This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," April 4, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: All right. I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” from Washington tonight. There is a mystery though in this city. Who from Mueller's team is leaking? The Hill's John Solomon has some answers and a message to the media who published these leaks.

Plus, there were protests tonight across the country and today calling on Attorney General Bill Barr to release the full Mueller report. But do these people even know what they're protesting. Well, we sent Arroyo down into the crowd to get some answers today and he's going to bring the protest to life here in the studio. It is hysterical. So, stay there. And the saga of hate crime a hoax or Jussie Smollett is not over. So, did the disgraced Empire star make his deadline to pay back the city. A late breaking update ahead. But first, the Democrats make America hate again. That's the focus of tonight's “Angle.” Just when you think they cannot get any nuttier, the ever-radicalized members of the President's opposition party surprise us all anew. Now after going full on Red Scare for two years during Mueller only to be left jilted at the altar of impeachment, Democrats are returning now to their first loves, racial pandering and grievance peddling. So, rather than seeing America as a place of near endless opportunity, they paint her as a place of near constant oppression.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Identity politics is nothing more complex than saying, I see that there are barriers for you, because if you are physically disabled and we don't provide access then you can't get that job. That if you suffer from mental illness and you can't get your medication then your identity matters because I can't solve your problem if I don't understand it. And so, I leaned into identity politics. In fact, I believe in identity politics.


INGRAHAM: Now, one by one the 2020 Democratic hopefuls and a smattering of others have made the pilgrimage to the National Action Network conference in Manhattan a.k.a. the Reverend Al Primary, they're calling it.

Now, in an interview promoting his big conference Reverend Al sounded like a king or maybe a queen maker.


AL SHARPTON, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: I think Kamala Harris has taken the heat and showing some because he's got to show something, and we've got to not excuse the rest of them. I told Bernie Sanders, you are progressive, but are you progressive on race. I want to know where you are about our particular matters because we have particular problems.


INGRAHAM: Yes, my friends, there is a new left wing sponsored by Al Sharpton litmus test.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you think about the reparations to it.

SHARPTON: Well, I've always supported reparations and I think that we - first of all, we can debate about how we get it.


SHARPTON: But let's be clear that we owed every candidate needs to say, yes, we are in debt, because we took.


INGRAHAM: And just like that the 2020 Democrats marching down his cynical and crooked reparations road. Now their goal is to punish Americans who had nothing to do with slavery in order to appear as the most woke in the field.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you sign that bill? Yes. The injustices that have been visited and continue to be visited on people, we will never get the change that we need to live up to the promise of this country.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I talk a lot about in this campaign about intergenerational justice. Well, one generation owes to another.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our country will never truly heal until we address the original sin of slavery.


INGRAHAM: And they're also seeking absolution for some of their past racial sins like the unconscionable comment made by Pete Buttigieg in 2015 that quote "All Lives Matter" during a dispute about whether South Bend Police, their tape recordings should be made public. See Sweet Pete grovel.


PETE BUTTIGIEG, MAYOR OF SOUTH BEND: What I did not understand at that time was that that phrase just early into mid especially 2015 was coming to be viewed as a sort of counter slogan to Black Lives Matter and it's a reason why, since learning about how that phrase was being used to push back on that activism, I stopped using it in that context.


INGRAHAM: Harvard and Oxford must be so proud. He's the perfect embodiment of the milk toast millennial class, right, I mean whatever Al says jump. The amazing thing about all of this so is how today's Democrats, they feel the need to live in almost a constant state of denial, denial of all the amazing gains that have been made by Americans of all disadvantaged backgrounds, especially under the Trump administration. And heck, they even deny losing elections that they actually lost.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We can work as hard as we want, we can fight right. But if you're fighting against a system that is designed to oppress you, sometimes you've got to fight a little bit longer than you planned. I decided to acknowledge the stakes of the election, but I refuse to concede. Here's the thing, concession means to say something is right and true and proper.


INGRAHAM: Can you imagine if Brian Kemp had won - or had lost by only like four votes she had won, and he had challenged the results of the election what she would have said. My friends in an era of historically low unemployment, high home ownership, a small business growth, off the charts, real wage growth, finally What message do these folks offer America's voters. I'll tell you what they offer. Resentment, anger, division and alienation.

And these Democrats don't even acknowledge obvious gains. But you know why they won't because to do so would affirm that Trump's policies are working. We can't have that. Now remember it did take a Republican President to pass criminal justice reform which is already helping so many families across America. And meanwhile, the Democrats what they basically do is offer more demonization of the police.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There must be accountability for the enforcement of the law. There must be accountability for use of force and federal funds to local police departments and sheriff's departments must be tied to accountability.


