Joe Biden stumbles over Warren's elitism during CNN town hall

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," November 12, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Thanks so much Sean awesome show as always. I am Laura Ingraham and this is “The Ingraham Angle” from New York City tonight. After weeks of Schiff and company keeping you the American people in the dark, we are just 12 hours out from the first public impeachment proceedings.

Tonight we are going to do something really important. We're going to take you through the many reasons to really understand what is going on here it could be complicated? Why this entire inquiry if you can call it that is a complete sham?

Along the way we're going to be joined by Congressman Doug Collins and Steve Scalise Lawyers Gregg Jarrett and Robert Ray. Also the President's son Eric Trump is going to be with us. Who is going to take us inside his father's thinking tonight and a lot more.

Also the Democrat's push for impeachment is routed in one inconvenient reality, there are 2020 roster front runners included are incredibly weak. Raymond Arroyo breaks down Joe Biden's Town Hall performance and what it means to the 2020 race. But first the House of lies that's the focus of tonight's “Angle.”

Everyday Democrats insist that the case for impeaching the President is getting stronger and stronger. They see the public impeachment and hearings scheduled this week as the climax in the plot to take down Trump and their media stooges are happily hyping.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's impossible to exaggerate the gravity of what we are about to undertake. People minds are going to be changed in shape because the truth is there is a mountain of evidence.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's what the American people need to see the parade of patriots.


INGRAHAM: Now, you have to know they're vernacular. If you resist Trump especially from inside the government, you are a patriot. But if you support him, if you applaud him you are an enabler. The Democrat's impeachment fiction is built on 5 falsehoods that are endlessly regurgitated on every media outlet throughout the day. They are as follows.

Number one, the claim that this inquiry is about getting at the facts, if that was the case why did a majority of House Democrats support impeachment before the Ukraine whistleblower's complaint went public? They never needed facts. They never needed evidence, not even member of the House Intel Committee who are now in charge of this inquiry.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The time has come Mr. Speaker for the House of Representatives to begin an impeachment injury into President Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think the President should be impeached?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're on that road right now and we certainly got closer after the Mueller report.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The President commits impeachable acts all the time.


INGRAHAM: Now that was back in July when the Democrats were scrambling to savage what they could of the Mueller report debacle. Now the second lie. IS that somehow the inquisitors take no glee from this solemn undertaking? According to federalist papers it's easy. But what Democrats really want to do is to produce an Emmy Award winning show.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This could be dramatized so our diplomats feel like soldiers in a battlefield and their commander abandoned them.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They wanted Taylor to be there because he is Vietnam vet and they wanted Marie Yovanovitch there because I'm told she cried in her testimony. They essentially want someone who is going to be emotional to say I was a victim of the President.


INGRAHAM: Wait, a woman being emotional? I thought the Democrats recoiled that the idea of women being portrayed somehow as dam cells and distress. But remember we saw this routine play out with Christine Blasey Ford when Democrats used her tearful testimony and that ridiculous attempt to force Brett Kavanaugh to withdraw his name during his Supreme Court confirmation battle.

Now they hope this woman Marie Yovanovitch is a better more credible version of Blasey Ford. The third lie is that the hearing will be fair and even handed. Absolutely if you think trials in China are fair.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Adam Schiff among many things has been trying to claim that this is a fair process by saying that Republicans are allowed to ask questions. He gets to choose all of the witnesses and him and himself only which means it's not a fair process on the face.


INGRAHAM: That's just scratching the servers we're going to get into more of that later with our legal panel. And yet we have known for weeks now that the outcome was always predetermined. Why do I say that? Because Republicans could not even cross-examine impeachment witnesses behind closed doors.


REP. JIM JORDON, R-OH: We tried to ask the witness certain questions and Mr. Schiff would not let him answer.


INGRAHAM: Never would happen. So the question is what does Schiff have to hide? We have to ask the same question when it comes to the Democrat's tactic of shielding the identity of the whistleblower which brings us to lie number 4. The whistleblower has a legal right to anonymity.

The actual statue if Democrats care about things like statues states that only the Inspector General "Shall not disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of the employee". In other words, it doesn't prohibit anyone else from revealing the identity of the whistleblower, Congress and the press included. Read the Statue.

That of course the biggest lie of all, the Democrats have been telling this over and over again that the President's conversation with the Ukrainian President was improper. I will say this. Listen closely. Not only did the President say nothing improper during that July 25th phone call, he made important points about the fact that other nations in the region are not pitching in enough to support Ukraine.

