Laura Ingraham: Unhinged left threatening major changes to U.S. over RBG replacement

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from “The Ingraham Angle" September 21, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

INGRAHAM: I'm Laura Ingraham. This is THE INGRAHAM ANGLE from Washington tonight. Another round of impeachments. Well, yes, packing the courts and a forced government shutdown. Those are just some of the little moves that the Democrats have flow to disrupt a Supreme Court justice confirmation.

Senator Ted Cruz, a member of the Judiciary Committee and a former Supreme Court clerk himself, is here with insight. Also, the Trump DOJ has just designated multiple American cities as anarchist's jurisdictions. Victor Davis Hanson tells us what that actually means and why it had to come to this.

Plus, how did Joe Biden kill off two-thirds of the country? Raymond Arroyo explains it in Seen and Unseen. But first, riot at the court. That's the focus of tonight's ANGLE.

For decades and decades, conservatives have been disappointed by the Supreme Court's turn from being a fairly apolitical institution that calls balls and strikes and leaves most of the big policy decisions to elected officials to an activist body pressing liberal social goals on the rest of us.

Now, reading Miranda rights under the Constitution, that was one thing. But in 1973, everything changed with Roe v. Wade. Justice Harry Blackman and six others used the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to strike down a state law prohibiting abortion, which then took the issue away from all

50 states. And nothing has been the same since.

More than any other that case set the precedent for the court to act as kind of a super legislature to impose a new social order on the American people. But when unelected life tenured judges ended up taking power away from the people and exercising it themselves, that created a huge fissure in America.

Our framers never envisioned that a handful of unaccountable jurists would have such outsized influence. But that's exactly what happened. Now, conservatives have been patiently waiting and patiently working to repair this damage to our constitutional system, for as long as I've been alive, they've been trying. So, they've marched, they've raised money, and we've all voted for candidates who promised to restore the separation of powers to its rightful place.

But often we've come up short. Too often, justices nominated by Republicans end up evolving to the Left, from William Brennan and Eisenhower nominee to Warren Burger, one of Nixon's picks to David Souter of Bush 41 fame and John Roberts, a Bush 43 appointee.

In seminal cases, they abandon the principle of judicial restraint and joined the activist liberals. And one of my earliest memories as a young Reagan administration staffer was watching the Robert Bork hearings. That was back in 1987. What they did to him was vicious political blood sport, and Republicans weren't ready then to fight back. Well, a few years later, he warned about judges becoming social justice warriors.


ROBERT BORK, FORMER SOLICITOR GENERAL: There is two kinds of justice. One, the kind of justice the judges should be concerned with is justice under law, which means applying the law fully and fairly. There's a higher justice, which is justice according to morality, and that is ruling on for judges, that is for our legislators and for ourselves to enact our principles of morality into law, which the judges should then respect and apply.


INGRAHAM: Well, Democrats savaged him because they didn't like the fact that he was a strict constructionist, while they were motivated solely by their desire to protect their holy grail of abortion, they rejected his nomination and Anthony Kennedy went to the court instead.

Justice Kennedy was a very nice man, but he then spent decades disappointing the voters who put Reagan in office. But conservatives soldiered on within the constitutional framework. And we were told that we had to get control of our own party and then win at the ballot box to affect change at the court. Well, that's what we did. And we did it with Trump's victory in 2016.

And now that we have the chance to put a fifth judicial conservative on the court, I no longer count Robert as one. Democrats are threatening to blow up the entire system, hence the title of the ANGLE, right at the court.

They claim that if they win the Senate, they'll pack the court by adding new justices, expanding it. Something, by the way, that hasn't been threatened and tried since 1937 when FDR tried and failed to mold the court in his favor.


REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): Let this moment radicalize you. If Mitch McConnell is not going to honor RBG's final wish, we will.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Democrats are saying, well, we'll just pack the court.

What would the impact be?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Exactly. Look, you've essentially cheated and stolen over two seats, the Scalia seat and now this one. And I think they'd be well within their rights to do so.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think additional justices need to be placed on the Supreme Court.


