Abu Khattala, and he was found not guilty of 14 of the 18 counts against him, unbelievable, no accountability.

Let us not forget the Democrats who once prided themselves on caring about protecting civil liberties -- they don't seem at all bothered about using the vast power of our intelligence services to spy on members of Donald Trump's campaign team. Although the Democrats and their media surrogates seemed fine with this, by any means necessary approach, I do not think most Americans are. Check this out. It's a new Monmouth poll that finds that over half of the American public is either very or somewhat worried that the U.S. Government is monitoring their activities and invading their privacy.

In other words, they are noticing the overreach of the deep state and they don't like it. This matters to voters. It should. If any of us had done what McCabe did, we would probably already be in jail and he may yet be. To understand the dangers at play here, remember when President Trump vowed to reform the intelligence services as he came into office? Do you recall the chilling response of Senator Chuck Schumer at the time?


SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER, D-NEW YORK 'MSNBC': Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community-- they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you. So, even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he's being really dumb to do this.


INGRAHAM: And the deep state has tried to get Trump six ways to Sunday ever since. And even when they are caught, as McCabe was, Democrats will defend them because they all share the same goal. At every level, the Democrats have either willingly enabled or tolerated lawlessness, conflicts of interest, and ranked bias within our government, because they want power back. And that's why they've contorted themselves into these pretzels to protect Hillary, and that's why they are relentlessly pursuing Donald Trump.

But I'm telling you, this approach may end up backfiring. President Trump's approval numbers have gone up four percent to 43 percent in the last month. Maybe I'm being too optimistic, maybe. But I think Americans have a strong sense of innate fairness and if the Democrats idea of public service is seeming to embrace weaponizing intelligence, spying on American citizens and yet dismissing obvious criminal acts, when committed by their own party or illegal immigrants, well they made themselves need a November miracle to pull off the kind of wave election that they've been banking on, we'll see -- and that's the 'Angle.'

Joining me now for reaction from New York is conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is a Senior Fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and with me here in Washington, (Feld Homelake) (sic.), former White House special counsel to Bill Clinton and author of the new book, 'The Unmaking of the President 2016: How FBI Director James Comey Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency' great to see both of you.

All right, I got to play this sound bite from both of you before we get to the segment from Marco Rubio. Senator Rubio from Florida, he was asked over the weekend about the firing of McCabe. Let's watch.


SENATOR MARCO RUBIO, R-FLORIDA: I don't like the way it happened. He should have been allowed to finish through the weekend. That said, there's an inspector general report that is due and work that's being done and after he had retired, if that report would have indicated wrongdoing or something that was actionable there are things that could have been done after the fact, but 48 hours to go before retirement, I would have certainly done it differently given the fact they're still this report out there that hasn't come in.


INGRAHAM: Monica, I can't follow that. God bless Marco Rubio, I like Marco Rubio, but they did receive -- the Office of Professional Responsibility as I sat in the 'Angle,' did receive the findings of the IG report -- not public yet, but these are career officials who consider this information and wrongdoing is wrongdoing. Why should you wait until the guy retires to then say, 'Oh, it was wrongdoing, we are going to try and get his retirement back'? I don't get that analysis at all by Rubio and other Republicans also went along with that. What's up?

CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I like and respect Senator Rubio as you do, Laura, but his comments there tell you exactly why Donald Trump is the President of the United States, because that kind of establishment thinking of protecting one another, the elites protecting each other, whether it's Senator Rubio coming to the defense of Andrew McCabe, or whatever the case might be, the American people have had enough of that, because the most distinct and dangerous split in this country that has been going on for a long time, Laura, is less left-right than it is the elites versus everybody else. We have seen the unprotected class as Peggy Noonan once very incredibly and extraordinarily called them and she was right about that.

The unprotected class has been in revolt now against the elite ruling class. So, Senator Rubio's comments there about -- well, he may have committed provable crimes, but he still should have been able to retire with the full benefits and with respect. No.

We are a nation built on the rule of law. You either have rule of law that extended -- that's extended and applied to everybody equally, or you don't. And if you don't, then you don't have a code of ethics.

INGRAHAM: There's got to be some consequences, that was the point I tried to make in the 'Angle', consequences down the line. Whether it's the way they Hillary email investigation, Lanny, was handled, the sanctuary cities, the fast and furious Benghazi -- there seems like this pattern of unlawful, improper conflict of interest-written behavior that the Democrats just ignore, distract from, or look the other way from. I think that undermines the integrity of the rule of law and a lot of these agencies work. Your reaction?