It's about time we have a President who stands up for U.S. tax dollars. By the way we have the transcript too. We read it on a note two dozen times. We can see that the favor Trump requested was about investigating corruption and what really happened during the 2016 election. I think what happened is that when Trump released the Ukraine transcript it kind of caught the Democrats off guard. So the left's first reaction was to invent a bizarre conspiracy theory about the transcript remember that fake parity and the ellipsis over the in the transcript. It somehow hit a dastardly plot.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I had two staff members on my office the other day read it aloud. It took 10 minutes and 40 seconds. The phone call was 30 minutes, what's in the other 20 minutes of that discussion.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The ellipsis, the magical ellipsis, what was behind them?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All historical parallel to Nixon?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That gap in the tape.


INGRAHAM: Lucky for us the testimony of an NSC official and army officer Alexander Vindman put that question to bed. Here's what he told the House Intel Committee back to the transcript here. Question, but you don't think there was malicious intent to specifically not add those edits? I don't think so. Okay, so otherwise this record is complete? And I think he used the term "Very Accurate"? Yes.

Of course, it is. This was a call listened in on by as many as a dozen other officials including people Trump knew were listening and probably not fans of his policy. Now this gets to the heart of what's really going on in here behind all of the democrat theatrics. This is going to play out over the next couple of days.

What Americans should take away from this phone call is not that this guy should be impeached but instead thank God someone is out there looking out for America's interest where we have all of these other diplomats and all these other experts' just want to shovel taxpayer money out of the door, no question asked. No concern about corruption. It doesn't matter what you did before tomorrow or next year. The money is going to keep coming. No questions asked.

Thank God we are not thinking that way anymore. We need more elected officials to do what Trump did on that call. Question the use of military aid and other aid we are giving countries all across the globe and focused on America First. If you are our friend, and you are important us in the region we will help but we're going to ask questions. And by the way that means Angela Merkel could do more to pay her fair share.

Americans have to understand that. And this is why the Democrats are spinning. Leaking and they're trying to dramatize this impeachment farce for everybody to see. They are keeping any other evidence from seeing the light of day. That's why Adam Schiff's rules will rule over the next few days. That I just gave you a little primmer so you are going to understand this lot better by the time this thing wraps at the end of the week. That's “The Angle.”

All right, joining me now is Doug Collins Ranking Member in the House Judiciary Committee. Congressman great to have you on tonight I know you are very busy. We have seen the Democrats lie, spin and block GOP cross- examination. What other stunts are you expecting at the public hearing tomorrow?

REP. DOUG COLLINS, R-GA: Well, I think we're going to find out. It's really - you made a question you said what are they hiding? They are hiding the fact that they have nothing on the President. They are fighting the fact to everybody that these evidences when they have done these interviews that it shown that there was nothing improper on the call - the fact that President Zelensky and President Trump both said there was no pressure on both ends of this.

Did he ask proper questions? When we were called on as a government to make sure that corruption doesn't exist in a country we give aid to even if that happens to be a Former Vice-President and his son. That is a valid question on what happened in the past. This is something that the President was doing right.

So what they're going to try to do tomorrow is spin - I call it putting flowers on the show. They are going to say here are the worst parts. They are going to put the witnesses together. So you really can't even take time to delve into each of them individually. You are going to go at it under Adam Schiff's rules saying here's the way we are going to do it. And that's all they want you to see is the show. What is appalling to me is how the media has started this process and saying oh, this going to be the most important day in history. The drama is here.

INGRAHAM: It's ridiculous.

COLLINS: It is crazy.

INGRAHAM: I kind of half want Congress to just to turn its back and start reading old issues of "Vanity Fair" or something. This is so ridiculous on so many levels. I do want to get your reaction again I am treating this for humor's sake at this point Congressman. What one your colleagues said today on CNN.


REP. RO KHANNA, D-CALIF.: I don't think the American people want to hear from members of Congress or our spin or our interpretation. The facts here are so powerful. Let people just hear what happened.


INGRAHAM: What the facts here are so powerful. They want to hear members spin, but what the man in charge of this whole thing pulled this stunt.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: I ‘m going to say this only seven times so you better listen good. I want you to makeup dirt on my political opponent. Understand? Lots of it.


INGRAHAM: Congressman, do you expect anything like this in tomorrow's public hearing?

COLLINS: You are going to see a lot of theatrics from Adam Schiff. Adam Schiff as I have said many times before and we'll see it tomorrow. He has trouble spelling truth much less telling it. And for Ro Khanna to actually say that the American people want to hear from them, they are not going to spin. This is someone who joined the others especially ones on the Intel Committee who have wanted to impeach this President long before they ever heard of Ukraine and probably you could find it on a map.

This is the problem we're having right now is they simply want to impeach the President because they can't find a way to beat him. He is doing the things that he promised to do. He is looking after taxpayer dollars. He is putting America First around the world. He has his - one of the most appalling segments that you showed just a moment ago was when they said that this President was undercutting our diplomats. He is not undercutting our diplomats. He is making them strong if they have a President stands behind them.