INGRAHAM: This is just unbelievable. It's outrageous. So, Ruth Bader Ginsburg passes away at the age of 87. The Constitution gives the sole right to nominate her replacement to the sitting president, who is Donald J. Trump. And if his party has control of the Senate, they have enormous power to move a nominee to a full Senate vote. They didn't get these powers by accident.

It wasn't a mistake, they got them from the voters who gave President Trump over 300 electoral votes and who gave Republicans 53 senators in the Senate. That's how our system works. But now the Left would have us ignore the entire constitutional system because of something the deceased justice supposedly said in her final days.


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Her last wish is, wait until the voters decide who will be the next president before pushing ahead to fill her seat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She said, my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced by until a new president is installed. We believe that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Brazenly defying the dying wishes of a woman who spent her life devoted to realizing the full promise of the Constitution.


INGRAHAM: The full promise of the Constitution is in the Constitution.

Imagine if we took that attitude at any of the, I don't know, 500 occasions when we lost a big case at the court or when Bork's nomination went south or maybe after they horribly mistreated Brett Kavanaugh, imagine if we had reacted like they did, the Democrats would have been screaming, bloody hell. And by the way, since they don't like the fact that the GOP has a 53-

47 majority, they're also threatening to pack the Senate. That's something that's never been attempted.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They can abolish the filibuster. They can grant statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We talk about things like court reform, statehood for D.C., Puerto Rico. None of that happens if the Democrats do not take back Senate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What we'll do is very simple, we'll add D.C. and Puerto Rico as states. That's four new senators.


INGRAHAM: Oh, why stop there? Why stop at four? Come on, keep it going. By the way, it gets worse. If those threats fail, their surrogates will try old fashioned physical threats as well.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need to be out in the streets. We need protests out there every single day.


INGRAHAM: Now, remember what I said back in January of 2019 about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.


INGRAHAM: I think it's a mistake for conservatives not to take her seriously, to brush her off as kind of a flash in the pan or an upstart, she's as close to a thought leader that the Democratic Party has today.


INGRAHAM: This entire unhinged response to the RBG replacement is being driven by the Far Left of the party, AOC plus three, plus whoever else she's going to drag along with her. Biden was basically hiding most of the weekend. The man doesn't even know what to do. Surely, the leader of the Senate Democrats isn't appearing with a freshman congresswoman on a matter that the House has zero authority over. Maybe wouldn't do that, right, Chuck Schumer? Oh, yes, you would.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you be in support of potentially renewing talks of an impeachment hearing either against the attorney general or the president?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: We must consider again all of the tools available to our disposal and that all of these options should be entertained and on the table.


INGRAHAM: Schumer is embarrassing himself, but so is everyone else in the party. They're so obsessed with beating Trump and his voters that they're willing to destroy our entire system of checks and balances to do so, allowing the radical left to call all the shots. And we predicted it here on the angle, poor Biden, he can't get control of these people. He's just an empty vessel to be filled with radical policies by radical politicians who hate our history, hate most of our traditions and hate most of our people.

He's too weak to control the young Bolsheviks. He doesn't have the sharpness to redirect their efforts and now his entire party is going off the rails. The real choice in this election has nothing to do with Biden.

It's a choice between President Trump and the hard Left. And this confirmation battle will show us just how crazy the other side is.

Republicans are doing what they've promised to do for decades to put originalist and textualist on the court. We've never proposed packing the court or trying to add new states. Those threats are only coming from one side. The Democrat Party is no longer the party of Clinton or even of Obama, for that matter. It's the abortion party, it's AOC's party. And for that, they're willing to destroy everything we Americans built together over 244 years. One issue. Let that sink in for a moment. And that's THE ANGLE.

Joining me now is Rob Leider, former Clarence Thomas clerk and George Mason University law professor. Also, with me, Harmeet Dhillon, civil rights attorney and co-chair of Lawyers for Trump.