INGRAHAM: But abolish ICE. OK. Now you might not have thought that the Civil Rights Act was ever even passed more than 50 years ago or that Black Americans have reached the highest levels of business, the law, medicine, entertainment sports, pretty much every area of society. And that is a very good thing.

Watching and listening to this Democrat feel kowtow to Al Sharpton makes it seem like America didn't even elect and then reelect its first black president. But for the hardcore racial rabble rousers, Obama's victories remember, they were just baby steps. What they want now is full on income confiscation meant to enforce equal outcomes if not equal opportunity.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're in the post-Obama generation. So, we have already seen a black president. We've already seen a black first family. Now, we want to know what it is going to mean. Symbolism is not enough now, it's substance.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And if there is no substance then we've gotten over the aura of the first.


INGRAHAM: Wow, pretty dismissive of Obama there. Today is the anniversary of the assassination of the Reverend Martin Luther King Junior. I was thinking like if he was alive today, I wonder what he'd think about such dismissive comments. And about a Democrat Party that believes it can regain power by living in a constant state of protest or racial hatred and denial. And that's “The Angle.”

Joining me now is Horace Cooper, co-Chair of Project 21, Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney and Republican National Committee Woman for California, and Shane Harris, a former Senior Representative of the National Action Network in California. It's great to have all of you on the show. Horace, what does it say about the Democrats that they all feel the need to kiss Reverend Al's ring?

HORACE COOPER, CO-CHAIR, PROJECT 21: Division works, if you rile up people, if you get them angry instead of looking at the gains that have been achieved, their party can benefit. They need 85 to 95 percent of Black Americans to vote straight ticket Democrat. The problem is many black Americans, white Americans and brown Americans are looking around and saying, what am I getting with all of this division.

INGRAHAM: Shane, were you surprised by what Al said about two terms of Obama. I mean he was obviously in the White House a lot. He was well liked. He was kind of an unofficial advisor, Valerie Jarrett mentioned that today to the Obama administration. But gosh eight years I mean reelected and a majority of white voters supported him. And it's kind of like well yeah that was a first. But now on to the real deal.

SHANE HARRIS, SENIOR REPRESENTATIVE, NATIONAL ACTION NETWORK: Well, you know Laura I was a representative of National Action Network well over five years. I worked with the organization. And I have seen them do a lot of good work around this country, particularly when it comes to assisting families in situations where they've lost their family members due to police shootings in particular situations where even artist and others have been helped and assisted by this great organization that does good work like many of the legacy civil rights organizations, NAACP and Urban League.

And I think that National Action Network's convention is an opportunity to convene around where we are now. We did the same thing around President Obama. When President Obama was in office, President Obama visited our convention when I was a part of National Action Network twice and both times there was a challenge to the President to come and deal with some of the very important issues facing America.

INGRAHAM: How did he do? What kind of a grade do you give him?

HARRIS: I give President Obama a B, because I think that President Obama although he was not perfect. He didn't do everything that black America wanted him to do. He delivered on a lot of important issues like health care where many, many now including--

INGRAHAM: Health care, the premiums are a way up for most people. And that coverage is way down, insurance companies did really well under Obamacare. Look at their socks. I hope you have in your portfolio.

HARRIS: Yes, but I'm talking about people. I'm talking about everyday people. African-Americans and our community.


HARRIS: President Obama did very well around criminal justice reform.

INGRAHAM: He didn't get it through. Come on.

HARRIS: But he had the first African American attorney general--

INGRAHAM: This is where you guys - the Trump got it through.

HARRIS: In the country--

INGRAHAM: Where was the tweet from Obama.

HARRIS: Under that administration there was police, there was call to action around civil rights and the police shootings and a real plan around that.

INGRAHAM: Well, guess what, talking over me Shane doesn't make it any more true that this President seated in the White House right now is the one who had the moxie to put it all on the line when he was get no credit from the National Action Network. Only person that showed up - only person. Hold on. The only person who showed up was Van Jones.

HARRIS: And I was there, and I was sitting right behind--

INGRAHAM: Well, good. Because today--

HARRIS: I was sitting right behind the Attorney General Barr and--

INGRAHAM: Well, good because today they--

HARRIS: Ben Carson.

INGRAHAM: Didn't talk about giving Trump any credit. I want to go to you Harmeet on this because this is what Chris Hayes at MSNBC going back to the denial of any gains made. There is discrimination in the country. You've experienced it as a Sikh American. Women still experience it. Blacks still. I mean there are bad actors in the world. There always will be. But this is what Chris Hayes said about the Republican Party after criminal justice reform. Let's watch.