INGRAHAM: Congressman, how did we get to this point where State Department employees who are great people and they devote their life to public service. But they actually didn't get elected. They didn't canvass the country or hold rallies or into Town halls. They are supposed to serve the interest of the policies of this President.

Now it's the opposite. They're the perpetual - they can call themselves whistleblowers when they are not to subvert Presidential authority executive authority and policy. That's what is happening on the Ukraine. You got a people who want money going to Ukraine including Former Bush Administration officials. You know who you are complaining about this? They want no questions asked and because Trump was asking questions, they wanted him out. It's as simple as that my view.

COLLINS: Well, I think it is. When I got to Washington, D.C., it was amazing to me again we talk about the swamp and we talk about the bureaucrats. There are a lot of people up here who try to really do good work but they don't like their messed with. And this President is a disrupter this President coming in and said I'm going to ask questions that nobody else has asked. If it's foreign affairs, if it's domestic affairs I'm going to get to the truth for the American people.

Here's the problem: if these diplomats and these other organizations who are all upset at the President and they said policy. That's not their job. Their job is to carry out the directives of the executives of the President and they're supposed to do it. But this Democratic Party, take this into account. Remember they'll use anything they can.

Even in my committee which was got sidelined because they were so inept with everything they've done. They actually brought in bring your donor to work day when they allowed two of their consultants - one of their consultants in the Corey Lewandowski hearing to asks questions to Corey Lewandowski, he shouldn't been able to ask questions. And this is a paid donor, bring your donor to work day. That's what the Democrats do.

INGRAHAM: Bring your daughter to workday, bring your donor to work day why not? By the way speaking was a good segue to this. Adam Schiff has put a Former U.S. Attorney but most importantly an MSNBC contributor Daniel Goldman in charge of questioning impeachment witnesses. Here's just one of his small utterances as a cable news talking head.


DANIEL GOLDMAN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I think legally we already now know that the President has committed a felony in order to obtain the office of the presidency.


INGRAHAM: Okay, that was his first bite of the apple in July of 2018. Again that was January 2018, that was all about Mueller. This is the kind of guy who is getting to the facts that have already been concluded.

COLLINS: Wow! What is really concerning here is the American people ought to really get concerned here. The Democrats are willing to put up people who already made up their mind in positions where they present themselves as arbiters of truth and fairness and the facts. This is just wrong. I mean, here he is already made up his mind he knows where it's going to be.

The Democrats know where they want to be. They just need to find the way to get there. And this is what should concern every whether you are a Democrat or Republican or Independent, when you get to this point, the founding fathers warned us about this. They warned that a political impeachment was imperiling our country. They were scared of this because they didn't want to own a position in which an executive to do his job was fearful of a Congress they would take political means to disrupt or to actually to remove him from office. This is a real concern.

INGRAHAM: Congressman, you don't understand. Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff are literally sleeping with copies of the federalist papers under their pillows at night. Okay, they are quoting federalist 42 for the 17. So they're doing that, so you just rest easy. Congressman, I really appreciate it. I know you are very busy. We really appreciate your prospective tonight. Thank you so much for coming on.

COLLINS: Thanks much, keep fighting.

INGRAHAM: All right. For years Democrats in the media they've dismissed the notion of the deep state. It's a figment of our imagination. It's another pipe dream on the part of the right.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: The President brands in his part of the so-called deep state bureaucracy of term popularized by right wing conspiracy theorist.

FRANK FIGLIUZZI, NBC NATIONAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: Over 25 years as an FBI official I've never seen anything that even looks remotely like some kind of deep state conspiracy.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: There is no deep state. I hate to break it to you.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: Deep state true or false?


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: There is no deep state, those who have that conspiracy theory who believe that there is this deep state working.


INGRAHAM: By the way now they are openly praising the deep state against the President. Watch.


PREET BHARARA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: By deep state if you mean professionals, who are constant professionals who are constant professional then God bless the deep state.

ELISE LABOTT, GLOBAL AFFAIRS JOURNALIST: Trump considers the deep state anybody who is not personally loyal to him. But I think most Americans feel that's not a bad thing. That's a good thing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank God for the deep state!


INGRAHAM: Here with reactions with the President's son and Executive Vice- President of the Trump Organization. Quite the evolution on it--


INGRAHAM: The deep state department it's hard to keep trying.