LANNY DAVIS, AUTHOR OF, 'THE UNMAKING OF THE PRESIDENT 2016: HOW FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY COST HILLARY CLINTON THE PRESIDENCY': Well, first of all, I never thought I'd say the words, 'I agree with Senator Rubio', but I do agree. And most people, I think, get the difference between the decision on the merits, which I think McCabe was deservedly relieved by briefing the press and he actually explained himself, that we have the FBI follow the rules. The problem with James Comey and McCabe is the FBI should not follow its own rules; you have to follow the policies of the Justice Department. But Comey, as I wrote in my book, thinks he gets to define the rules, McCabe.

INGRAHAM: But Comey said under oath.

DAVIS: McCabe gets to define.

INGRAHAM: We actually have this sound bite. I want to play it for you, Lanny, because you wrote the book on Comey. Let's watch what Jim Comey said on May 3rd 2017.


SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY, R-IOWA: Director Comey, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?


SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY, R-IOWA: Question two, relatively related. Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?



INGRAHAM: Who was lying, Lanny? One of the two is not telling the truth, or has a terrible case of amnesia. But being someone as meticulous as Comey is, in his dress and the way he carries himself, how could he misremember that, or McCabe isn't telling the truth?

DAVIS: Well, first of all, they get to make their own rules because they think that their power is unto themselves. Jim Comey knew that when he wrote that letter on October 28th, he was violating 50 years of Justice Department policy. McCabe knows that you are not allowed to brief the press anonymously or otherwise.


DAVIS: If you're an FBI agent, but he then spoke as if the FBI was an institution apart. That's the problem with Comey and I think the FBI has to be part of the Justice Department reporting to the Attorney General and not a rogue agency that makes its own rules.

INGRAHAM: Monica, I want to go to the general premise of the 'Angle', which is the Democrats think they are riding high going into November, but I think that innate sense of fairness that the American people have -- I think it's inside of us. It's part of our DNA. You saw with what happened with the Clinton investigation. It ended up backfiring on Republicans. What about this, given the fact that so many other bad actors have been given basically carte blanche to walk away?

CROWLEY: Well, I think the American people, Laura, know that given enough time, history reveals the truth, and I think we are seeing the truth unfolds now and my understanding is that this initial McCabe firing is just the tip of the iceberg and there's a lot more to come that is even worse than what we've heard so far. And they also hold true, Laura, that Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe may be subject to subpoenas and we will see how that will unfold. But to your broader political question about the midterms, I think that's true. I think most of the American people understand that this country was built on the equal application of the law. To everyone equally -- not the elites protected, not Mrs. Clinton and James Comey and Barack Obama, Susan Rice.

INGRAHAM: Or anyone in the Trump Administration. I mean, if anyone is violating the law they should all be held accountable.

CROWLEY: That's right.

INGRAHAM: I don't care if you're Republican, an Independent, or Democrat.

CROWLEY: Correct.

INGRAHAM: Down the line, I have no problem with that.

CROWLEY: Correct and, and that's what they want to see and now that we are seeing these investigations unfold, I think it could very well backfire on the Democrats. I don't know how it's going to play out in November, but this idea that this corruption has been so deep in our top law enforcement agencies that are supposed to blindly apply the law, that it was so corrupt and partisan.

INGRAHAM: Lady Justice has a blindfold.

CROWLEY: That's right.

INGRAHAM: We are going to continue this on radio because I have to get Lanny in on radio to talk more about his book -- a great segment. I have a question guys. Is the deep state really out to get the President? Well, we are going to get the inside scoop from a retired FBI Assistant Director and Retired Agent next. And coming up, the IRS finally fusses up to exploding tax fraud committed by illegal immigrants. We have the details.

INGRAHAM: Before the break we detailed much of the deep states dislike of President Trump and over the weekend, former CIA director John Brennan directed this revealing tweet of the President.


JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: When the full extent of your banality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgrace demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat and he McCabe but you will not destroy America. America will triumph over you with bad writing.


INGRAHAM: Is the FBI colluding with the Intel community to destroy the Trump Presidency? Well, let's put that to the test. Retired FBI Assistant Director, Chris Swecker is with us and retired FBI Special Agent Terry Lane and Fox News Contributor and 'Washington Examiner' reporter Byron York.
Gentlemen, we have so much to get through, we've got to be pithy about this. I want to play for you right off the bat, this commentary -- this testimony by Brennan on May 23rd of last year at the House Intel Committee.
Let's watch.


