Mark Morgan on Democrats ignoring Trump's accomplishments at the border

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," November 25, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Laura Ingraham:
All right.  I’m Laura Ingraham.  This is the Ingraham Angle from a busy Washington tonight.  So, have the Democrats already lost the impeachment fight?  In moments, my angle will provide some key answers.  Then we got Dershowitz.  We got Congressman Lee Zeldin.  They’re going to react.  We got breaking news we’re going to get to.  Plus, Joe Biden is quickly discovering he could never please woke immigration activists.  Dinesh D’Souza explains why the party of Obama is officially dead.  Also, tonight, anti-police protestors, this was particularly disgusting, launched a vicious attack on New York’s finest, even comparing them to the KKK.  Former NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik is here with a fiery response.  And Hollywood A-lister Jon Voigt joins us in an exclusive.  He tells our Raymond Arroyo about receiving the National Medal of the Arts and what he thinks of the impeachment battle.  Stay for that later on in the show.

But first, lessons learned, or not?  That’s the focus of tonight’s angle.  First, a message to the Democrats.  I tried to warn you that if you allowed leftist radicals to become the face and brain trust of your party, you’d end up regretting it.  And after two months of nothing but impeachment talk, Democrats are seeing headlines like this, even in liberal Vanity Fair.  It’s hard to read this as anything but a warning.  New polling suggests Democrats impeachment push could alienate key voters.  Oops.  Remember, the squad of hit girls has been pushing for impeachment long before they’d ever heard of Zelensky or Vindman.
 
Female Speaker:
Because we all know the recent tweets and words from the president are simply a continuation if his racist and xenophobic playbook. 
 
Female Speaker:
We can either continue to enable this president and report on the pile of garbage that comes out of his mouth, or we can hold him accountable to his crimes.
 
Laura Ingraham:
They’re not looking out for what’s best and the best interest of the United States.  They often don’t know or don’t want to know either the relevant law or facts on important issues from immigration, to now impeachment.  But who cares?  If it raises their profiles, they don’t give a flip whether what they’re advocating is good for the country, let alone good for their own party.  From the moment they were sworn into office, AOC plus three have enjoyed being showered with accolades and appearances on late-night TV.  Fancying themselves as Trump slayers, they’ve dined out on far-left policies and nonstop advocacy for impeachment.  Despite Pelosi’s earlier words of caution.
 
Nancy Pelosi:
If and when the time comes for impeachment, it’ll have to be something that has such a crescendo in a bipartisan way.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Oh, remember that?  But the cool kids on the Democrat block rejected that out of hand.  And they got a boost from the impeachment-hungry Adam Schiff, who was eager to avenge his embarrassing loss with the Mueller report.  Eventually, the speaker relented.  And the Democrats committed themselves to this convoluted idea of impeaching a president about withholding aid to Ukraine, aid that Ukraine eventually received just a few weeks delayed.  For a few weeks, though, they did feel like they had the wind at their backs. 
  
Female Speaker:
I think our committee accomplished a great deal for the American people.  We established that there was abuse of power.
 
Male Speaker:
And the ones that the American people have been able to hear from have affirmed this idea that there was something wrong with the president asking for a political favor.
 
Female Speaker:
Well, I think the American people have had a good week.  I think truth has had a good week.  I think patriotism has had a good week.  And I think the Constitution has had a good week.
 
Laura Ingraham:
But when the hearing went from secret to public, Americans’ views started shifting toward the president, especially among independent voters in those all-important battleground states. 
 
Female Speaker:
How many people think the impeachment process will hurt President Trump?
 
Female Speaker:
I think it’s a sham, okay?  I think --
 
Female Speaker:
Horrible.
 
Female Speaker:
-- the president --
 
Male Speaker:
-- and I think it’s a waste of time.  They’re a bunch of little kids fighting and not accomplishing what the hell they were elected for.
 
Female Speaker:
I read the document and it’s -- there was absolutely nothing concerning to me for a foreign president to -- [inaudible] absolutely appropriate.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Fair-minded people took the testimony of foreign policy and national security officials not as evidence of impeachable conduct, but as a policy disagreement with the president.  Remember, Trump ran on the idea that we were going to reorient some of our foreign relationships, including even with Russia.  Well, foreign policy elites and the old war hawks did not want him to do that, despite this idea that you could triangulate, perhaps, against China, which is our biggest threat.