Rob, given what the Democrats are threatening, do you believe this confirmation battle will be uglier if that's possible, than Justice Kavanaugh's?

ROBERT LEIDER, FORMER CLERK FOR JUSTICE THOMAS: I don't think it will be ugly. Justice Kavanagh's was a pretty ugly and personally ugly confirmation. I do think that it will be just as contested, if not more so.

The stakes are higher at this point. A sixth vote will cement a conservative majority for decades. And I always say that for conservatives to get five votes at the Supreme Court, they probably need six or seven justices to get that on any issue.

So, from that end, it will present a shift. And I think the Democrats will fight with everything they have, but their tools are very limited because of some prior decisions they made in terms of breaking the filibuster.

So, I do think it will - I think it will be ugly. I think it will be as ugly as the previous confirmations. But I think it also shows how much the level of politics that have been injected into the judicial system.

INGRAHAM: Something that certainly some of our founders didn't want at all.

I mean, Alexander Hamilton didn't want this. He saw that this is not what the role of the court should be. And by the way, Harmeet, this is what Justice Ginsburg herself said about court packing just last year.


RUTH BADER GINSBURG, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: Nine seems to be a good number, and it's been that way for a very long time. There are some people on the Democratic side who would like to increase the number of judges. If anything would make the court appear partisan, it would be that.


INGRAHAM: Harmeet response to that.

HARMEET DHILLON, LAWYERS FOR TRUMP NATIONAL CO-CHAIR: Well, absolutely, Justice Ginsburg was right then, I don't know what her dying words or wishes were, but they're not constitutionally relevant. With all due respect and I disagree with Rob, I think that this confirmation is going to be nastier. It already is.

And in the Kavanaugh situation, we didn't have mobs threatening violence in the streets over these issues. We didn't have picketing of the Senate Judiciary Committee's home to pressure him physically and loudly. And we did not have Senate packing. We did not have so many of the other threats that they're throwing at us.

I mean, the court packing is an FDR thuggery. It's a long time ago they've been saying that. So, I think this is going to be everything on the table.

And I hope it's everything on the table from the Republican side to I say that as a Republican, because too many people on our side are talking about the rules of croquet when the other side is coming to this mobs and nunchucks and weapons.

INGRAHAM: Yes. Rob, I want to hit on that because I was spending time taking a walk down memory lane earlier today, watching the Bork hearings, because I was just you know, I was a young kid in Washington at the time and I was just transfixed by them back then. But he warned of exactly what's happening now. He warned of this type of chaos and they crucified him for it. I mean, they crucified Robert Bork. That was the beginning of a confirmation battle being turned into a political circus.

But the only thing we didn't have, and Harmeet is right, is a threat, a real threat of violence. I mean, they're preparing for civil unrest in Washington. They're preparing for it in New York and they're preparing for it in L.A. They are - authorities are preparing for it.

LEIDER: I mean, I tend to think optimistically that we will have that kind of civil unrest, but I do think it's important to emphasize--

INGRAHAM: Where have you been all summer, Rob? Where have you been all summer? You see what's happening in the country, it's already happened.

LEIDER: I mean, no, there will definitely be protests and some of them will get out of hand. But I don't think, I don't think it will be quite to the level that some may fear. But what I do think is important to emphasize is that we are a country that is bitterly divided over what the rule of law means. And this is really the confirmation where it comes to the head.

Republicans and Democrats have two totally different views on what the rule of law is. Do you, for example, follow the text and the original intention of the framing generation? Or does the Constitution evolve, and do you mix law with empathy? I mean, this will be - I'm not disputing that this will be intensely fought, and I think it will be intensely fought because the stakes are so high. I mean, this is a constitutional moment--

INGRAHAM: Rob, you're too young, go back and watch 87. Bork said - and Joe Biden said it to Bork. Joe Biden was that chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He looked at Robert Bork and he said this is a pivotal vote.

This is going to be a pivotal confirmation because of everything we're facing, meaning overturning Roe versus Wade.

And Harmeet, this is also a little snippet of what Biden, who's been around town for a long time said. Watch.