HAROLD WATSON 'TREY' GOWDY III, AMERICAN ATTORNEY, POLITICIAN, AND FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Are you aware of any request within the community that were denied?

-- I didn't have visibility into request that were being made across the government, so I don't recall one that I was denied.


INGRAHAM: Okay so, Chris basically, if you ask for someone to be unmasked it's going to get unmasked. He kind of said, 'I do not -- I don't know the whole range of.' What do you make of that in light of what we know now, his tweets, the focus on getting Trump, he is a demagogue--That's a former FBI Director, CIA Director, excuse me?

CHRIS SWECKER, RETIRED FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR: CIA Director, well clearly, he was still working for President Obama while he was working for President Trump. I have never seen so much politicization at the tops of these two agencies, the FBI and the CIA. It's something that I hate to concede, I hate to admit, but under Director Comey, clearly there was an agenda to kill the Clinton email investigation and not even let the campaign finance-- or the foundation investigation continue or be conducted in a way that is designed to get to the truth of the matter. So, you've got two things going on there. I also think, however, Laura, that the Special Counsel needs to exist and we need to get to the bottom of some other things as well.

INGRAHAM: Byron, John Brennan, I think, showed in his tweet this weekend just how much animosity has built up, like Chuck Schumer warned, against the President. Samantha Powers also had a response. Not a good idea to piss off John Brennan, that's lovely language coming from Samantha Powers.

BYRON YORK, 'WASHINGTON EXAMINER' REPORTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: To say they got off on a bad foot, it's an incredible understatement. Go back to the transition. Donald Trump has been elected. The intelligence chiefs are working on their report about Russian meddling. They finished it in January of 2017. They briefed President Obama on it and they also briefed President Obama about the dossier and the salacious details in the dossier.
The next day, January 6th, they go up to Trump Tower, four of them are in there, including John Brennan and James Comey and they talked to him about the report on Russian interference, and then by prearrangement, three of them leave, leaving Comey alone with the President-elect, who tells him about the dossier.

INGRAHAM: But Comey knows the dossier is paid for, does he not, at that point, by fusion GPS -- Fusion GPS gets paid for by?

YORK: We think by the Hillary Clinton Campaign.


YORK: And we think that he.

INGRAHAM: Does he tell the President that?

YORK: Not to our knowledge but we really only know what Comey said, but think of this from the President-elect's point of view. First face-to-face meeting with the FBI and they tell him, 'By the way, we know about you and those hookers in Moscow'. So that is getting off on a really bad foot.

INGRAHAM: Not to mention rather the President meant to -- 'We are onto you'.

YORK: How else could he think that?

INGRAHAM: Joe DiGenova was on radio today with me, Terry, and he's coming in as a new lawyer on the Trump Team. He is a longtime contributor to the show and others on Fox, and this is what he said, let's listen.


JOE DIGENOVA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: I really believe that Brennan and Clapper were the people who are most, most responsible for all of the violations of law that occurred during the 2016 campaign that involved not only the unmasking, but the illegal disclosures and other things. So in many ways, this tweet by Brennan was a blessing in disguise.


INGRAHAM: Terry, for that he's being called, again, a conspiracy theorist.
Donald Trump is hiring a conspiracy theorist for one of his -- on his legal team and so forth, your reaction?

TERRY LANE, RETIRED FBI SPECIAL AGENT: Laura, I will tell you like we say in Texas, Brennan is an idiot. He has no idea how the FBI operates. His agency operates completely different. Although they take an oath to the constitution, they don't follow the constitution as we have to. Now, the FBI has to follow the constitution to the letter -- whenever we prosecute somebody, whenever we investigate someone, we have to follow all the rules of evidence, all the criminal procedures. The CIA doesn't do that, so I'm not surprised that Brennan comes up with this idiotic statement that he makes, because, again, he can operate on conjecture. His agency doesn't have to follow the truth. Their stock and trade is actually the untruths. So, I don't know if there's a deep state, but if there is, I am absolutely certain Brennan is part of that deep state.

INGRAHAM: Chris, I want to go back to you because you wrote a piece for Fox News about how truth telling by the FBI -- we're going back to McCabe's firing here, in a general sense of lawlessness, conflicts of interest, unethical behavior, the telling of the truth is so critical for the FBI, why? And that's a sacrosanct rule that must be followed and if it's not, it breaks on the trust. Tell us.