And remember, billions of dollars of foreign aid was also on the line with Trump’s new approach.  Most people in Washington are doing their jobs.  I want to say that tonight.  They’re helping the president and his team carry out the policies that he ran on.  But, and that’s a big but, there are some rogue actors in the intel community and in the geopolitical space who refuse to do their jobs and instead decided to work with the president’s political enemies.  They considered it a noble calling.  The voters, however, are a lot more skeptical, especially with the election less than a year away and a booming economy.  Democrats are even losing interest in impeachment themselves, according to a new Hill Harris poll.  It’s the same with independents.  Plus, an Emerson poll reveals that more Americans are opposed, now, to impeachment.  This is all happening as Trump has a 52 percent approval of his handling of the economy, according to the RCP Average.  Ninety-five percent approval among Republicans.  And now, after allowing themselves to be corralled by their radical fringe, more mainstream Democrats are beginning to feel the heat, especially in those swing districts.  Is it any wonder that a vicious, brutal case of buyer’s remorse is infecting the party?  Or that now, some are urging them to drop the impeachment vote altogether in favor of the milder censure?
 
Male Speaker:
Do you think President Trump should be impeached?
 
Adam Schiff:
I want to discuss this with my constituents and my colleagues before I make a final judgment on it.
 
Laura Ingraham:
[laughs] Wait a second.  He’s been presiding over these hearings.  He needs to discuss it?  Sir Lancelot seems more like Sir Loosey Goosey there.  He’s not slaying dragons.  He’s slaying his own Democrats.  To have a real shot at winning next year, and I don’t really want to give advice to the Democrats, but this is what I’d do.  Party leadership is going to have to find backbone to take on the squad.  But that would also mean taking on Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, and risk alienating their supporters who are both angry and very energetic.  That would take real guts.  My prediction?  Pelosi and Schumer try to move to the middle, maybe a little bit, but in the process, they try to placate the left with more radical policy proposals and maybe even a few more investigations of the president before the election.  That, of course, leaves Trump a free lane to run on results.  And Democrats?  What are they going to run on?  Revenge?  And that’s the angle.  Later on, four thank you's for four special people.  Hint: Schiff will vehemently disagree.  Joining us now, Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor Emeritus, and author of the new book, “Guilt by Accusation,” and Congressman Lee Zeldin, member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  Lots of stuff to get to, both of you.  Alan, after these two weeks, could Democrats really move to drop their impeachment crusade, given what we’re seeing in some of these pretty key public opinion surveys?
 
Alan Dershowitz:
Well, as a liberal Democrat, I sure hope they do.  It’s gotten them nowhere.  It violates the constitution.  Congress seems to forget that they’re not above the law either.  They can’t make it up as they go along.  They haven’t found any offenses as defined by the Constitution that would authorize impeachment.  So, if they’re smart, they would marginalize those who are trying to impeach, bring the center back, and say, “Let’s move on to health care, immigration, other issues that affect all Americans.  And let’s put impeachment aside.”  Will they do that?  Don’t know.  Don’t know how much pressure they’ll get from the squad and others who are demanding impeachment.  But if they’re sensible, they will move away from that because it’s a gift to the Republicans and a gift to President Trump.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Congressman Zeldin, Adam Schiff is still trying to give it the old college try.  I want your reaction to something he said over the weekend.  Watch.
 
Adam Schiff:
The public support for impeachment has grown fairly dramatically in the last two months.  So, whether it is now essentially at a plateau or whether it will continue to grow or shrink, I don’t think is really the question we should be asking.

Laura Ingraham:
Congressman Zeldin, we’ve seen the exact opposite trend over the past three and a half weeks.  Even among Democrats, losing interest at the very least.
 
Lee Zeldin:
Yeah.  His imagination has grown.  He certainly wants to be able to sell this fairytale that he’s writing.  He wanted to be a screenwriter.  And essentially, he’s trying to connect dots that aren’t connected.  He’s relying on second-, third-, fourth-hand hearsay.  You’ve been covering this a lot over the course of the last couple of months.  The facts aren’t on his side, but he’s desperate to sell this, and when he said on the Sunday morning news shows that he has to go back and talk to his constituents as if his mind wasn’t made up, give me a break.  I think that he really wants to go forward with impeachment.

What’s interesting going forward, if precedent means anything, Ken Starr, as the independent counsel during the Clinton impeachment, presented his report in person under oath.  That’s how much he believed in it.  Let’s see how much Adam Schiff believes in the report that he’s about to turn in about a week from now.  Will he be willing to show up at the House Judiciary Committee, for example, under oath and answer questions?  Will he face cross-examination not just from Republicans, but also from the president's counsel?  Let see if the prosecutor, the judge, the jury Adam Schiff will take his report from his kangaroo court to the American people and answer those tough questions.  He’s way ahead of his skis here, and I think he’s going to pay a huge price.  But I don’t know if the Democrats really, at this point, can roll back from impeachment --

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah, the Squad is going to go --

Lee Zeldin:
-- because they’ve really gone all in.