CHRIS HAYES, JOURNALIST, MSNBC: One half of the American political party system is essentially a segregated entity. One half of the American political party system, there is two parties. One party is almost entirely all white. It's just a factual thing (END VIDEO CLIP)

HARMEET KAUR DHILLON, LAWYER AND REPUBLICAN PARTY OFFICIAL: Laura, I've been hearing this garbage since we were in college and I've been told that the Republican Party is the party of the white people and that hasn't been the case in my 30 years involved in Republican politics. But you know we don't even talk about that in the party. We're post-racial and I think that's what Martin Luther King wanted as well. We were talking about opportunity for everybody, but you know when going back to Al Sharpton, what people are letting him off the hook for is he's actually the granddaddy of this Jussie Smollett situation.

COOPER: Absolutely.

DHILLON: He has been cantering, pandering, hoaxing and if we talk about reparations, he had to make reparations to the Tawana Brawley situation. But everybody's forgotten that and moved on. And what we really are seeing is the Al Sharpton struggle sessions here and in order to like the Cultural Revolution in China, in order to get to the next level. The elders have to calm, and self-abrogate and apologize and wear a dunce cap. I mean you saw Pete Buttigieg. Why is he apologizing?

INGRAHAM: Why are these people acting like they were in and you know in Alabama in 1930 with hoses.

DHILLON: It's embarrassing.

HARRIS: He's apologizing.

DHILLON: I don't owe anybody reparations and you don't owe anybody reparations and--

HARRIS: But Mayor Pete is apologizing.

DHILLON: It's ridiculous.

HARRIS: Mayor Pete is apologizing though because many in this country have said all lives matter. We've got to really deal with that.

COOPER: It do matters.

HARRIS: Because black lives matter, black lives ....

COOPER: We are a nation of people, all lives matter.

HARRIS: Black lives matter means black lives matter too. That's what it's about. Black Lives Matters too and that is really the point.

INGRAHAM: Shane, hold on.


INGRAHAM: I agree with you, OK to this extent. Black lives matter too should have been the slogan. That's the great - I think that's a great slogan.

HARRIS: Well, I mean we can disagree without being disagreeable about slogans.

INGRAHAM: Slogan, I agree with you.

COOPER: Black Lives Matter was to say that black lives matter too. That was the goal.

INGRAHAM: OK. I want to talk about reparations.

DHILLON: It's all a rhetoric.

INGRAHAM: I want to talk about reparations and Shane I'm really glad you're at the White House, so kudos to you for being there because that says a lot about you that you were actually there because a lot of people didn't show up. But I'm glad you were there.

HARRIS: Well, I think that this is a good place where we should give the President credit.


HARRIS: And give his administration credit, but we also have to hold him accountable to the millions of other dollars that are going to be needed to get more people out of prison and that's why we're working with Van Jones and others.

INGRAHAM: That's why he wants to keep money in the United States and send it to countries that don't appreciate it or send it and give it to people who are breaking into the country illegally. So, this is - I want to read something, this is what Jason Riley wrote in The Wall Street Journal about the reparations debate just last a couple weeks ago. He's talking about Kamala Harris' comments about how people are responsible for these past racial sins. Kamala Harris wants to hold slavery responsible for black America's contemporary problems but that requires ignoring the progress made by blacks both in absolute terms and relative to whites who live much closer to the era of slavery.

For example, the soaring violent crime rates that produce so much quote trauma according to her in poor black communities today did not exist in those communities in the first hundred years after emancipation. Even though poverty rights at the time were much higher and racism was still legal and widespread.

Jason Riley's point, Shane your reaction to that. His point is, how do you tag that with today's problems given that long period of lower crime rates, lower homicide rates, a black man by black and of black men and other social pathologies which were much lower during that long time period until actually coming up to the 60s and the 70s when things kind of exploded.

HARRIS: Well, here's the reality about reparations is that we lower in a time where Republicans and Democrats must both address what the African- American compensation why it should get for what African-Americans went through. Let us not forget we gave reparations to many others in this country, in the Indian community. You see it across the line. You see reparations go to many, many, many people. But yet and still African- Americans are still disproportionately unemployed. African-Americans have not gotten the opportunities or the resources that many, many other communities have gotten. And I think that this argument is valid regarding reparations.

INGRAHAM: OK. So, you're not arguing, you're just stating your wish and saying everybody has to agree with it, but the overwhelming majority of Americans are saying no to this.

HARRIS: No, America owes black people.

INGRAHAM: Overwhelming majority of America--

HARRIS: America owes black people.

COOPER: Including a majority of pain that--

INGRAHAM: Hold on Shane, you had the floor for a long time now. Let Horace speak.

COOPER: Across the board. This is a dumb idea. It doesn't make sense. There is no correlation between the status of a black American, white American, brown American today and what happened with slavery. We have had an interim mixing and immigration effort that has changed and transformed the makeup of this country. You're not even able to identify. Does Kamala Harris, is she a--

HARRIS: Wait a minute.

INGRAHAM: Hold on.