SWECKER: Well, certainly fidelity, bravery, integrity is the FBI's motto, and its integrity because they have to testify about things that they do. They have people's life, liberty and property in their hands. They can put their thumb on the scale of an investigation and deprive someone of liberty in a second. They have to tell the truth and they can't nuance the truth and they can't spin it. They have to tell the whole story the way it comes out factually, and McCabe knew that. His own OPR -- OPR reported directly to him. Candice Will, the Assistant Director of OPR was one of his direct reports. She basically fired her own boss because the FBI was cleaning its own house here.

INGRAHAM: Byron, I want to go back to you. Micheal Bromwich, tweeted out, 'We will not be responding to each childish, defamatory, disgusting & false tweet by the President. The whole truth will come out in due course,' but the tweets confirmed that he has corrupted the entire process that led to Mr. McCabe's termination has rendered it illegitimate. What can we expect?

YORK: I think we need to look at people who know something about this case, and even Adam Schiff, the Democrat on House Intel Committee who never misses an opportunity to criticize President Trump, has said, 'Well, perhaps this firing was proper', and then he criticized the way in which it was done. But people who know about this are being careful not to denounce this as an illegitimate sort of act and we do know that the nonpartisan parts of the FBI, Office of Professional Responsibility, and the Inspector General were behind this. Last thing, McCabe had a media tour ready before this. He had done several interviews with media people and the one thing he did not talk about with the details of what led to his firing.

INGRAHAM: Interesting, interesting and we will keep following that this all show long. We are out of time unfortunately. We will have you back. This is will be going on all week, next week as well. It might not shock you guys to learn that the IRS has known about, I don't know, 1.3 million cases of taxpayer fraud by illegal immigrants. What they don't know will probably shock you, and that's next.


INGRAHAM: OK, this is a pair now of mindboggling revelations from the IRS inspector general. The IRS documented more than 1.3 million cases of I.D. theft from 2011 to 2016 by illegals who received individual taxpayer identification numbers even though they weren't ineligible. And then in 2017 the IRS also discovered 1.2 million cases of illegal aliens filing tax returns with Social Security numbers that were either fake or belonged to someone else. Isn't that nice?

And when asked by CNS News how many of those thieves had been referred for criminal prosecution, the IRS replied that it did not know. It didn't know, what? Let's discuss how this could happen with a former IRS investigator Joseph Banister. All right, Joe, it's great to see you. OK, when I first read this today, I guess this came out on Friday and we didn't get to it because of all the McCabe stuff, if you or I cross the IRS, we are toast, let's face it. We are going to be audited for the next ten years. But illegal immigrants can steal ids and then file and get payments for child tax credits fraudulently, never get prosecuted. Explain how this can happen.

JOSEPH BANISTER, FORMER IRS INVESTIGATOR: You and your guest, Laura, were talking a lot about the deep state earlier in your show, and I would propose that the IRS is the original deep state operation. They've been around since 1913, and you talk about a power unto itself, unaccountable.
You mentioned Lois Lerner earlier, Commissioner Koskinen, I was really amazed that there was a firing at the FBI because it's one-zero, one being FBI and zero being the IRS. They just don't follow the law. The American people have no idea how much fraud and corruption goes on inside the agency. I've got my wading boots ready for President Trump to volunteer and go into the deepest, murkiest part of the swamp, and that's the IRS.

INGRAHAM: Remember Lois Lerner, remember all those disappearing emails and they couldn't find the BlackBerrys, and then I guess we found some of them. But this goes right to the heart of a lawlessness theme that we are going to be hitting all week long on 'The Ingraham angle,' that there seems to be, especially on the part of the Democrats -- I'm keeping everybody accountable, Republicans and Democrats, but on the part of the Democrats there seems to be this embrace of conflicts of interest, unethical behavior, rank bias, lawlessness if it helps their political agenda, which is why nobody trusts the government today. Very few people trust the government.

And this case of illegal aliens filing tax returns with fake numbers, getting refunds with fake information, robbing the U.S. government of tax dollars, is mindboggling. And yet it's happening without any prosecution. Who is responsible for this policy? Who was response to mike responsible for this prioritization or lack thereof?

BANISTER: I'm afraid it's the Congress ultimately, but of course the Congress is supposed to answer to us. So if we don't raise a stink about it, nothing is going to happen.