Laura Ingraham:
Let me just say this.  The Squad is going to go totally nuts on this one.  I mean, they’re not going to be satisfied with a censure, I can’t imagine, but, look, they could say, you know, “We appreciate you all, but we’ve got to do this for the good of the party and the country.”  But I don't think –

Lee Zeldin:
The question is --

Laura Ingraham:
Hold on, hold on.  I’ve got to get to some breaking news, guys.  This is very important.  Earlier tonight, Obama-appointed federal judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has ruled that former White House counsel Don McGahn must comply with the House impeachment subpoena.  The DOJ has already said it’s going to appeal.  It should also be noted that our competitors were loath to admit tonight that if upheld at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, McGahn could just show up to Congress and assert privilege on as many questions as he wanted.  Alan, your response to the hyperbolic reaction to this.  One federal district court judge in D.C. on this question of McGahn.

Alan Dershowitz:
Well, the big winner is Uber, because McGahn is going to have to get into his car, he’s going to have to go over to the Capitol, raise his hand, take an oath, and then he can invoke privilege.  So, this has no substantive impact.  The judge went out of her way to say, “I am not ruling on the issues of privilege.  All I’m saying is he has to show up.”  She used that word, and then she went nuts talking about how the president is not the king.  Of course, the president is not the king.  The president is far more powerful than the king.  The president has the power that kings have never had.  He’s a very, very powerful office, and the Framers wanted it that way.  That’s why they required for impeachment very strict criteria to be met.  And we don’t live in a parliamentary democracy where parliament can just vote to remove a leader, a prime minister.  So, this decision itself has no big impact.  All it means is people have to show up, and then they can invoke the privilege.

Laura Ingraham:
Well, just to your point, Alan, just a line from the opinion.  And the king -- the reference to the king was kind of a giveaway on this judge if you ask me.  But the court distinguishes this issue from the very different question of whether the specific information that high-level presidential aides may be asked to provide in the context of such questioning can be withheld from the committee on the basis of [unintelligible] privilege.  So, that’s Alan’s point.  So, it only goes to the specific question of whether he must physically present himself.  And Congressman Zeldin, contrary to what the kind of the measured analysis of Dershowitz just there, this is what Neal Katyal said on MSNBC, who was Solicitor General for a short period of time for President Obama.  Watch.

Neal Katyal:
These arguments are so silly that I just don’t think the Supreme Court is likely to take them in the end.  What Barr has said is something that no responsible constitutional scholar in our history has ever adopted.  It’s King George III-plus, is basically what Barr is advocating for.  These kinds of views are really written in crayon.  They’re not written in any sort of analytically sophisticated or even accurate way.

Laura Ingraham:
Congressman, Barr versus Katyal.  Who might be having the better argument here?  They were relying on precedent as far I can tell.  DOJ was relying on the Janet Reno precedent on this.

Lee Zeldin:
Right, and as I’m listening to that, I -- there’s only one Alan Dershowitz, and I wish that there was more Alan Dershowitz, you know, being able to weigh in on this issue.  It’s obviously going to be appealed at ruling.  It was an expected ruling.  Before the ruling had even come out, you could guess that this is the way it was going to go.  And to executive privilege, I'll tell you, during the closed-door depositions that took place, this was one of the problems with not allowing the White House counsel present in the room.  If someone was to ask a question of one of these witnesses being deposed about a conversation with the president of the United States, there was no one in the room to exert executive privilege.

Laura Ingraham:
Oh, that’s --

Lee Zeldin:
It was up to the witness, and if that witness --

Laura Ingraham:
That’s an interesting point, Congressman Zeldin.  Alan, is that a -- is that something that struck you as well?  Why didn’t the White House counsel get to go to those closed-door sessions?

Alan Dershowitz:
Absolutely, because the privilege belongs to the president and the presidency, and McGahn has no right to answer questions if the president invokes the privilege.  Then it has to go to court, and then there has to be a determination as to whether that's happened.  Look, I predicted on this show and others that this is the way the case would be decided.  The difference would be split.  They would have to go over and make an appearance, but they have to, question by question, determine whether the privilege applies, and it's the White House counsel --

Laura Ingraham:
Right.  We’ve got to go.

Alan Dershowitz:
-- that has to invoke the privilege.

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah, they're going to showboat in front of the cameras, and then he's going to claim privilege, and that's going to be their big, you know, celebratory moment.  Gentlemen, fantastic analysis as always.  Thank you so much, both of you, tonight.

[sound effect]

During the chaos of the 24-hour cable news cycle it's pretty easy to forget that the House Republicans over the past few weeks stood up to the Democrats and confronted both the Dems and their media cronies who’ve been pushing this entire impeachment scam on the American public.  I can be pretty critical of both sides, and I hold -- I try to hold both sides accountable, but now that we've seen things in their entirety as they've shaken out, I think we should take the time to point out four members of Congress who absolutely tonight deserve special recognition.  First up, Congressman Mike Turner.

