McConnell: I am the 'grim reaper' of the Democratic socialist agenda

close

Video

McConnell: I am the 'grim reaper' of the Democratic socialist agenda

Majority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell responds to 'grim reaper' attack from Nancy Pelosi on 'The Ingraham Angle.'

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," June 13, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM: All right. Thanks. And I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” from Washington tonight. Ahead, FBI and legal experts along with Governor Mike Huckabee explored today's burning question, whether it's OK for a President to even look at, consider looking at opposition research or tips from a foreign country. Plus, Speaker Pelosi has a new nickname for Senate Majority Leader, well Mitch McConnell, the Grim Reaper.

Tonight, Mitch McConnell tells me exclusively why he might be embracing that new nickname. And also, tonight a can't miss debate on a radical group pushing something called Drag Queens' Storytime at children's libraries. Plus, Ed Henry brings us a report. You're only going to see here regarding how Obama handled overcrowded migrant centers. But first, Democrats phony foreign outrage. That's the focus of tonight's “Angle.”

Now, last night I told you that I thought the White House made a rather unfortunate decision giving ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos two days' worth of access to President Trump. After traveling on Air Force One to Iowa, the former Bill Clinton Comms Director chilled with the President in the Oval Office, where he found his only possible vertical lynch advantage over the Commander-in-Chief.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, CHIEF ANCHOR AND CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, ABC NEWS: If foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on opponents, should they accept it, or should they call the FBI?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: I think maybe you do both. I think you might want to listen. I don't - there is nothing wrong with listening. If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI, if I thought there was something wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now of course Trump's off-the-cuff response which seemed to me more like a kind of a flick off sent the Democrats and their press poodles into the stratosphere.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It disintegrates at the very core of what our democracy is about.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have a President of the United States who's not playing on America's team.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Confessing his immorality, his corruption, his thuggish.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Accepting assistance from a hostile foreign power like Russia is treasonous behavior.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Foreign interference, treasonous, democracy imperiled. Oh! My God. Susan Rice, that was a great one seeing her pop up in that montage. Now apparently, we're to believe that President Trump said what he said in order to what invite on camera foreign governments to help him win re- election. Again, all in plain sight.

Now, I'm not saying that the President shouldn't have - maybe handled the question slightly differently. Maybe he should have. But let's not be foolish over the Democrats supposed concern now about foreign interference in America's business.

Now first off, it was Hillary Clinton's campaign itself that paid for that phony Russian dossier hawked by former British MI6 Officer, Christopher Steele. Now this was all filtered through this sleazy oppo research firm which is Fusion GPS run by the ever-shady Glenn Simpson.

Now you all have real lives I know, so you may have forgotten that Nellie Ohr, the wife of DOJ's Bruce Ohr worked at Fusion and met with Trump dossier author and former British spy, Christopher Steele, the day before the FBI launched Trump Russia investigation. So, where was let's say Congressman Nadler's outrage about any of this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JERRY NADLER, D-N.Y.: I don't know what that means, and it may just be a public relation, I don't know.

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: That's what I was wondering.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: And why no Nancy Pelosi press conference demanding to know what Obama officials knew and when they knew it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: I don't know what that is. What are you referencing?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, this was Russia making salacious claims about an American presidential candidate in the heat of a very contentious campaign. Now, I would argue that Donald Trump has always been very open about his desire to play hardball politics to win. You saw that on camera. But the Clinton team was always in concealment mode. They were aided and abetted by an Obama DOJ and deep state that was desperate to see to it that Trump was defeated. And then after he won that he was removed from office. So, all the feigned outrage from Democrats over foreign interference, it also made me think of something else. When was the last time you heard Democrats complain about what the Chinese have been up to here in America?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As the U.S. scrambles to learn the extent of a massive theft of federal government personnel records said to have been stolen by China. NBC News has obtained a classified government report that shows the remarkably pervasive reach of Chinese cyber spying nationwide. This National Security Agency map shows a red dot for every successful computer intrusion by China over the past five years. Nearly 700 with computer attacks in every state.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: That report went on and on. Now does that look a little more pervasive than all the claims of Russian interference and meddling from some Facebook hackers and in basements in Russia. You bet it does. And that report doesn't even address massive efforts by the Chinese to steal our very sensitive intellectual property or infiltrate America's premier research universities. The Democrats demand retaliation or hold endless hearings after China stole all those personnel files from the Office of Personnel Management. This all shows us that the Democrats aren't really worried about foreign countries meddling in our affairs. They just saw this yesterday as a convenient way to resurrect the moribund Mueller investigation and maybe even push their leadership to take up impeachment hearings once and for all.

And maybe in an odd way. this kind of ill-advised interview with Stephanopoulos will end up forcing the Democrats into the corner that Nancy Pelosi hope to avoid, wasting the nation's time with needless politically motivated impeachment hearings during an election year. And that's THE ANGLE.

Like I said at the top of the show, we're going to dig into three distinct elements of this debate. The first one we're tackling is the FBI's perspective. Joining me now to walk through all of this is Chris Swecker, former Assistant Director of the FBI. All right, Chris what role does the FBI play in vetting oppo research from overseas.