Actually Americans are better off if an illegal aliens makes up a Social Security number because as the statistics in the report show over a million numbers that were accurately issued by the Social Security Administration belonging to regular Americans, over a million of those were used by illegal aliens on W-2 forms. And the only way that the IRS found out about this is by the treasury inspector general looking into what goes on here and they see a W-2 with a Social Security number on it and a tax return with an I-10 on it, and they say wait a second, somebody with an I-10 isn't supposed to have a Social Security number.

INGRAHAM: The bottom line -- got to keep it really simple for the American people. The bottom line is there is document fraud, there's mail fraud, there's probably wire fraud. This is all fraudulent, and the IRS looks the other way, and I think a lot of it is politics. I know they have bigger fish to fry, maybe, but when you added up, 2.5 million people, that's crazy.

BANISTER: And zero prosecutions.

INGRAHAM: Totally crazy.

We are out of time, but thank you for your expertise on this, and I know we could do an hours just on the IRS. Maybe we will, actually, but thank you for that.

And by the way, American students may be mired in mediocre test scores, but boy can they organize national marches at the drop of a hat. Or can they? The truth about those student-led marches, next.


INGRAHAM: I'm going to figure out how I can be away this weekend, because a half-million protesters are expected to descend on Washington to push for more gun control and school safety. Hundreds of other protests are planned around the world on the same day, and we're told that each march is basically student-led. But did students really organize all of this in the five weeks since the Florida shooting?

Let's look into who is really behind this with 'Washington Free Beacon'
reporter Stephen Gutowski. Stephen, great to see you. This is just a bunch of kids having fun and doing what's right in a time when we need to say enough is enough.

STEPHEN GUTOWSKI, REPORTER, 'WASHINGTON FREE BEACON': Certainly that's the media narrative on this protest. It's just the kids sort of put this all on themselves out the blue. They are just very talented kids.

INGRAHAM: Articulate on TV, they're on '60 Minutes.' We might play a sound bite.

GUTOWSKI: Sure, but the reality is that's not true. There's a number of groups that are helping organize this event, Every Town for Gun Safety, which is Michael Bloomberg's --

INGRAHAM: He's personally put in how much money into that group?

GUTOWSKI: Millions.

INGRAHAM: Millions and millions. He's a multibillionaire himself. That's his big issue, gun control.

GUTOWSKI: Absolutely. And so they even created a new group called Students Demands Change, or Students Demand Action.

INGRAHAM: And again, because it's a 501-C4 as you wrote in your piece, it's limited on what information we can get, but we can bet, and this has come out, that this is going to be a massive push for voter registration.
In each of these sites they are going to have a canvas with voter registration stations. So the goal here is?

GUTOWSKI: It's to change policy, change the law.

INGRAHAM: To take back power. The goal is to take back power. And the midterms, drive the election narrative going into 2020. And it's the same kind of folks that were behind the women's march, correct?

GUTOWSKI: Yes, some of them are absolutely involved in organizing this, applying for permits for the march as well. And the group itself that they created, the C4 that you mentioned, that group is not just spending the money they raised on this particular march. They've also said they're going to spend it going forward on other lobbying.

INGRAHAM: Very interesting. We should be all excited because George Clooney and his wife and his two children are coming because he wrote a check. He just sold that big tequila company for -- I think he made personally 500 know enough of that, not a bad payday so he wrote a $500 million of that, not a bad payday. So he wrote a $500,000 check, chump change, to this group. But he's going to be there, so they're going to have a celebrity push much like the women's march. And this is all part of an organizational effort to drive the political narrative, correct?

GUTOWSKI: Yes, that's absolutely right. It's not just George Clooney either. It's also Oprah Winfrey donated half a million dollars, so did Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg. So there's certainly a lot of --

INGRAHAM: These are old Clintonistas. They are all back. It's the Clintonistas. We don't have time to play it, but the students went on '60 Minutes.' They are getting the full media push, and it is going to be blanketing the country. We see the graphic. Do we have the graphic we can put up from the march? Look at that. You can't even put the red flag. You've got to hand it to them. That got the money behind them and they got the organization. Will this have big impact, do you think, in November?
Is this an issue that drives the electorate?

GUTOWSKI: It hasn't been in the past, in probably the opposite direction of what the organizers want. In the past guns have been an issue that Republicans have dominated, that voters have gone to a Republicans for because they prefer their policies.