TRUMP: You know this is not an impeachment. It's a coup. It's embarrassing. This is the deep state because we are less than one year away from another election when you could have 130 million people get out to the polls and vote for the person that they think is doing the best job. The Democrats know it's going to be Donald Trump because - they don't have anybody on the other side. The country is doing so well on every front. Economy, unemployment, wages going up. The military is back. I mean, he is doing so incredibly well. They know they can't beat him the cast of characters on the left are--

INGRAHAM: Are you afraid of Bloomberg?


INGRAHAM: You know him, so what kind of--

TRUMP: Bloomberg has a zero chance. He has less than a zero chance. And Elizabeth Warren has less than a zero chance and Mayor Pete.

INGRAHAM: He is surging, in Iowa he is number one.

TRUMP: Honestly and Biden. Biden can't go through a sentence without fumbling. He is in Iowa and saying he is in Ohio. I mean, the guy is not exactly there. They knew they can't beat him. I mean, they know--

INGRAHAM: If that underneath this impeachment push they are worried about losing next year?

TRUMP: There is no question about it. It is a coup. You start with this Russian nonsense. Then you go to the Kavanaugh nonsense. And they keep on following on their face and they are following their face again and they put their star witness on the stand. Everybody known and had heard from the guy in years, Bob Mueller. We're going to bring him out, and we're going to show how Trump did something wrong and he comes out and he never even read the report.

INGRAHAM: What is your dad's mind set tonight going into tomorrow's public hearing?

TRUMP: People are bored of this. Americans are bored of this. That's how my father was this morning.

INGRAHAM: Yes. He is New York--

TRUMP: I was with him yesterday at the Veterans Day parade. There was this incredible soldier he was over to veteran "Battle of the Bulge". He stood up and he saluted my father and thank you for what you doing for this country. And you hear real Americans like this, who have accomplished so much right and then on the flip side you get to see the parallel. You get to see pencil neck Adam Schiff up there with his crazy eyes doing what he does every single day. So disconnected from real America, my father is doing an unbelievable job.

INGRAHAM: Do you think it would be better for your dad just to focus on the accomplishments and stuff he was doing today incredible speech about the economy and veterans. And just let his team fight the impeachment. And just let it, I don't think most people really care about it. I really don't.

TRUMP: You need to fight this lunacy. That's what America got. They have got a fighter in there. Anybody else would have been steam rolled by this nonsense.

INGRAHAM: "The Wall Street Journal" today is kind of shocking. They've gotten things wrong before but they said it's not the economy anymore, stupid. It says that the absence of serious recession or spectacular boom. The economy may have little bearing on how Americans vote next year. Is that really the case? Do you agree with their suspect?

TRUMP: By the way it's absolutely the economy.

INGRAHAM: They think its dislike or like or it's emotion that is going to sway the vote.

TRUMP: You know when people have the largest wage increases in the history of this nation and when you have the lowest unemployment in history of this nation and where the lowest African-American unemployment and Hispanic unemployment and people are taking vacations. They have great jobs and they have options and people are entering the workforce and there are 6 million people off food stamps. Believe me that's going to win the day.

INGRAHAM: How do you get the women to turnout for your dad? Because the women - you got to get these suburban women to vote especially in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Virginia might be lost but--

TRUMP: That's amazing everywhere I go, my wife does laugh going for Trump. Everywhere I go I can't tell you how many women come up: we are with your father. Don't believe the fake news. We're with him and I saw it in 2016. They same thing then, remember back then Laura they were saying the same thing about Hispanics. No Hispanic will ever vote for Donald Trump and all of a sudden he got record turnout Hispanic turnout for the Republican Party. These are the narratives they task. They want to catch doubt the do with these fake polls every single day and they're going to get it wrong. You mark my words they're going to get it wrong again.

INGRAHAM: I guess you're going to the travel the whole country and not be afraid to go to blue state America, go to California, go to Colorado he is going everywhere?

TRUMP: The man doesn't have any fearful bones in his body. He was in New York at UFC, right? He was down in Mid Town giving Veterans Day's speech--

INGRAHAM: I was in Alabama. I was in that box, he got an unbelievable reception. Eric thank you for being here tonight great to see you as always.

TRUMP: Thanks.

INGRAHAM: And next a new IG complaint points to the impeachment whistleblower engaging in illegal acts. We have a shocking report up next.



REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: When the time comes for impeachment, it will have to be something that as such cushion done bipartisan way.

SCHIFF: An impeachment becomes a partisan exercise doomed for failure. And I see that to begin by putting the country to that kind of lynching experience.


INGRAHAM: Schiff was not just lying but he is conducting this impeachment inquiry in the most politically damaging way possible. And ahead of the first public hearings tomorrow the House Intel Chair actually issued a set of guidelines saying that anyone who talks about the whistleblower might hear from the Ethics Committee. Now why might he witness for the members like that.