JOE BIDEN (D) PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: My colleagues and I, yourself and others will be engaged in a historic discussion that could affect the direction of our country. And I think it would be a disservice to the American people if we allow that bay to be clouded by strident rhetoric of the Far Left or the Far Right. Such inflammatory statements only distract from the central focus of these hearings.


INGRAHAM: Harmeet, that was a lie then. First of all, can you believe how long Biden has been around, half of those people are dead that were on the committee. So, Biden said, no strident rhetoric. They destroyed Bork, OK.

And now 33 years later, it's even worse.

DHILLON: Biden himself later in the proceedings went on to claim publicly that there would be women dying in the streets of back alley abortions, et cetera, et cetera, if Robert Bork became a Supreme Court justice. He by the way, I was so disoriented, he was able to speak in full sentences and commas and clauses and everything. That's not the Joe Biden of today, but the Joe Biden of today has the same lack of principle. His party has the same lack of principle, but now they're bringing violence. It is real. We are seeing it in every city in America. And you are frankly not paying attention if you don't think it's going to happen now to pressure senators who are on the fence to pressure members of the public, to make us stay home.

If there's one good thing about COVID, Laura, it is that there aren't going to be a gallery full of these leftists there pressuring in person. So that's one good thing. And so, the stakes are very high. Laura, you know, and I'm sure you're going to be talking about it. COVID litigation, our liberty shutdown efforts are so many important issues beyond abortion that have to be placed at the highest level by conservatives.

INGRAHAM: Well, we can't have - Rob, how important is it to have a vote before the election or is it feasible in your mind?

LEIDER: I think it's definitely feasible and I think it's crucial for legitimacy. President Trump has a mandate, he definitely has a mandate that runs through the election. I think from a legitimacy perspective, it is much better that someone be confirmed now before the election. You don't know what will happen in the election and I do think there will be legitimate concerns if the Republicans confirm somebody, were he to lose the election in terms of capability, they can do it. Justice Stevens, I think took about two weeks from nomination to confirmation. It's certainly not a problem.

There's no required process in the Senate that they have to drag it out.

The Senate just has to take a vote. The committee will take a vote. But how long the hearings are up to the senators. And I think if they don't do it, I think if the Republicans do not confirm somebody, it will be one of the great political blunders of the early 21st century.

INGRAHAM: Well, Rob, I couldn't agree with you more. And let me just say, we've had enough blunders on the judicial confirmation front. We don't need anymore. Panel, thanks so much. Great to see both of you tonight.

And coming up, as President Trump chooses RBG's replacement, we're going to hear from someone on the shortlist of potential nominees. Senator Ted Cruz joins us in moments with can't miss analysis of how the president should proceed and reaction to all of the hyperventilation and threats now from the Left. Don't go away.



SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): Leader McConnell in the Republican Senate majority have no right to fill it, no right. There's only one way, one way for this chamber to retain its dignity, and that is for four brave Senate Republicans to commit to rejecting any nominee until the next president is installed.


INGRAHAM: Dignity. Isn't that a funny word coming from Chuck Schumer? Well, four years ago, he was saying just the opposite, but don't expect the media to tell you that. The fact is the Democrats will say or do anything they need in order to keep President Trump from putting another constitutional originalist on the court. They spent the last three decades ruthlessly breaking precedent to do so.

And this time around, they're trying to intimidate the kind of moderate Republicans with threats of court packing and D.C. statehood. Now, while this has worked on some squishy GOP senators, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, he's not having any of it.


SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (D-KY): The American people strengthen the Senate majority to keep confirming this president's impressive judicial nominees who respect our Constitution and understand the proper role of a judge.

We're going to keep our word once again. We're going to vote on this nomination on this floor.


INGRAHAM: Joining me now is Senator Ted Cruz, Senate Judiciary Committee member, former clerk to the late Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist, who was one of the greats. He's also the author of One Vote Away, how a Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History. Wow, which is now slated for release this month. That's pretty good timing.