HARRIS: How do you want to talk about immigration when you are supporting the Make America Great movement which is to push immigrants out of the country. I mean we can have different opinions, but we can't have different facts.

INGRAHAM: Don't explain me please. Shane, Harmeet is the only immigrant at this table. She's up from India. She got it.

DHILLON: Can I tell you something?

INGRAHAM: Real quick, because we've got Jussie Smollett, got to go.

DHILLON: So, Laura, all these people who are talking about how horrible America is. Trust me they don't want to go back to Asia.

COOPER: Absolutely.

DHILLON: Africa, Europe, wherever they came from because it's much worse there. This is the best country in the world, it still is, we have got our problems but--

HARRIS: So, let me ask--

DHILLON: Welfare state is not going to solve those problems.

INGRAHAM: Well, creating more grievance and - hold on, Shane. Hold on please. Creating more grievance or more resentment which if you tell the Serbian guy who came in five years ago, some of your money is going to go to the Somali refugee who arrived here 17 years ago that probably will cause some problems and not solve a single problem on pathology.

DHILLON: Time to move on.

INGRAHAM: So, Somalis should get some reparations. I don't get that. Jussie Somalia is not paying the $150,000.

DHILLON: Yes, that's right. So, the city of Chicago is not going to be at war with itself. So, the city attorney's office, not the DA's office is going to go prosecute him. And we'll see what happens. File a civil lawsuit and he's continuing to be in denial, but hey, if he keeps up with this path in a few years he can have a summit like Al Sharpton and make a career out of that.

INGRAHAM: All right. Maybe he could actually be--

HARRIS: Wait a minute. But Al Sharpton has not made a career out of race bathing like many of you all say.

DHILLON: Yes, he does.

COOPER: That's all he does.

DHILLON: That's his career.

HARRIS: Matter of fact, Al Sharpton was one of the most legitimate civil rights organizations in this country that has done good work in the community and it is a reputable place for candidates from Republican and Democrat to address important issues.

INGRAHAM: Tom Sol (ph), Walter Williams (ph), Shelby Steele (ph) have they ever been invited to speak to the National Action Network, any ideological diversity whatsoever. The answer is no. It's monochromatic when it comes to political views. That's a shame. It will be great to have a real conversation about these issues, but Shane we're delighted you came on. Delighted everyone's here.

Thank you so much and John Solomon is here next, oh boy, with some new reporting about the latest whodunit, which one disgruntled member of the Mueller team is leaking to The New York Times and later Raymond Arroyo engaged with some rabid Mueller conspiracy theorists who don't want to miss its latest report from the field. There they are.


INGRAHAM: All right. Last Friday night, we predicted that the media's crush on Mueller just would not stop despite the end of the investigation. Now, I hate to say it, but we told you so. They found a new Mueller story to keep the romance going to stoke their fantasies. Now mainly that anonymous folks on the Mueller team are actually upset by the Barr memo. President Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani reacted to this lame bombshell last night on our show.


RUDY GIULIANI, LAWYER: There are a bunch of sneaky unethical leakers. And they are rabid Democrats who hate the President of the United States. And I can't tell you how much false information they've leaked during the course of the investigation.


INGRAHAM: Well, after the initial New York Times story broke yesterday, a media pile on ensued, you've got The Washington Post, NBC both followed up with their own confirmation, almost as if they all share the same disgruntled sources. And then of course the cable propagandists weren't far behind.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You've got big breaking news tonight what appear to be the first ever leak from the Mueller team sending a shot across the bow to the attorney general.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: New and potentially explosive report.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, I mean this is remarkable.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The timing could not be better for the Democrats.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought it was all over. Well, maybe not.


INGRAHAM: Now if any of that sounds familiar it's because it is. This is the same pathetic tired reaction we've seen from these jokers for the last 22 months. Now I guess what they say is true. You never forget your first love and their first love is Bob Mueller. Joining me now is some exclusive new reporting for us is John Solomon, Executive Vice President for The Hill. All right, John you say, you haven't seen anything like this in your entire reporting career. OK. Explain that.

JOHN SOLOMON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, THE HILL: Well, seldom seen something like this. I think is what I actually said in the lead. But here's why, the title of my column basically says, if you don't indict, you can't incite. I know it sounds a little bit like Johnnie Cochran, but there is a really important part behind that.

The Justice Department rules derive from our constitution says, if a prosecutor cannot bring charges in a federal court they can't then go take their evidence walk it into the court of public opinion and try to smear you and that's what last night's leak was disgruntled Mueller sycophants trying to smear the President with a backhanded leak.

And here's one of the things I learned today in my reporting. It really gets to the political nature of what's been going on. When the Mueller people wrote the report, they wrote these little summaries like campaign summaries that could be released instantly for the public. That wasn't their mission. That's not what the statute says or even supposed to do.