Well, today this reporting dropped on fox ICIG complaint alleges the Trump/Ukraine whistleblower may be soliciting elicit donations in the form of a go fund and some of it might be coming from overseas. Joining me now is Gregg Jarrett, Fox News Legal Analyst Author of the phenomenal book "Witch Hunt" and Robert Ray Former Whitewater Independent Counsel. Gregg, we are starting to get a sense of why Schiff and his fellow Democrats are hiding - what are they hiding and why they're hiding the whistleblower currently?

GREGG JARRETT, LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely. They are hiding the whistleblower so that Schiff can conceal his own collusion and then he in a pretext to impeach the President. They are also hiding the leaking of classified information by someone to the foe whistleblower which last time I checked is a crime.

They are also hiding the fact that this guy is a hyper-partisan, the whistleblower. Not a whistleblower under the law. This guy has connections to John Brennan, Joe Biden and Susan Rice these are all Obama.

INGRAHAM: Those photos of the whistleblower with pretty much every major Democratic impeachment player is kind of a funny meme going around the internet. Also I want to get to this point because the new argument they are making Robert is that the whistleblower, the identity and motivation, it's irrelevant. Watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think at this point the whistleblower's identity is irrelevant.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't follow red herrings like the President demanding to out the whistleblower.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They pulled the fire alarm. We have found the fire. Leave this person alone.


INGRAHAM: Leave this person alone. Robert. I don't take any of these people seriously. They all look like cartoon characters to me sorry. They are not believable this is like a bad soap opera except the acting in soap opera is better.

ROBERT RAY, FORMER WHITEWATER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: We are going 360 degrees in a circle because--

INGRAHAM: Why did the whistleblower matter? Why does the motivation, the identity and the associations matter?

RAY: Because if it's an orchestrated effort to do a hit for political purposes in order to engineer an impeachment, particularly one that one suspects is an impeachment in search of a crime, that is very directly relevant to the outcome in the House of Representatives or should be.

INGRAHAM: Does it become the fruit of the poisonous tree? It was a set up? We are listening in. We don't like your policy. We are going to try to do this and we are going to leak it out. That we're going to send it to "The New York Times." I mean, does it become all the fruit of the poisonous tree.

RAY: I think it does because it raises real questions about the deep state. The motivations of the people involved who didn't like going outside of the usual channels. It suggests that the State Department was ganging up to do pay back. It suggests also that within the White House there were even people who were not on team Trump so to speak--

INGRAHAM: Oh, my God, they are still at the White House?

RAY - and they are not carrying out the President's policies. To do something like this really does again get back to the one thing that you have to be concerned about. If it was an orchestrated hit in order to have a preview of what was coming, to line up all the ducks, and to proceed down a road in a partisan fashion, this is so hopelessly far away from what was done in connection with the Nixon impeachment. This is not even close to being anything approaching something that would be bipartisan.

INGRAHAM: Even Tom Brokaw had to laugh that off the other night.

By the way, we have Schiff now adding a new crime or impropriety to the basket of non-impeachables. Watch.


REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF., CHAIRMAN, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: As the founder understood bribery, it was not as we understand it in law today. It was much broader.

Bribery requires that you're solicit something of value. It doesn't have to be cash. It can be something of value. And clearly this was something of great value to the president.


INGRAHAM: So this just popped up this week. Did you notice this. Guys, this just --

RAY: Completely baloney.

INGRAHAM: It is complete, I don't want to say the word.

RAY: The major part of the baloney was the fact that they are suggesting that the framers didn't understand what bribery was.

INGRAHAM: Gregg, let Gregg in on this. But what is this? They are making up as they go along. Quid pro quo fell apart, so now --

GREGG JARRETT, LEGAL ANALYST: All you have to do is look at the conversation. Soliciting is a payment of something or bribery? No. There is no evidence of that. This bears no resemblance to fundamental fairness and due process. I wrote a column today that said this is nothing --

INGRAHAM: Fabulous column, by the way.

JARRETT: It's a clown show. The head clown is Adam Schiff. Think Bozo, not Pennywise.


JARRETT: This is impeachment that is based on rumor and innuendo. The two witnesses tomorrow are speculating based on triple and quadruple hearsay from a single individual who is on record saying I presumed there was a quid pro quo, even though the president told him there was no quid pro quo.

INGRAHAM: This is impeachment by emotion, inference, and third hand accounts as far as I can tell. Really quickly, Swalwell, if this is a clown wedding, he is the maid of honor. Watch what he said.


REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF.: If the president has evidence of his innocence, evidence that would exonerate him, now is the time to stop blocking witnesses from coming forward. And I can guarantee you, Wolf, if he had those witnesses, he would allow them to come forward.