Mike Turner:
No one on this planet told you that President Trump was tying aid to investigations, yes or no?

Gordon Sondland:
Yes.

Mike Turner:
So, you really have no testimony today that ties President Trump to a scheme to withhold aid from Ukraine in exchange for these investigations?

Gordon Sondland:
Other than my own presumption.

Mike Turner:
Which is nothing.

Laura Ingraham:
Well, that was my -- I think that could have been my favorite line of the entire impeachment scam, but that was the moment the whole quid pro quo narrative came crashing down.  Fabulous.  Second, there was the congresswoman who Adam Schiff could not silence, breakout GOP star Congresswoman Elise Stefanik.

Elise Stefanik:
Ambassador Yovanovitch, I want to thank you for being here today –

Adam Schiff:
The gentlewoman will suspend.  You're not recognized.

Elise Stefanik:
This is the fifth time you have interrupted members –

Adam Schiff:
The gentlewoman --

Laura Ingraham:
He just kept going on and on and on; she just kept going.  It was terrific.  The third person who should be congratulated and specially recognized, House Intel Ranking Member Devin Nunes.  He's been at this for some time.  He's perhaps best summed it all up, what the impeachment sham is really all about.

Devin Nunes:
What you’ve seen in this room over the past two weeks is a show trial.  Like any good show trial, the verdict was decided before the trial ever began.  When their Russian dossiers and investigations failed to do the job, they moved to Plan B.  The minority are in the dark about what this committee will be doing when we return, and so is America.

Laura Ingraham:
Oh, I loved it.  Great sum-up.  And finally, Congressman Jim Jordan deserves thanks for his tireless efforts to debunk the Democrat narrative.

Jim Jordan:
You not only didn't go to your boss -- you said you tried, but you didn't go to your boss -- you went straight to the lawyer, and the lawyer told you not to go to your boss.

Alexander Vindman:
It was an extremely busy week.

Jim Jordan: 
But you talked to your brother, you talked to the lawyers, you talked to Secretary Kent, and you talked to the one guy Adam Schiff won't tell you -- won't let us -- won’t let you tell us who he is.

Laura Ingraham:
Jim Jordan, Stefanik, the entire group.  They weren't cowed; they weren't bowed.  They made their case succinctly, pointedly, and without fear of, you know, whatever the media was going to say about them the next day.  It's not easy to do this day in and day out, and Republicans, I think, are finally learning from Trump -- don't stop punching back -- and they could also turn out to discredit most of what the Democrats tried to argue.  But those four lawmakers, I think, above all others, although they all did a pretty good job -- they not only succeeded, they succeeded in proving the Democrats’ case was political from the beginning and the star witnesses really just had policy differences with Donald Trump.  Our Constitution, the integrity of our representative democracy, remains intact because of their efforts, so this Thanksgiving week we're thankful for all of them.

[sound effect]

And coming up, why is Joe Biden having so many problems with Latino voters now, and what does that have to do with Barack Obama?  Mercedes Schlapp, Dinesh D'Souza, on the woke backlash. You won't believe it in moments.

[commercial break]

Male Speaker:
[unintelligible] million people that were deported and separated from their families.

Joe Biden:
You should vote for Trump.  You should vote for Trump.

Male Speaker:
You have the power as a candidate to actually commit to stop all deportations from day one for executive action and we want to hear you say that.

Joe Biden:
I will not stop all deportations.  If you have a -- if you commit a crime that's a felony.

Laura Ingraham:
He's such a squish.  Only if you commit a crime.  Everyone else can stay.  That's not the only problem, though, Biden is facing with Hispanic voters.  The woman in charge of his Latina outreach, her name is Vanessa Cardenas, reportedly quit in frustration.  Now, the reason she stated and who knows if it's accurate, but it's Biden lacked compassion when talking immigration. In other words, he's not for total open borders and that apparently what you just heard Biden telling activists he would only deport criminal aliens, felons, to make it specific, went too far for this leftist.  Joining me now, Mercedes Schlapp, Trump 2020 campaign senior advisor and Dinesh D’Souza, conservative author and filmmaker.  Dinesh, former President Obama just told his party to ditch the old purity tests, just as his standard bear is being eaten alive.  So, what's going on here?

Dinesh D’Souza:
Well, Obama, although on the left, had -- was tethered to reality and Obama realized it's one thing to say that you have people who are aliens who are clearly breaking the law but there's a special category of lawbreaker, the criminal alien.  This is a guy who's a drug dealer or a murderer or rapist, someone who actually poses a threat to citizens and to say that that guy should not be deported, this is -- would be political lunacy.  So, Obama never went there and the fact that we now have an activist wing of the Democratic Party taking this kind of stance or considering the deportation of criminal aliens to be somehow be on the pale, this just gives you an idea of how this party has become at least to some degree unmoored, unhinged from reality.