The Justice Department looked at him and said, well, wait a second, there's law enforcement information here. There is grand jury information. We can't release this. So, they've been doing the diligent thing trying to go through that and fix that problem. But what sort of prosecutors create a final report that looks more like a campaign document than what the legislation called for - what the regulations called for.

INGRAHAM: Well, was that you were told by your sources--

SOLOMON: 100 percent.

INGRAHAM: DOJ. So, aren't they leaking to them?

SOLOMON: I've talked to multiple DOJ sources today.

INGRAHAM: Who is leaking. We're complaining the other guys leak, now they're leak. Everybody is leaking back and forth here. They're trying to defend themselves. They're trying to defend themselves obviously.

SOLOMON: Yes, that's right.

INGRAHAM: And hearing what was reported last night. So, your understanding is that the summaries as they're calling it that Mueller's team themselves produced, they themselves contain grand jury information that cannot be released.

SOLOMON: That's why the Justice Department had to slow down and fix what was there and so you know they're going through that process so that they give the public as much transparency as the law allows.

INGRAHAM: OK. All right. Kendall landing over at NBC who's embarrassed himself on numerous occasions in his reporting over the last year or so. He said this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're hearing from a separate U.S. official that some members of the Mueller team say that the evidence on collusion while not establishing a criminal conspiracy is actually very compelling. We need to see this report. The Barr summary by many accounts did not quite do a justice.


INGRAHAM: OK. Now, the standard for NBC now is if it's compelling, does it not criminal compelling. John, please react to that.

SOLOMON: This isn't an Ernest Hemingway novel. It's a legal proceeding. The Constitution and the Justice Department are clear and I think this is the final chapter in a very long three year saga in which we've repeatedly seen law enforcement and intelligence community assets being used to settle political scores rather than to do what they're paid to do with unsolved crimes and protect our country.

INGRAHAM: Unbelievable. John thank you for the reporting, we really appreciate it. And Chairman Nadler says, he's going to subpoena the full Mueller report which his Judiciary Committee voted in favor of party lines, but he's yet to make an official request or issuance so far. Joining me now is John Yoo, former Deputy Attorney General - Assistant Attorney General of the United States. Is Nadler bluffing here with a subpoena.

JOHN YOO, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I don't think he is. I think he's going to demand the Mueller report be produced. But it's just a cynical public relations stunt, because first as you pointed out just now it would be illegal for the Justice Department to release the Mueller report in full because there is both classified information and this grand jury information. Congress has agreed and passed laws that prohibit all that being put out in public. Second, if they're even going to try to enforce a subpoena, it would take years for it to get to --

INGRAHAM: How would that work? Explain it to the viewers.

YOO: Nadler and the committee would issue the subpoena. The Justice Department would refuse on these grounds that we have secret things in there that we're required by law to take out. Nadler would then try to go to court to enforce the subpoena. Most federal judges --

INGRAHAM: D.C. district court first.

YOO: D.C. trial court, and then D.C. circuit court, where actually President Obama appointees have the majority, but the D.C. circuits never wanted to step in the middle of this. And it takes years. It would take probably one or two years. The report will be provided by Barr in redacted form in just a few weeks. It will be well before any subpoena --

INGRAHAM: And what kind of legal jeopardy could Barr be in if he actually -- damned if he does, damned if he doesn't -- if he complied with that subpoena?

YOO: He can't comply with the subpoena. He would be violating the law. He's the attorney general. He's supposed to enforce the law.


YOO: It's amazing, actually, Chairman Nadler figured out a way to issue a subpoena to someone to break the law.

INGRAHAM: That's crazy. Twilight Zone. I have to ask you another question which has been bugging me. What about executive privilege? What about the deliberative process privilege? Why wouldn't the president's legal team say, wait a second, all the conservations the president had with staff about various issues that might have tangentially been related to this that might be shoehorned into this report by all the Democrats on that staff, why would that -- they not challenge some of this stuff being released on executive privilege?

YOO: That's a great question, and we've overlooked that. In addition to grand jury, in addition to classified information, there's all information that's protected by the Constitution that the Supreme Court has recognized about the confidentiality of conversations between the president and his closest aides and advisors. The president could choose to keep that privileged and not release it to Congress, too. President Trump could also waive it, and he could decide to put it all in the public. But the president's lawyers should have the opportunity, and attorney general, Attorney General Barr would normally look at the report to take that out as well.

INGRAHAM: Right, to get a privilege review. And as far as we know, Bill Barr is not doing an executive privilege review because the president is waiving his executive privilege. I wouldn't waive any of this stuff. I wouldn't trust these people not to cherry pick phrases from conversations or related conversations. Hey, Bannon, go do this, and then Bannon has to talk to them, then all of a sudden it's in the report.