INGRAHAM: It's prove your innocence, Robert.

RAY: Yes, and that's obviously not the president's burden. He doesn't have to do anything. It is the House impeachment managers, which I expect this group people will be, and it will be their obligation, if this makes its way to the Senate, to prove that there are high crimes and misdemeanors and abuse of office that constitute removal from office. The president doesn't have to do a thing, doesn't have to put on a defense. And it's their obligation to prove what the facts are that are sufficient to justify overturning the result of an election.

JARRETT: They are trying to reverse the burden of proof and invert the presumption of innocence, exactly what Mueller tried to do in volume two of his silly report.

RAY: We spent two months on quid pro quo, and now apparently they don't want to talk quid pro quo anymore. Now they want to just talk about bribery and extortion. One problem with that is that it's absolutely clear that a quid pro quo is required to prove either bribery or extortion.

INGRAHAM: Thank you, thank you. And by the end of the week, I think the egg, there are going to lots of chickens, lots of eggs, it's all going to be on the face of Adam Schiff. Gregg and Robert, thanks so much.

And there's been a lot of drama because certain deep state detailees assigned to the White House are blowing the whistle, so to speak. So how does one get this coveted role at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Why are they chosen? And can the president turn them away?

With me now to explain how it all happens is Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA ops officer and targeter. Bryan, how did the process start?

BRYAN DEAN WRIGHT, FORMER CIA OPS OFFICER AND TARGETER: Well, there are two different groups of people here. One is the working level set of analysts or policy coordinators. These are your midlevel, middle-aged folks who have policy expertise on a particular country or issue. These folks actually have to apply. This is an open call, particularly within the CIA, to go down to the White House and take a two-plus year rotation. So there is an open process. There is a senior panel that sits down and decides whether or not you are fit based on your knowledge of the topic or the country.

Then there is a second group of people, the country directors. And I'm simplifying this, but the upshot is you don't apply for that. You are tapped on the shoulder and said we believe, we being the senior folks all the way up to the seven floor, which would be Gina Haspel, the CIA, the director herself, would say we think you are going to be good at this, you could be good at this. We're going to nominate you to go downtown.

So that is the process. So the question is, can that be politicized? So the short answer is yes, absolutely. For the midlevel folks, the working level analyst, the people who are picked ultimately have the support of their seniors because those folks have generally speaking sucked up. To move up, you suck up. That's usually how it works in the federal government.

The other side of the house, much the same, except for these folks, they are not only just providing that substantive expertise. They are actually involved in the degree of the political ramifications of the things that they are recommending to the president or the national security advisor. And so if Gina Haspel believes that she wants to put her person in there, she can and she will. And that's a problem.

INGRAHAM: Yes, but Mark, the whistleblower's -- Bryan, excuse me -- the whistleblower's attorney Mark Zaid, has actually tweeted at you, basically saying leave the whistleblower alone. You are entitled to nothing about the anonymity of the name. On the other hand, the whistleblower is legally entitled to anonymity, so stop being a partisan ideologue. And from what I can gather, Bryan --

WRIGHT: Absurd.

INGRAHAM: -- and we're almost out of time, but what I can gather is if you are detailed to the White House and you have a policy problem with something the president is doing, all you need to do is call yourself a whistleblower, hire someone like Mark Zaid, and then you are golden. No one can bother you. No one can say anything about you. No one can question your motives.

WRIGHT: We have an anonymous CIA officer who kicked off an impeachment inquiry against the president of the United States. If people aren't alarmed by that on either side of the aisle, that we can have someone with the most powerful tools at their disposal, some of the most powerful relationships, send forward this allegation that, by the way, we've seen the transcript, and there's no there there, that we as a country don't have the right to say, who is this whistleblower? And if you don't give me the name, tell me about this political bias. We know that that is true. That is a demonstrated fact. What is that bias? That is fair game. And to say that that is not is absolutely, patently absurd.

INGRAHAM: It's just a name calling game. That's all they have at this point. Bryan, thanks so much.

And coming up, a new poll only proves what we said weeks ago -- Nancy Pelosi's most fateful decision was putting Adam Schiff in charge of impeachment. Congressman Steve Scalise and Democratic pollster Doug Schoen will be next to tell us why.



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: The Democrats in Washington would rather pursue outrageous hoaxes and delusional witch hunts which are going absolutely nowhere. Don't worry about it.


INGRAHAM: Weeks ago I said that the worst mistake Pelosi has made was putting Adam Schiff in charge of impeachment. And I think it's really showing now. A brand new poll out today revealing that 52 percent of Americans think Democrats are doing a bad job handling the impeachment inquiry.