Senator Cruz, great to see you tonight. Now, reports are tonight that Cory Gardner of Colorado who is up for reelection now voicing support for the nomination late tonight. Are you confident that you're going to have the votes to win it?

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Laura, I am. I think this is exactly why President Trump was elected. He was elected to nominate principled constitutionalists to the Supreme Court. And this is why the American people elected a Republican majority, and they did so repeatedly. They elected a Republican majority in the Senate in 2014. They did so again in 2016. And in 2018, they grew our majority in the Senate.

And the voters had front and center the issue of what kind of justices are going to go to the court. And Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, they embrace radical leftists who want to undermine the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

And President Trump promised to nominate justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas.

You mentioned my book, One Vote Away. We're actually moving the date up. It was going to come out October 6th. It's now coming out next Tuesday. And so, you can preorder it right now on Amazon. But the entire book is talking about the stakes of this election and one vote on the Supreme Court. And so, every one of our rights, whether it's free speech, we're one vote away from losing our fundamental protections on free speech, religious liberty, the right to worship according to our faith, according to our conscience.

We're one vote away from losing it.

And right after right after right, it comes down to the court and the president is going to make the nomination this week. And I believe we will have the votes in the Senate to confirm this justice and critically to confirm the justice before Election Day. I think we could wait till afterwards.

INGRAHAM: Senator, explain that. Rob Leider, who clerked for Justice Thomas and Harmeet, both agree with you. Why, in your view, is it so critical that that four-four tie not be possible post-election?

CRUZ: Well, Laura, there are a lot of reasons, but I think the most important is, we know this is a country that is divided, that there's a lot of anger. Joe Biden has been explicit that if he doesn't win on Election Day, he intends to challenge the legitimacy of this election. He's already hired a top tier team of lawyers headed by veteran Supreme Court advocates.

All of us remember what happened in the 2000 election, Bush versus Gore.

I was part of the legal team representing George W. Bush and Bush versus Gore. I think what we saw in Florida, in Bush versus Gore with litigation challenging the election, if Joe Biden loses, we're going to see all over the country, not just one state, but multiple states. And if the Democrats succeed in keeping this seat vacant, there would be only eight justices on the Supreme Court, eight justices. If they divide four, four, they cannot make a decision. The court has no authority divided four, four.

And so, we all remember the 36 days of uncertainty, of chaos that played out in Bush versus Gore without filling this seat. This election could last weeks or months. And with the kind of chaos we're seeing that constitutional crisis I think would be incredibly unhealthy for our country.

INGRAHAM: Yes, and Senator, I have to get your reaction to this tweet from Newt Gingrich, he said every person who seeks to intimidate, coerce, threaten or punish senators and their staffs and families during the Supreme Court nomination process should be arrested and prosecuted since this is a felony punishable by five to 10 years in jail. This should be stated clearly now."

Senator, many of us have been frustrated that more hasn't been done to protect people and places, landmarks. Although President Trump obviously pushed through his executive order, and Barr I guess is doing what he said he can. But now they're going to senators' homes. You could be vulnerable as well.

SEN. TED CRUZ, (R-TX):  That is exactly right. We're seeing the violence.

We're seeing the riots. We're seeing the chaos. And we're seeing Democratic jurisdictions that are allowing it to just go on and on, whether it's Portland or New York or Chicago or Seattle. And we're seeing the hard left right now. They're trying to threaten people directly. They've gone to multiple senators' homes on the Senate Judiciary Committee. They are angry, and the threat of violence is in the air. I can tell you the Capitol police is already very concerned.

In the midst of Brett Kavanaugh, you had angry protesters who would confront senators, who tried to intimidate senators. And I am very concerned that the next two months will see things get even worse. But we can't let that intimate us. We have a job to do.


CRUZ:  And our job is to honor the promise we made to the voters. I'm telling you right now, Laura, I believe we will have the votes and we will confirm a principled constitutionalist to the court before Election Day.

INGRAHAM:  And Senator Cruz, I know you are texting friends, buddies with Eric Holder, so you probably already know this.