INGRAHAM: So the Second Amendment types are saying this is unfair, they're coming after our guns, law-abiding people's gun, we got to get out there and vote. So it could have a boomerang effect, but they are going to register a lot of people to vote. Stephen, great work on the piece.

And a big serving for humble pie for some of the loudmouths on the left. That's next.


INGRAHAM: For fun let's call it the diva apology tour. A number of lefty ladies are issuing mea culpas, isn't that nice, after getting stung with bad press following idiotic remarks.

Let's begin, because it's always fun to begin with the Clintons, with Hillary, who recently caused such an uproar in India when she wasn't falling down the stairs that even Democrats are disowning her. They were especially outraged over her latest explanation for her presidential election loss, what happened. She said that basically men pressured women to vote for Trump. Women are too stupid to think for themselves. That's what my take was. But instead of apologizing she wrote on Facebook, quote, 'I understand how some of what I said upset people and can be misinterpreted.' Notice in customary Clintonian fashion she didn't really apologize for what she said. She apologized to those of you too stupid to understand what he meant.

Hillary then made matters worse by justifying her claim, writing 'It's not that crazy when you think about our ongoing struggles to reach gender balance, even within the same household. I did not realize how hard it would make many who heard it.' And this tone-deaf woman is still trying to figure out what happened? Please.

At least MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle issued an apology, an actual apology, after mocking the face of Larry Kudlow, the president's new pick to lead his National Economic Council.


STEPHANIE RUHLE, 'MSNBC HOST': He ended by saying however things work out it will be God's will. That's an interesting way to talk about being the National Economic Advisor to the president, God's will?

As Larry Kudlow says, it's God's will.


INGRAHAM: Do I have something to toast? Yes, St. Joseph's feast day. Kudlow took exception and he tweeted on Friday, 'Sneering at faith and God's will, why still on air? She apparently believes people in business and economics should not have faith.' Ruhle reversed course the next day, tweeting 'I apologize if my comments came off as dismissive of his faith. I would never question another person's belief in God.' Kudlow didn't even point out the inappropriate word choice. We all make grammatical mistakes, but graciously he accepted Ruhle's apology.

And then there's Joyless Behar. Something possessed her to make these comments in February about Vice President Pence.


JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, 'THE VIEW': It's one thing to talk to Jesus. It's another thing when Jesus talks to you.


ROSIE PEREZ, CO-HOST, 'THE VIEW': Exactly! That's different!

JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, 'THE VIEW': That's called mental illness if I'm not correct, hearing voices.


INGRAHAM: Hearing voices. We told you two weeks ago that Behar had called Pence to apologize privately. He urged her to go to apologize to the tens of millions of Americans who were equally offended. And on Tuesday she finally did.


BEHAR: I think Vice President Pence is right. I was raised to respect everyone's religious faith and I fall short of that. I sincerely apologize for what I said.


INGRAHAM: Good for her. I'm glad she did. But these apologies seem to be driven by complaints sometimes rather than conscience. But however grudging, they serve an important purpose. And each puts the intolerant left on notice to think twice before they utter in public what they probably say about conservatives behind closed doors. The silent majority, silent no more. So be careful.

We'll be right back. 'The Last Bite' is next.


INGRAHAM: Before we go, it's time for 'The Last Bite.' This bizarre era of American politics took a fresh turn into these surreal today. Actress Cynthia Nixon of 'Sex and the City' fame, you all watched that in the 90s, right, officially announced her candidacy for governor of New York. In a surprise twist, get this, she's running as a pro-Trump Republican. Just kidding. Of course she's running as a Democrat, and running to the hardcore left of Governor Andrew Cuomo in the upcoming Democratic primary. Fortunately, Ms. Nixon's acting repertoire should prepare her for the brutal day-to-day political conduct with New York's legislature.


CYNTHIA NIXON, 'SEX & THE CITY': I've got to go. There's a big pile of tutus coming at me. OK, we need to have another talk.


INGRAHAM: Mr. Big I think is as qualified, and he would be a lot more fun running for the same office. And I heard Nixon by the way got some good reviews for her recent appearance on Broadway. Somehow I think in this case, though, her political act may be closing out of town.

Well, we want to tell you that all week long we're going to be doing a special series on the lawlessness of the Democrat Party. You do not want to miss it. It's not a day, not a night.

And we want to hear from you about tonight's show. Tweet me @IngrahamAngle.

That's all the time we have tonight. Shannon Bream and the 'FOX News at Night' team takes things from here. Miss Shannon.


<Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>