Laura Ingraham:
Mercedes, I say this quite often but it's -- it bears repeating.  Trump has been like a -- an astringent across the political skin of the country.  You kind of see where everybody's -- everybody really is.  Their real faces, their real, you know, sensibility, and now we know.  The Democrats said for years oh no no, we're for border enforcement, but they're actually not.  They're not for border enforcement.  Everyone comes and gets to stay, even aliens who commit crimes.  They all get to stay period.  That's the truth now.  That's what they believe.

Mercedes Schlapp:
Not only that but they've done nothing to help get through and pass any sort of common-sense immigration reform that would include securing the border.  And really it is because they are so tied to that liberal base of open borders, of demonizing our ICE officers, and what they have to realize is that those Democrats, they are the ones that basically protect MS-13 members, many of those who end up killing innocent lives in these minority communities, in the Latino communities, in the African American communities.  Those criminal aliens should not even -- they should not be in our country.  They should absolutely be deported.  So, I think that you have found a party and you've seen these cities and these sanctuary cities, these states that don't help our immigration officers do their job and so it creates more crime in these cities and it's just -- I think --

Laura Ingraham:
But they don't care –

Mercedes Schlapp:
--- at the end of the day Democrats have gone too far on this.

Laura Ingraham:
They don't care.

Mercedes Schlapp:
No, they don’t.  It's a moral crusade.

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah.  So, Dinesh, it's –

Mercedes Schlapp:
And you know what, Laura?

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah.  Quick.

Mercedes Schlapp:
The Latinos, I was just at an event at a Latinos for Trump with 500 people, 500 Latinos, they want secure borders.  They want to make sure that we don't have these criminal aliens --

Laura Ingraham:
No, no.

Mercedes Schlapp:
--- in their communities.

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah.  Dinesh, there was other -- another moment for Biden that was a little tricky to say the least.  He apparently has a list of potential VP picks but then he struggles a bit.  Watch.

Joe Biden:
I can start naming people, but the press will think that's who I picked if I were the nominee.  But there's an incredible number of people.  A former assistant attorney general who got fired, was just in Delaware.  The leader of the -- the woman who should've been the governor of Georgia, and African American woman [unintelligible] good.

Laura Ingraham:
Dinesh, I mean, the pandering project doesn't seem very sincere, God bless him, but he can't -- he doesn't even know their names.  So, you're not going to ever --

Dinesh D’Souza:
He doesn't know who they are.  He admires them so much that he just can't remember who they are.

Laura Ingraham:
Yeah.

Dinesh D’Souza:
Look.  I think when this started out with Biden, it really looked like these were "gaffs."  I think now we're dealing with something beyond that.  We're dealing with something approaching dementia now.  Look, Reagan had Alzheimer's, but that was after the presidency.  I think with Biden, we have such a pattern now of stumbling and bumbling that I think Democrats are going to have to ask is this guy even capable of operating at the highest level and with the pressures of the presidency.

Laura Ingraham:
I think we should be careful, Dinesh, unless you got your medical degree in the time between the last appearance to make a dementia diagnosis, but I think as people age --

Dinesh D’Souza:
Well, --

Laura Ingraham:
--- it's going to happen to all of us, you're not as quick, okay?  So, that's just -- that's life.  You're not as quick.  But that's -- Mercedes, it's a tough -- that’s a tough deal for the Democrats.  They need him to appeal in the south and in some of those battleground states.  And he’s struggling big time.
 
Mercedes Schlapp:
Yeah, no kidding.  And as you know, it’s going to be winning Iowa, winning New Hampshire.  I mean, the Democrats normally go with that candidate --
 
Laura Ingraham:
Yeah.
 
Mercedes Schlapp:
-- who won -- who wins Iowa.
 
Laura Ingraham:
That’s Buttigieg.
 
Mercedes Schlapp:
And Biden is just not in a strong position.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Yeah, that’s Buttigieg or Bloomberg.  All right.  Mercedes and Dinesh, thanks so much.  Great to see you both.  And in moments, we explore what America would look like under Democrat rule.  Anti-cop protests in New York City over the weekend.  Did you see any of this?  It’s just a little, little window into what happens when the left takes control.  Former NYPD Commissioner Bernie Kerik is here with a warning, next.
 
[commercial break]
 
Male Speaker:
The MPA is doing 500 additional police.  There has been a dramatic increase in crime in the subway system.  Felonies are up, assaults are up, robberies are up.  I have been talking about this for years.  We are spending $50 billion to improve the subway system.  If it’s not safe, people are not going to use it.
 
Laura Ingraham:
That tame announcement to crack down on subway fare evasion ignited vicious anti-police protests in New York City over the weekend.  Now, here’s a taste of what went down.
 