YOO: And also I would urge the president and his advisors to do the review because they've got to think not just about themselves, but future presidents. Future presidents and future aides need to have candid open discussions. This could undermine the principle of that for future presidents and make our decision-making worse.

INGRAHAM: What about, real quick, Michael Cohen's Hail Mary? He said late today that he found another hard drive somewhere, and there might be documents on it. Don't send me to prison.

YOO: Actually, if this is true, Cohen is actually just providing the grounds that he wants to stay in prison longer than he was going to, because this means he hid evidence from prosecutors and investigating agents.

INGRAHAM: Where did he find it? Where did he find the hard drive?

YOO: Exactly. So if he deliberately hid it, he could actually end up going to jail for longer.

INGRAHAM: It's a desperate move. The other cables are seizing on this tonight, of course. Thanks so much, John, for coming in. We really appreciate it.

YOO: Thanks, Laura.

INGRAHAM: And does Stacey Abrams represent today's purest form of liberalism? Dinesh D'Souza tells us why her rant about identity politics today may represent the future of the Democrat Party. And later Raymond Arroyo and a report from today's Mueller protest in D.C. Oh, boy, don't want to miss it.


INGRAHAM: Now, a White House whistleblower named Tricia Newbold claims that the Trump administration shouldn't have granted security clearances to at least 25 individuals. Now, in doing so, Newbold called out a top personnel security official named Carl Kline. As a result, Kline, who isn't a political appointee, has had his name dragged through the mud and has been subpoenaed by Congressman Elijah Cummings, and has had to hire a lawyer. So are Democrats really in favor of smearing a career civil servant because of their hatred for President Trump?

Joining me now to tell Mr. Kline's story for the first time is his attorney Robert Driscoll. All right, Robert, we saw private citizens fall victim to the Mueller probe, huge legal bills. I have never heard of Carl Kline. I don't understand what's going on here. Explain.

ROBERT DRISCOLL, ATTORNEY FOR CARL KLINE: Carl Kline worked in the Security Office. He was 25 years in the military, 18 year civil servant, doing nothing but security clearances for all but two of those years. He's not a political appointee. And the Democrats are doing an investigation where they want to get into the SF-86 and the FBI files of top Trump administration appointees. And so they're alleged that somehow this career civil servant is the reason that they can get into these things. And so they subpoenaed him personally before the House. And now he's got a compelled deposition, even though I offered Chairman Cummings in a letter on Monday morning for him to appear voluntarily.

INGRAHAM: So if he'd appear voluntarily, why do they go through the rigmarole of --

DRISCOLL: Because they and the White House have a disagreement on scope. The White House doesn't think the House should have the raw personnel files of everybody, which is a reasonable position. But whatever that position is, it's not my client's problem. He worked for the White House. He no longer works there. And he will answer what he's allowed to answer, and he won't answer what he's not allowed to answer. But he's a career employee. It's not his problem. And yet he's the one subpoenaed in this.

INGRAHAM: Does he know this Trisha Newbold?

DRISCOLL: They worked in the same office, yes. He was her superior. And so the way this all works is --

INGRAHAM: I didn't realize they were in the exact same office. Now it's all making sense. So she's calling out the boss man, saying the boss man, 25 years, so he worked through eight years of Obama, was there during Clinton?

DRISCOLL: He was doing security things. He just worked the most recent job in the White House for Trump, but he's been doing security clearance issues for his entire career. This is what he does is analyze security clearance files. And so the way the process works, when a White House employee file goes in, a line person looks at it, a supervisor looks at it. And if someone things there's a problem it goes to Carl's desk. And she was below Carl in the chain of command, and she was upset about some of the decisions he made, and felt that her superior didn't explain them sufficiently to her. And so that --

INGRAHAM: She seems like a disgruntled employee. I know they call her a whistleblower, but I'm just surmising she had some disciplinary issue I know, it was a two-week deal. Maybe it's not the end of the world, but --

DRISCOLL: There's a complaint that Carl is sworn to secrecy on to respect the process, novel concept, respect confidentiality where it's appropriate. He will be cleared of that eventually. But all of this is just dragging a career guy in for no reason.

INGRAHAM: Elijah Cummings said they're not trying to embarrass Trump. They just want to process that work.

DRISCOLL: This is an inverse Fusion GPS. In Fusion GPS they used oppo research to try to create an investigation. Here they created a fake investigation to do oppo research, because --

INGRAHAM: Oh, my God, that's so genius for them to do, but it's so nefarious and it's so not cool.

DRISCOLL: Because if you think about it, there's no legislation Congress can pass that would affect the president's ability to grant or not grant security clearances. It's a plenary presidential authority. So what does this investigation all lead to? What's it's going to lead to is the Democrats getting hold of SF-86 files and going through them for all the high-profile people they want and leaking it to the media.