INGRAHAM:  But this is something he said, I guess, today -- sorry, Saturday

-- about the current court majority. Watch.


ERIC HOLDER, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL:  You would have a conservative majority on the court, illegitimate conservative majority of the court. We need to think about court reform. And at a minimum, as part of that reform package, I think additional justices need to be placed on the Supreme Court.


INGRAHAM:  Obviously the future court majority. So court packing, very quickly.

CRUZ:  It's clear the Democrats, if they get the majority they're going to try to pack the court. But history is abundantly clear that when the president and the Senate are of the same party, the Senate confirms an election-year vacancy. That's happened 29 times in our nation's history, 19 of them were when the president and Senate were of the same party, 17 of those were confirmed.

On the other hand, when the president and Senate are of different parties, that's happened 10 times. The Senate has only confirmed it twice. That explains the difference between 2016 and 2020. The American people elected President Trump and a Republican majority because we want the Constitution and Bill of Rights protected. And that is our job. It's what we need to do.

INGRAHAM:  Senator, I hope your book is required reading for high school students and college student, certainly, who don't understand the Constitution and don't know it. And I almost don't even blame them for saying what they do because they never learned it. So I look forward to having you back when your book comes out. Thanks so much.

CRUZ:  Thank you, Laura.

INGRAHAM:  And Thursday night we brought you a story from a FOX affiliate out of Nashville. The station reported that internal emails revealed that the mayor's office had covered up data on the very low number of COVID cases at bars restaurants. Those case numbers were, in fact, low. Mayor John Cooper pushed back against the notion that there was any type of cover up, saying this information was released to the public over the summer and a streaming event. So FOX 17 retracted their story late Friday night, but added that they still were very concerned about the lack of overall transparency from Cooper's office. We'll keep you updated on any developments should they come.

But still ahead, Joe Biden made a desperate request of Anderson Cooper?

Raymond Arroyo has it all, "Seen and Unseen" next.


INGRAHAM:  It's time for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we reveal the stories behind the headlines. For that we're are joined by Raymond Arroyo, FOX News contributor, author of the forthcoming book, "The Spider Who Saved Christmas."

All right, Ray, Biden had only one brief appearance over the weekend in Philly. He seemed a little tuckered out as he began, well, until the shouting started.


JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE:  I have the great privilege of being a guest leader of this outfit for a year.

If Donald Trump has his way, the complications from COVID-19, which are well beyond what they should be. It's estimated that 200 million people have died, probably by the time I finish this talk.


INGRAHAM:  We can report --

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  His candidacy might die, but not the people.


ARROYO:  Yes, we can report with certainty, Laura, that two-thirds of the American population have not perished due to COVID. But it's moments like that which caused the president to comment on Joe Biden's recent appearances over the weekend. He put it this way.


DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:  They gave him a big fat shot in the ass, and he comes out.


TRUMP:  And for two hours he's better than ever before.


ARROYO:  Laura, the president seems to be suggesting that Biden is on some sort of stimulant or enhancer. Trump is asking that both he and Biden take drug tests before the debates, believe it or not. Biden today gave a speech with a mask on. I don't know if he's going to also debate with a mask on.

That will be interesting to see.

INGRAHAM:  Then it will be like this. I can never hear anyone on a mask.

Can you? You hear Schumer with AOC. They are both like -- like mummies.

ARROYO:  I don't what they're saying.

INGRAHAM:  I can't hear what they're saying. It's better that way.

Here's a bit of the Biden CNN drive-in town hall. This is like a throwback to happy days, except it was unhappy days.

ARROYO:  A return of nature, Laura, the bugs can't seem to get enough of Biden. He's always chasing bugs.


JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE:  Look, we learned, drug abuse doesn't cause mental illness. Mental stress and mental illness cause drug abuse. We have learned so much that we can change so much. And that's why we have to make sure that the super wealthy start paying their fair share.

One of the things I have done -- anyway, I'm going on too much about cancer.