Joining me now is Doug Schoen, former Clinton adviser and FOX News contributor, and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise. Congressmen, you all are seeing this unfold on Capitol Hill. Do your Democratic colleagues have any even some tiny signs of buyer's remorse?

REP. STEVE SCALISE, R-LA, HOUSE MINORITY WHIP: I think there is a lot of buyer's remorse, Laura, especially when you look at the fact when a lot of these members of Congress go back home and they fought to get the majority, they're in the majority. And people what have you done with it to help improve my life? And things like lowering the cost of prescription drugs could be law today, except that they are obsessed with impeachment. Our troops aren't getting the tools they need right now, Laura, because Pelosi is obsessed with impeachment. Our border is not secure because Pelosi is obsessed with impeachment.

That's the kind of stuff they are hearing about when they go back home, as they should, because people are looking at this and going wait a minute, the president didn't do anything wrong. In fact, Zelensky himself - there were only two participants in the call, and Zelensky himself said there was no pressure, and he got the money. And so Democrats still move forward because they made this unholy pact with their far left socialist base that wanted to impeach Trump on day one.

INGRAHAM: We're going to get to Hillary Clinton in a second, Congressman, because she is now talking again about getting in. But the latest poll, Doug, on the issue of impeachment that CBS just did, it's another interesting metric. OK, here is the survey, "How much you're you heard or read about Trump's phone call with the president of Ukraine that prompted a whistleblower complaint and the current inquiry?" A lot, 44 percent, some 37 percent, none, 19 percent. So they haven't read much into it, read or heard. I travel a lot. Literally no one talks about the substance of this impeachment. Everyone is talking about football or their talking about their kids or what is going on in school. But I just think it misses the mark. I go back to what Tom Brokaw said. It's not an obvious thing here. It's not connecting with a lot of people.

DOUG SCHOEN, CONTRIBUTOR: The Democrats thought initially they could do it with closed door hearings. When there was an outcry, they've now taken the stop beginning tomorrow of public hearings. This is an attempt to turn those numbers around, to make palatable what is for many people unpalatable. And Congressman Scalise is right. I say this as a Democrat. You win on the issues. They won the midterm elections on climate, on guns, on healthcare. They're not going to win on impeachment. And that's why this is so problematic for the Democratic Party and why so many swing members are privately very nervous.

INGRAHAM: Congressman Scalise, I was at a dinner in Alabama on Friday night.

SCALISE: I know what you were doing earlier that day. We could talk about that another time. Go Tigers.

INGRAHAM: I was at dinner. And sitting not too far from me, I think to my right, was Senator Doug Jones, OK, then you had Joe Manchin. They were sitting together. I didn't want to bother them. But I kept thinking Doug Jones is going to be this Senate fight, probably against Sessions, and he's going to go back and they're going to talk about, oh, we tried to impeach Trump, or we got Trump impeached, in Alabama? So are these red state Democrats, what are they going to tell their people? Even "The New York Times" wrote about this today in a piece saying they are going to have trouble.

SCALISE: Yes, and it's not just the red states. It's all these swing states and swing districts in the swing states where people care about their pocketbooks. They like the fact that President Trump fought to get the economy going again. And they are seeing higher wages right now, and all Democrats are talking about is impeaching the president over some whistleblower that they are hiding from the public, they still don't want this whistleblower to come forward who heard something thirdhand from somebody else about something that didn't even happen. Ultimately, again, this was all about withheld money that ultimately wasn't withheld. Ultimately, you look at what -- the facts are on the president's side, and yet they still keep pressing forward.

INGRAHAM: Doug, real quick, the 2020 field is obviously looking really weak. So we are hearing more and more of this from a familiar voice.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you going to run again?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That is 100 percent, so in a few days I'm not going to open my newspaper?

CLINTON: Well, I never say never to anything.

I will certainly tell you I'm under enormous pressure from many, many people to think about it. But as of this moment that is absolutely not in my plans.


INGRAHAM: Doug, what's your advice to your former boss? She's like if I'm basically dragged into it I'll think about.

SCHOEN: My advice would be, go home, close the door, shut your mouth, be quiet, and just forget about this. She lost when she shouldn't have lost.

INGRAHAM: We've got to go.

SCHOEN: Everything she has said recently has been nuts.

INGRAHAM: I thought you were going to say have a glass of chardonnay, like that election night.

SCHOEN: I think that's good. Maybe a couple of them, Laura.

INGRAHAM: We have got to go. Gentlemen, thank you so much.

And CNN held a town hall for Biden last night, and it did not go well. Can you imagine? Raymond Arroyo is here breaking it all down in moments.