Multiple Speakers:
NYPD, KKK, how many kids did you kill today?  [beep] you.  [beep] cowards [unintelligible].
 
Laura Ingraham:
This is only the latest in a string of anti-police actions plaguing New York City, starting with videos of hoodlums dumping water on officers that went viral over the summer.  Joining me now is Bernie Kerik, former NYPD Commissioner.  Bernie, did you ever think that you’d see people behaving that way over a very mild plan to make the subway -- but necessary plan to make the subway safer?
 
Bernie Kerik:
Laura, listen.  These people are anarchists.  You know?  What’s interesting to me is -- and what I really would like to know, who pays them?  Who puts the money behind these protests, whether it’s this protest, whether ones in the subway earlier this one where they were protesting the police arresting someone that did something without a permit?  These are laws that are on the books.  They’re laws that should be enforced.  The governor is right.  There’s a major spike in crime in the subway system and the mass transit system.  And if there is, they need more police to deal with it.  What’s going on here is completely insane.  These people are anti-cop, anti-law and order.  But I will say one thing, Laura.  Anybody that’s watched these protests, watch these kids.  They jump the turnstiles.  They say they have to jump the turnstiles because they don’t have the money to pay for the train.  But they’re wearing $300 Air Jordans on their feet.
 
Laura Ingraham:
And they’re vaping.  They’re vaping.  They have plenty of money to vape THC, though.  That’s all free, I guess.
 
Bernie Kerik:
Yeah.  It’s completely ridiculous.
 
Laura Ingraham:
But Bernie, this is a window into what life is like under Democrat rule.
 
Bernie Kerik:
Yes --
 
Laura Ingraham:
Chaos, no respect for law and order.  And I used to ride the subway.  I won’t ride the subway now. 
 
Bernie Kerik:
Well, this --
 
Laura Ingraham:
Subway, you know, years back, was fine.  It was no big deal.  Now it’s like, people don’t want to ride the subway.
 
Bernie Kerik:
This goes back, you know, when you look at this, when I see this, I think of the David Dinkins days.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Oh, boy.
 
Bernie Kerik:
I think of the days when there were 2,400 homicides in New York City, when mothers were putting their babies in bathtubs to protect them from random gunfire.  When you see videos like this --
 
Laura Ingraham:
No.
 
Bernie Kerik:
-- that should scare the hell out of every American, every New Yorker, anybody that comes to visit, live, work, go to school in New York City.  And, you know, if the mayor doesn’t clean it up, it’s only going to get it worse. 
 
Laura Ingraham:
Oh, no.
 
Bernie Kerik:
If he doesn’t address it, it’s only going to get worse.
 
Laura Ingraham:
Oh, de Blasio is running for president.  He was too busy to do any of that stuff.  Bernie, let me tell you, those pre-printed signs, you know, the “cops are fascists” and their lame attempt at rhyming -- which never works, by the way -- I’d like to -- you know, it’s pretty easy to track who’s paying for all this, whether it’s some foundation --
 
Bernie Kerik:
That’s exactly right.  That’s exactly right.
 
Laura Ingraham:
-- or, you know, there’s something going on.  And if we had actual reporters at some of these local newspapers that would be interested and curious in this, they might have found out some, you know, fascinating facts about who’s behind it all.  Bernie, thank you for what you’re doing and what you’re saying on behalf of the police, not just in New York, but across the country.
 
Bernie Kerik:
Thanks, Laura.
 
Laura Ingraham:
And also coming up, President Trump gets a lot of flak for not finishing what was, perhaps, his signature campaign promise, the border wall.  So, 86 miles have been built so far.  And that’s in areas where there was some kind of structure, but nothing that was going to keep people out.  Despite all that, Trump has still been able to accomplish a heck of a lot.  For starts, the president’s groundbreaking deals with Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, have all helped reduce border arrests 73 percent from their peak in May.  That’s not all.  Trump has put up a bureaucratic wall in place of a physical one.  Now, denials for H1B visas have doubled in the past two years.  That’s helped wages stay up in the United States.  Wait times for citizenship doubled under Trump and has the average processing times for all kinds of visas.  So, what’s the result?  The U.S. admitted 70 percent fewer immigrants than the year before.  The biggest declines were among people from Latin America and Asia, according to the Brookings Institution.  And of course, they bemoan that fact.  Unless you think that this is just about our southern border, Trump’s immigration policies have also blunted Communist China.  According to the New York Times, Trump’s policies curb the number of Chinese students allowed at colleges and universities.  It’s about time on that.  So, as much as Trump has done, it’s only a fraction of what’s needed to align our immigration system to our national interest.