ARROYO:  Laura, Biden has replaced clarity with indignance. He runs through kind of a scattershot spray of issues, and he never really answers the question at hand. Now, this was Anderson Cooper throwing softballs and never challenging him, but imagine what the debates are going to look like.

INGRAHAM:  That was one of the odder campaign events that I've seen.

ARROYO:  I agree.

INGRAHAM:  Because all of them, even the ones that were decent questions, you're right, Biden kind of reverts back to the golden oldies. And I guess every candidate does, but it's more pronounced with Biden. And he always does that thing, Raymond, where he says but no, no, no, I'm not going to get into that now. I don't want to bore you with that. I don't want to bore you? It's a campaign. What are you talking about?

ARROYO:  The saddest moment, Laura, of this event, of this drive-in town hall, was probably Biden's hot mic at the end of the town hall. Listen closely.


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR:  Think you to PNC Field for hosting us. Stay tuned for "Cuomo Primetime" coming up next.

JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE:  Can I see my family that's out there



ARROYO:  Can I see my family? Laura, this is what you hear at the eldercare unit when they disobey the people taking care of them. Can I see my family?

I want my family to help. I felt awful when I heard this. It's a terrible thing for a presidential candidate to be asking a host for his family.

INGRAHAM:  No, he always seems like he's wincing, almost like -- you mentioned passing a kidney stone or something. He winces through every question or answer.

To me, the saddest moment was when Jill and Kamala, or Kamala Harris's husband, tried to stage a car parade to compete with those Trump boat parades and car parades across the nation. This was shared by Dr. Biden's spokesperson.

ARROYO:  Oh, my God. Look at this, Laura.

INGRAHAM:  Where is it.

ARROYO:  There are three cars.

INGRAHAM:  No, that's the boat parade. That's the Trump boat parade. We don't want to see that.

ARROYO:  Three vehicles.

INGRAHAM:  Where's the car? There it is.

ARROYO:  It's unbelievable. It was three vehicles, and they are waving like it's the Rose Bowl parade.

Before we go, I watched the sound ruin that was once the Emmy Awards last night.

INGRAHAM:  Our ratings are going to tank now.

ARROYO:  Terrible. But they were less about television than the next election. They should've been called -- they should have had a hashtag, #Emmyssopolitical. This is what I mean.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  This is so freaking weird. Have a voting plan. Be a good human. Rest in power, RBG.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Black Lives Matter. Louder, Jimmy. Black Lives Matter.

Louder, Jimmy. Say it so that Mike Pence can hear it.

Black Lives Matter.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Go out and vote, because that is the only way that we are going to have some love and acceptance out there. Please do that. I am so sorry for making this political, but I had to.


ARROYO:  Laura, Daniel Levy, that actor, he's Canadian. He's telling people to vote in America, as the American Academy of Television Arts and Sciences just gave his Canadian series the Best Comedy Series Emmy. If that's not love and acceptance, I don't know what is. As you mentioned, Laura, partisanship coupled with shattering of shared TV viewing drove the Emmys to its lowest all-time rating. They're down to 5 million people, down from

7 million last year, and that was a descent. Nobody's watching any longer.

It's tragic.

INGRAHAM:  I actually like that last guy. He's a good actor. He's a really good actor. I like he had a cute skirt on. It reminded me of one of my old field hockey kilts. That was a nice, it was like a wool kind of fall number. It was interesting.

ARROYO:  Well.

INGRAHAM:  Well, Raymond --

ARROYO:  To each his own. My legs aren't good enough for that, Laura, so don't ask.

INGRAHAM:  That's right. Rebecca would -- anyway, Raymond, thanks so much.

ARROYO:  Only pants for me.

INGRAHAM:  Exactly. By the way, there was a special day yesterday. Wasn't there some special day yesterday? What was it?

ARROYO:  I can't remember, Laura.


INGRAHAM:  There was a fire alarm pulled at the Arroyo residence in New Orleans. But happy birthday, Raymond.

ARROYO:  I thought I might get out of it this year, the public humiliation.