INGRAHAM: Joe Biden's performance at that CNN town hall was scintillating. Joining me now with all the details, Raymond Arroyo, FOX News contributor. All right, Raymond, Biden has been going after Elizabeth Warren over the cost of her healthcare plan. And last night when she was challenged for calling her an elitist, Biden's response was colorful.


JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I know more than you. And let me tell you what to do.


BIDEN: And it wasn't she is elitist. The attitude is elitist. It's not about her. It's about the attitude out there. And imagine if I said to her, well, you should be in a Republican primary -- or you should be in a socialist primary. Biden is being -- right. And you're all say that. You know it.


RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: You know what we are seeing here, Laura?

INGRAHAM: I liked this. I like this hand motion.

ARROYO: Attitude, attitude. This is an attitude of a candidacy losing altitude. There's a reason Michael Bloomberg has jumped into this race, and the reason is the moderate voice in the Democratic Party is nosediving with Joe Biden's candidacy, so he sees and opening.

But this is -- they're worried that the moderate voice is an endangered species. Biden looked like an endangered species last night. Laura, there were moments when he was very unsure of where to go or even who the moderator was.


BIDEN: You are a really talented reporter. And I think that the fact that Facebook, for example, would take down -- the politics has gotten just so out of whack. But it's going to come back in whack. This guy.


ARROYO: The poor man. This is a man and a candidacy adrift, Laura. There is a reason your ratings doubled that CNN town hall last night.

INGRAHAM: Oh, really.

ARROYO: It tanked. It tanked last night. There is no enthusiasm there, and that's a problem. We have got to show you Joe Biden, your favorite, Joe Biden's wife Jill on MSNBC. She was asked how she felt about Republicans on Capitol Hill wanting Hunter and Joe Biden to testify at the impeachment hearings. Like her husband, she stumbled through the answer and had a special message for President Trump.


JILL BIDEN, JOE BIDEN'S WIFE: This, I think has been -- Donald Trump, this plays right into his hands because this, for him, he is trying to distract the voters. Stop it. Stop it. My husband is going to beat you.


INGRAHAM: They both like doing the hand motions.

ARROYO: Attitude, it's an attitude.

INGRAHAM: Stop it.

ARROYO: Attitude. Stop it. I guess that's the hand -- look, the problem with this, Laura, you are seeing a candidacy recoiling. He is dying in Iowa. He's dying in New Hampshire. He has cut his staff by half and pulled back TV and radio ads.

INGRAHAM: He's still up in New Hampshire, though. He has the highest numbers in New Hampshire. Buttigieg is --

ARROYO: His only salvation is South Carolina, because he has a big black support in South Carolina, and that's his greatest hope. But if he loses Iowa and New Hampshire, it is going to awfully hard to resist.

INGRAHAM: That's his waterloo, right?

ARROYO: That could well be it, Laura, that could well be it.

INGRAHAM: His Waterloo, Iowa.

ARROYO: He has tried this six times. Two real runs, but he toyed with it six times, flamed out twice. This could be number three.

INGRAHAM: I don't think sending your wife out almost ever works.

ARROYO: The visiting angel has to be a little more articulate than the senior she is helping. That's always a good rule of thumb.


INGRAHAM: Raymond, thank you very much.

ARROYO: You're welcome.

INGRAHAM: Up next, I have got mail. Last night I gave you my email address, and tonight I am reading what you've sent me, at least the clean emails, when we return.


INGRAHAM: Last night I asked you to email me at, and we received some amazing responses. Angle fan Rich King writes, "Laura, I love your show. I can't speak for anyone else, but I would love to see you institute debate rule, which is simply if anyone interrupts the speaker, his or her mic will be cut." I have been asked that before. My problem is, does it apply to me as well? Only to be fair. I get it. It can be annoying. We do our best.

We got this email from Robert Grayson. "My wife and I are worried that someone forced you to quit wearing your cross on your show. I hope that is not the case." Of course, this is the night where I don't have the cross on. It is dictated by the type of top or dress I wear. But no, I sleep with it, I wear it all the time, but sometimes it doesn't work with the outfit. Nobody is telling me not to wear it. Believe, I will be buried in that cross, but I hope not too soon.

Finally, Robert Hofawger sent this hilarious note. "Now that San Francisco has gone totally socialist and is trying to protect the homeless and criminals, why won't they go to Pelosi's house and camp and defecate and shoot up outside her house since she's so worried about them. Maybe she will even invite them in for a snack." We've often hoped that Nancy Pelosi would open her commodious abode to the homeless and to the drug addicted, and maybe minister to them with that mellifluous voice of hers.

All right. If you have any thoughts or comments about the show tonight, remember, e-mail us at And we might feature your e-mail.

It's all the time we have tonight. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team, they were at the Supreme Court today for the big, big hearing and they take it all from here.


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.