[sound effect]

And despite all the progress with our border, America still saw an increase of all hard narcotics in fiscal year 2019.  Now, this includes meth from so-called super-labs in Mexico.  They produce it faster, cheaper, and with higher purity.  Joining me now, Mark Morgan, acting Customs and Border Patrol commissioner.  Mark, we mentioned the success at the border.  There’s still a burgeoning drug trade.  A friend of mine in Mexico who lives there said to me the other day, “I don't -- we’ve tried a lot of different things, but they’re producing it, and it’s being smuggled in, and it’s being purchased, and it’s killing people.”

Mark Morgan:
Absolutely, Laura, and that’s what we’ve been saying for a long time.  This isn’t just a humanitarian crisis, as some want you to believe.  This is undoubtedly both a humanitarian crisis and a national security crisis.  You are spot-on.  Let’s take meth, and that’s what I’ve been saying for a long time.  Every town, city, and state in this country is a border town, city, and state.  Make no mistake, if you have a meth problem anywhere in the United States, mark my words, it came from the southwest border, from those super-labs that you describe.

Laura Ingraham:
One of our security folks at Fox also does some work for local police, and he’s always telling me stories, and it’s heartbreaking.  You just want to bawl, crying, like a mother who literally tried to, you know, like, hurt her own child because she thought her child was something else.  You know, just having complete delusions because she’s a meth addict.

Mark Morgan:
Absolutely.

Laura Ingraham:
Fentanyl coming from China, which is another huge problem.

Mark Morgan:
It is.

Laura Ingraham:
And yet we’re treating China as -- “Oh, we can work with China.”  They’re killing our people with their drugs as well.

Mark Morgan:
Sixty-eight thousand people lost their lives last year to drug overdose of illicit narcotics -- 68,000.  Every American -- that should be an alarming statistic.  And so, when we talk about, like, for example, the border wall, the border wall is not just to address the illegal immigration.  It’s to stop bad people and bad things from coming in.  Last year CBP -- 750,000 pounds of drugs we stopped.  And Laura, that’s just what we caught.  Thousands and thousands of pounds of more drugs are pouring in every single day, making their way to every town and city in this country.


Laura Ingraham:
When you’re dealing with a country like Mexico, though, that is in large parts a narco state, how does the United States make any progress?  I mean, you have police that are murdered, beheaded, people that are terrorized, bought-off politicians.  What do you do?  What do we do?  I mean, I’m really just asking you because I find this to be so disturbing on so many levels, and no one seems to have an answer.

Mark Morgan:
So, I -- it’s definitely challenging, but I’ve been in discussions with the White House, and right now what we’re doing is we’re looking at the same thing -- kind of the same approaches as we do counterterrorism, meaning we need to approach this from a whole of government approach, and not just domestic law enforcement as well.  But we need to come together with the same ferocity, same intensity, and same commitment that we have tackled counterterrorism in this country.  That’s how we’re going to make a dent to go after these cartels.

Laura Ingraham:
Mark, I have to get your thoughts also on two really disturbing sanctuary counties right ton our doorstep here, Washington D.C., Maryland, where we had six illegal immigrants charged with serious felonies.  Now, here’s a list of the suspects.  The charges include assault, child abuse, first-degree murder.  There they are.  Now, Mark, if federal agencies name and shame these localities, does it have a positive effect?  Or they’re just like -- anyone who’s killed or raped or abused by these illegal aliens, they’re just acceptable damage for this great promise of open borders?

Mark Morgan:
Laura -

Laura Ingraham:
What is it?

Mark Morgan:
-- this is insane, and this is what we need to stop doing.  Let’s stop talking to the politicians.  Let’s forget about the politicians.  Let’s go to the average American citizen.  Let’s get to them, because they -- I have to believe that when you’re talking about another law enforcement agency that has a murderer that’s been in their custody -- in their custody -- and they’re not going to work with ICE?  They’re -- they would rather --

Laura Ingraham:
Montgomery County, Maryland; Baltimore County.  All these counties that pushed the sanctuary policy -- there is blood on their hands.  There is blood on their hands.

Mark Morgan:
From a law enforcement officer for a long time, Laura, I can tell you the city is much less safe because of it.

Laura Ingraham:
Mark, it’s great to see you tonight.  Thank you so much.  And coming up, fresh off receiving the National Medal of Arts from President Trump, actor Jon Voight weighs in on a heck of a lot, including the impeachment inquiry, with Raymond Arroyo, coming up next.

[commercial break]

Donald Trump:
Jon captures the imagination of the audiences and dominates almost every single scene he’s in.  He’s a special person.  Jon Voight, you are an amazing artist and a beloved icon of the American film.  Congratulations.  Receiving the National Medal of Arts is a tremendous, tremendous achievement, and you deserve it.

Laura Ingraham:
Actor Jon Voight, of course, did receive the National Medal of Arts from President Trump last week, and now, days later, the Hollywood A-lister sits down with our own Raymond Arroyo to discuss what receiving the distinguished award means to him, his support for Trump, and his thoughts on the impeachment fight.