But it will be the tweed skirt next. Thanks.

INGRAHAM:  Happy birthday.

All right, up ahead the DOJ has declared three cities dens of lawlessness and anarchy as peaceful protesters storm the suburbs. The media told you it wouldn't happen, of course. It was a lie. Victor Davis Hanson, next.


INGRAHAM:  You've heard of sanctuary cities, but what about anarchist jurisdictions? That's the designation of the DOJ today leveled on three Dems run cities consumed by riots and lawlessness. New York, Seattle, Portland, they could now lose federal funding if they continue to allow Antifa and Black Lives Matter's radicals to run wild.

And can you blame them? "The New York Times" reported today that Portland protesters are storming the suburbs, including one instance where they were triggered, triggered by an American flag. Quote, according to Portland resident Terrance Moses, "They said take it down. They wouldn't leave. They said they're going to come back and burn the house down."

Joining me now is Victor Davis Hanson, Hoover Institution senior fellow.

Victor why was this designation so important, and why now?

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, HOOVER INSTITUTION:  I think Attorney General Barr is trying to do two things. First is he's trying to recreate deterrence so it stops, so we don't have these riots going all summer long, all fall long, and then endangering the election and the aftermath of the election. That's what he's worried about.

But more importantly, he is trying to reestablish a principle that a citizen of Minnesota or Washington or Oregon is first a U.S. citizen, and second a state resident, and they have inherent civil rights. So what he's doing, he's looking back at the history of the old Confederacy, if you will, and he is saying just as Lincoln protected federal property in 1859,

1860 and 61, I'm going to do the same thing. But more importantly, he's looking at civil rights movement. When JFK said to, I think it was Alabama.

He said, if you're not going to support free and open housing to people regardless of race, we are going to cut off HUD funding. And then they said that Alabama, I think that was LBJ in 64 said, if you do not disperse welfare funds equitably and you continue to discriminate, the federal government is not going to give you any reimbursements at all. And that was very effective.

And then in addition, they looked at individuals that were crossing state lines with weapons, that were conspiring to commit riots and mayhem, and they charge them with racketeering, conspiracy --

INGRAHAM:  So that changed the dynamic.

HANSON:  -- weapons across lines. Yes. And it was a multifaceted way of restoring order by recreating deterrence, and it was predicated on the idea that people have inherent rights as U.S. citizens, and they are not stripped away just because they live in a particular state.

And the irony of it is it was very effective, and Barr has sort of recalibrated and applied it not to segregationists but to the anarchists.

And I think they are really surprised at it, because it's quite ironic.

INGRAHAM:  And Victor, this is how the New York Attorney General Letitia James responded to the DOJ's designation today.


LETITIA JAMES, (D) NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL:  The president in the past has indicated that he would punish New York for whatever reason. It is arbitrary, it is capricious. It may not even happen. This president is doing nothing more than saber rattling, rattling to his base, using words and phrases that, unfortunately, are filled with racial overtones.


INGRAHAM:  Yes, 15 seconds, Victor, but this is where they always go. It's back to racism.

HANSON:  Yes, all he's doing is doing -- all Barr and Trump are doing is doing exactly what JFK and LBJ did to George Wallace and said you can't run Alabama in an anarchic and chaotic fashion. Only this time the shoe is on the other foot and they don't like it.

INGRAHAM:  I love it. Victor, great history lesson needed today.

And coming up, the Pelosi-bot malfunctions on live TV. The Last Bite explains.


INGRAHAM:  Nancy Pelosi went on ABC yesterday to talk about Trump's forthcoming SCOTUS pick. Unfortunately, it seems someone on her staff attempted to reboot her mid-interview.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  But to be clear, you're not taking any arrows out of your quiver. You're not ruling anything out.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Good morning, Sunday morning. The -- we have a responsibility. We take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.


INGRAHAM: Oh, wow. That's all the time we have tonight. Shannon Bream and the "FOX NEWS @ NIGHT" team take it all from here, Shannon.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.