INGRAHAM: Leaking personal information about their --

DRISCOLL: Look at what happened with the whistleblower. She went in over the weekend, and on Monday, the names of the people she talked about were made public, at least speculation.

INGRAHAM: Unbelievable. Robert, this made it so much clearer for us. Thank you so much. We really appreciate it. We'll keep in touch with you after your Congressional appearance, or his Congressional appearance.

All right, I want to dig in a little more on something I touched on a little bit earlier in THE ANGLE and ask this question. Is failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams kind of the purest distillation of what the modern Democratic Party today is all about? Well, it's about identity politics to them.


STACEY ABRAMS, FORMER GEORGIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: We have to acknowledge any constraints that people see when they see us. I'm a black woman with natural hair and a sturdy build. And there are people who discount my capacity for leadership based on purely phenotypical issues. We have to acknowledge that. You can't ignore that that's how people behave. The issue is, what do you do with that information? For me, it's lean into it. I talk about it. I don't pretend you can't see me. But I also make certain that you understand that I'm incredibly smart. I'm very capable.


INGRAHAM: And very modest, which is great.

Here now to react is Dinesh D'Souza, conservative author and filmmaker. Dinesh, at least, I guess she's honest. She's confident. And this is what the Democratic Party must be about now. She's very clear on it -- identity politics.

DINESH D'SOUZA, CONSERVATIVE FILMMAKER: Yes. The old FDR Democratic Party under Franklin Roosevelt was ultimately about a division, but it was a different kind of division. It was a class division between, if you will, the haves and the have-notes, the workers and the employers. And the Democrats have now kept some of that, but they've supplemented with identity politics, which is essentially an affirmation of race and gender, sexual orientation and so on.

I think Stacey Abrams is giving a very benign picture of what this identity politics is, because there's a toxic side to it. Let's remember, for example, that black nationalism came out of -- came as a sort of retaliation against white nationalism. Malcolm X was asked why he was a black nationalist, and in fact he said I've got to be a black nationalist to fight against the white nationalism that preceded me. But of course the inverse is also true, which is to say that black nationalism and Latino nationalism is likely to give rise to a revived form of white nationalism.

So what I'm saying here is the Democrats through identity politics are creating some of the very problems that they then pretend to deplore. They deplore the rise of white nationalism, yet they are doing more than anyone else, certainly more than Trump, to fuel those fires.

INGRAHAM: Yes, but Dinesh, they have to keep this going, do they not, because there has been significant progress, there's significant gains, still much work to be done, no doubt about it. But you can't give Trump credit for pretty much anything. You have to pull the credit out of people for criminal justice reform.

But Al Sharpton said in his radio interview this week, some unemployment has gotten better, but we're still double that of whites. We still have less income as a family household matter than whites. It was down the line, than whites. And that's how they're reading it, and that leads to reparations, the need for that leveling of the economic playing field through monthly payments of some sort, perhaps given how that plays out.

D'SOUZA: You see here that Trump is actually embracing the correct answer for this sort of identity politics, and it is to reject identity politics altogether, and to embrace a sort of decent American nationalism in which all groups are given an opportunity and a chance to move up. I think this kind of American nationalism, which was the nationalism of Lincoln, the nationalism of the American founders, this is the Trump card, if I may say so, to beat identity politics.

INGRAHAM: Yes, and yet they want to tag the word "nationalism," Dinesh, with white nationalism. So if you love your country and you think the country is worth preserving, our borders, our sovereignty, our Constitution, our history, our historical markers, even when they're people who committed terrible acts of cruelty but who redeemed themselves in other ways, then you're tantamount to just a white nationalist. But no, we love the country, the warts and all. We love our experience. We want to keep getting better.

D'SOUZA: What's been hidden here is that white nationalism was invented by the Democratic Party after the Civil War in order to maintain its lock on the south. White nationalism was the glue that held the south tightly to the Democratic Party. So the very people who have sort of poisoned the waters here with white nationalism are now pretending to show up as the water commissioner and be the solution to white nationalism. No, they created white nationalism, and in a sense they've also created black nationalism.

INGRAHAM: Dinesh, thank you so much. Great to see you tonight.

And, my friends, protests broke out all across the country tonight with liberals taking to the streets to yell about Attorney General Bill Barr, of course, nefarious figure that he is. We sent our own Raymond Arroyo into the middle of the maelstrom. His harrowing and hilarious report next.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is Trump, our president above the law?

CROWD: Nobody is above the law!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is Bill Barr above the law?

CROWD: Nobody is above the law!


INGRAHAM: That looked like a costume party there. Aren't they lovely? Well, we decided it might be fun to throw our own FOX News contributor, Raymond Arroyo, into the mix and ask these folks what they really are so peeved about? Raymond, what did you find out?

RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: Thanks, for throwing me into the mix. This D.C. protest was purportedly to urge the release of the unredacted Mueller report. Well, it was a collection of mostly aged partisan government worker types. At times it felt like they were going through the motions -- look at the poor people -- like they were going through the motions, but we actually had some interesting conversations. Watch, Laura.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're not convicting people in a criminal court of law. We're investigating.

ARROYO: The investigation is complete, though. You're making it sound like the investigation is not complete. Is it? Is it the investigation complete?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's completely absurd just on the public evidence. The public evidence --

ARROYO: So he's guilty of criminal collusion with Russia and obstruction of justice?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. I'm saying that we deserve a right to see what's coming on. There's two years of investigation, and nothing the coming out?

ARROYO: It is coming out. Bill Barr just gave you a summary.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bill Barr did not give anything out.

ARROYO: Tell me why you're here today.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think that it is incredibly important for our government to be as -- to share what they know with us and share all the information that they have. And I think that refusing to release the report to the people goes directly against democracy.

ARROYO: Your thoughts on this economy and what Trump has done to the economy?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I mean, as far as -- I honestly haven't been paying that much attention to the economy. I'm a college student, so I don't know -- I don't have a full understanding of the economy right now. So, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have seen as well as I have the things that the president has done with our own -- with your own eyes. We don't have to say, oh my gosh, I need to see the report to know there have been things which are not appropriate for a president to do. We have children in cages. We have -- help me out here. We have children in cages. We have disregard for the law in many circumstances.

ARROYO: So you believe Bill Barr is in collusion with Trump to cover up this investigation?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, he's handpicked by Trump. And he's not -- he's just not doing what he should be doing to get the information out to the people.

ARROYO: Tell me why you're here today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To get the full Mueller report released.

ARROYO: What do you mean by the full Mueller report?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The full 400 pages that Mueller wrote, unredacted, and all the backup material.

ARROYO: You want unredacted?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Unredacted as much as possible.

ARROYO: You know it's illegal for him to submit an unredacted support because it's got grand jury testimony in there. You're waiting for Congress to make the ruling here, not Bill Barr or the Department of Justice?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, I'm waiting for 2020 to vote that son of a -- out of the -- White House.


ARROYO: Charming.


ARROYO: There was a lot of anger and hurt, Laura. I have to tell you, there were people, this was their last kind of hope, holding on that they could finally get this president, corner him. And I think when the Barr summary came out and the Mueller findings were in, they were very deflated. So it was a halfhearted protest, I have to tell you.

INGRAHAM: It looked a little weak.

ARROYO: Some of these poor people, I really feared they were going to fracture hips before the protest was over.

INGRAHAM: It was like that the last time they protest, it was like 74.

ARROYO: The Civil War.

INGRAHAM: That was like 74, get the servicemen out of Nam.

ARROYO: They're still looking for the Watergate papers. Look, the last time I saw a protest this halfhearted, it was Alyssa Milano leading the 30 makeup artists and prop mistresses in the Georgia statehouse, which I wrote a piece about on Fox News, so you can look that up. But this was a lot of Astroturf, a lot of anger. I felt bad for the people. I really did. I did.

INGRAHAM: You felt bad for the people? What's wrong with you?

ARROYO: When you see people chanting offkey, we're going to get the Mueller report.

INGRAHAM: And conservatives are good protestors, they're the worst.

ARROYO: But then one man turns to Jessica and I on our way out, and he said, this is why we lose elections. So I felt bad for them.

INGRAHAM: But the left can turn out big protests. They had the gun march, they've done big, big protests.

ARROYO: If this is any indication of 2020 --

INGRAHAM: Kavanaugh protests were big.

ARROYO: If it's any indication of 2020, Trump can start redecorating another part of the White House. He's going to be there for a while longer. This was sad.

INGRAHAM: I liked the student who said, she admitted, I'm not real familiar with the economy. I'm a student.

ARROYO: My favorite was the lady, help me out. Help me. Help me out here.

INGRAHAM: Help me, honey. What good are you, stand there like a totem pole. Say something.

ARROYO: Stop sending me into the maelstrom.

INGRAHAM: Raymond, that was fun. We're going to be right back. Stay there.


INGRAHAM: All right, Raymond, we have a special Friday Follies tomorrow. Do you want to --

ARROYO: Special in what sense? Define "Special."


INGRAHAM: Well, it involves a special video


ARROYO: It concerns -- I will say, I think we may have to retitle the segment the Friday Fall-ies.

INGRAHAM: Fall-ies.

ARROYO: And I'm not going to explain anymore.


ARROYO: But this is a painful bruising.

INGRAHAM: All right. Shannon is going to kill us. Podcast, look at PodcastOne and go to Apple iTunes as well. You'll love today's podcast. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team, take it from here.

Shannon, rescue me.

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.