[sound effect]

Raymond Arroyo:
What did you think of that moment?  I mean, this is the highest medal and award that the United States government bestows to an artist.

Jon Voight:
Yeah, isn’t that wonderful?  I mean, there’s so many deserving people out there.  To have been -- to have a slate of fixtures that deserve some attention in that group is quite, you know -- very humbled by the whole thing, you know.  And -- but this -- look at the grace with which he presented my name, you know.  It was wonderful to be with to be with Allison and Marion, the other, you know, awardees and to have that wonderful host, you know, he's a wonderful host.

Raymond Arroyo:
It makes you feel included in the piece, yeah.

Jon Voight:
He takes care of everybody, you know.  People in that kind of a situation, you don't know am I standing in the right place then I have to turn and I have to do this and -- he makes everybody comfortable and brings it into like a living room.

Raymond Arroyo:
Now, there was a moment where it felt like a living room, Jon, when the music from Midnight Cowboy played and this happened.  What happened here?  Why did you jump up like this?  What happened there?  You were inspired.  You were going with it.  I thought Dancing with the Stars was auditioning.  Oh, yeah.  You were going.

Jon Voight:
Well, you know, I was doing it because I mean, he's playful.

Raymond Arroyo:
Yes, he is.

Jon Voight:
So, I was warned that, you know, you never can tell what he'll do, Jon, so just go with it, whatever it was.  And when he started playing the music and I don't know how many people identified that music as the Midnight Cowboy music, but when it played, and he played for some length before I got up.  You know, I didn't do it right away.  I said, "Well, I'd better do something, because," --

Raymond Arroyo:
Yeah.  They're all looking at you.

Jon Voight:
Here's the music.  Somebody should come up -- so, I got up.  I didn't know quite what I was going to do, you know?  But then I did this kind of, you know, just tipped it a little bit by doing a little playful something, you know, and you know --

Raymond Arroyo:
Invoking the character of Joe Buckle [spelled phonetically] we're going to talk about later.

Jon Voight:
And then I sat down, and I did a -- so, you know, to embrace it and certainly it showed that I don't take myself that seriously.

Raymond Arroyo:
When you see a Bobby DeNiro coming out and telling the president to go blank himself or Madonna saying she has fantasies of blowing up the White House, you think what?

Jon Voight:
Well, I think, you know, when I was back in the '60s I was that extreme, but I was tended toward that thought, you know, that kind of thinking of the period was it's nice to be a revolutionary, you know, iconoclast when you're a young person.  You think you're doing something brand new and all of this stuff.  And you don't know -- you don't look at the real result of all of this youthful energies, right?  Arrogance.  Arrogance, right?  But I've been there.  So, when I hear them, those two you mentioned and others, I know and in this lifetime perhaps they'll come to an understanding that that’s wrong.

Raymond Arroyo:
What do you make of this impeachment inquiry?

Jon Voight:
Well, it's a lie, as I have said, and this -- it's the culmination of the commitment to take down this president.

Raymond Arroyo:
You said this impeachment battle is a war but as a performer, how is the audience receiving this?

Jon Voight:
Yeah.  I -- well, I think -- you know what I think?  I think it's a way of exposing the truth.  It's -- here we have these people in bad behavior.  I'll say, you know, look at the statements of Nancy Pelosi.  I look at this fellow Schiff, Adam Schiff, and I say, it's pretty clear there's something wrong here.  These people are not well.  And the audience is seeing the bottom line just as they're seeing the bottom line with these debates.  One ridiculous statement after another.  That's what the Democratic Party is and they're getting a view of it.

Laura Ingraham:
Raymond's going to have more of his interview with Jon Voight when he guest hosts for me on Wednesday so don't miss it.  Up next, an ISIS sympathizer arrested and charged for plotting what would've been a shocking and brutal attack.  In moments.

[commercial break]

Laura Ingraham:
Shocking news from Florida tonight.  Federal prosecutors charged a man who calls himself the next rightful Caliph with plotting to bomb the deans at a Miami-Dade and Broward colleges.  Well, 23-year-old Salman Rashid allegedly asked a confidential FBI informant to get ISIS to take revenge on the colleges from which he was expelled.  On top of that, Rashid's Facebook page was full of complaints against Jews and moderate Muslims.  He also calls for overthrowing democracy and just establishing Islamic law here.  The FBI's criminal complaint read that he showed a growing hatred of America, democracy, non-Muslims, and secular Muslims.  If he's convicted, he's in jail for up to 20 years.  That's all the time we have tonight.  Shannon Bream and the fantastic Fox News @ Night team have all the breaking developments from here.  Shannon.

Shannon Bream:
Busy Monday, Laura.  Thank you so much.