CHRIS SWECKER, FORMER ASSISTANT FBI DIRECTOR: Well, they ought not to be messing around with opposition research at least in any of - for using it in any particular official documents. I mean it's the absolute pinnacle of hypocrisy to take that information and use it in a FISA and then say it or take the statement that the President made today and turn it around on him. So, it is not illegal per se to accept information from a foreign government.

INGRAHAM: Do you have any idea - the idea that the President knowing he's on camera is somehow saying, OK, China, Russia, whoever give me information because then I'm going to - I'm not going to tell any authorities that I'm going to run to put it in my campaign documents or campaign commercials. It's just ridiculous. I mean he spoke to Stephanopoulos as he speaks to anyone who ask him a question. And he said, well, I'd look at it. I want to play something for you from Senator John Kennedy who entertain the same question, Chris. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY, R-LA: Unless they're like Iraq only dumber usually spies don't come to you and say, I'm a spy. I'm from Russia and I've got dirt on my opponent. So, you have to listen awhile and see what they're up to and then make a decision and call the FBI. And I think most people would.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: So, he said he'd call the FBI after listening and that's pretty much what the President said. He said, I don't know what I do. I probably listen first then maybe I'd call the FBI, but the idea that you just rushed to the FBI hotline because some random former government official from another country says well you know I saw you know someone so drunk two weeks ago at the Palm. I mean this is ridiculous.

SWECKER: Well, it's real fact dependent. I mean you'd have to know that this person was a foreign agent and that their expressed purpose was to disrupt some - an election or some other espionage purpose, so it's real fact dependent. It is not illegal per se simply to have a conversation with someone about the election, about even dirt on someone relating to an election. They haven't built a politician; it won't accept dirt in an election cycle. INGRAHAM: And also, it could be just gossip. And Chris, the media was awfully quick to shut down any comparisons between what the President suggested and what Hillary Clinton did. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: These two things, the dossier and what Trump is talking about here. These two things are not the same.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have Christopher Steele who is a former spy for the British intelligence services.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Britain is not a hostile foreign power that was then interfering in the election.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This erroneous parallel between the Steele dossier and what the President seems to be talking about here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: What about that just dismissing any concern about a dossier. First of all, calling it a dossier is a sense that it wants - they want to use it to affect the election, but that there is no comparison whatsoever.

SWECKER: I held my nose and reread the dossier again today and it is chalk full of information supposedly from Russian government officials, high level government officials who speak to Putin every day and get direct information from him. So, I counted at least five or six of those references to those high-level government sources. Let's face it, the President loves to chum the waters and get the press spun up and he's probably responsible for Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi being on blood pressure medicine and he enjoys it. I mean this is what he does.

INGRAHAM: All right, Chris, thanks so much for the perspective and for the potential legal issues now surrounding the President's comments, we turn to attorney Robert Ray, former Whitewater Independent Counsel. Robert, the focus now is on the section of the U.S. code that reads, it shall be unlawful for a foreign national directly or indirectly to make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a federal state or local election. So, is what President Trump what he was entertaining in that clip that we played. Would that be a trigger of this statute?

ROBERT RAY, FORMER WHITEWATER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: I don't think so. And I think it's clear that - that's the case, I mean you don't have to just listen to me. I mean this was an issue that was addressed by none other than Bob Mueller himself in connection with the June 9, 2016 meeting in Trump Tower involving Trump Junior. And the question of whether or not the offer of dirt with regard to Hillary Clinton would constitute an illegal campaign contribution or foreign contribution. And the issue about whether or not opposition research would be sufficient to trigger a felony violation of that statute and the answer is emphatically, no. And you don't have to take my word for that. That's Bob Mueller essentially saying it's in the report. Go look. It's pages 183 to 188 in the first volume of Bob Mueller's report. End of story.

INGRAHAM: One of President Obama's close friends Lindsey Graham also a JAG lawyer, he made an interesting comment about this. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LINDSEY GRAHAM, LAWYER: I think it's a mistake. I think it's a mistake of law. I don't want to send a signal to encourage this. And I hope my Democratic colleagues will be equally offended by the fact that this actually did happen in 2016 where a foreign agent was paid for by a political party together opposition research. All those things are wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: So, Graham said it was a mistake for the President I guess to answer the question as he did. I don't necessarily think it was a mistake at all.

RAY: I agree with you, Laura. I mean I don't see that at all - look, opposition research remembers if you're going to try to make the argument that opposition research can be considered an in-kind campaign contribution, be careful what you ask for. There are significant First Amendment issues because remember that campaign finance laws would apply not just to foreign campaign contributions, but any campaign contribution and the notion that you would allow a contribution to be considered and in kind contribution as a result of the fact that it's opposition research seems to me especially if it's all its reporting is factually accurate information then from whatever source whether it's foreign or otherwise. The notion that that would constitute an illegal campaign contribution has some significant implications, not the least of which is that it may well be a violation of the First Amendment.

So, I'd be careful about jumping to that conclusion.

INGRAHAM: Yes. I was surprised that Lindsey Graham said that. Robert, thanks so much tonight. And now onto the final piece of this puzzle. The political considerations. Joining me now is Fox News Contributor, former Governor and Presidential Candidate, Mike Huckabee.

All right, Gov. As someone who has sought the highest office in the land like you what did you think of the President's. Let's first talk about the President's language yesterday in answering that question.

MIKE HUCKABEE, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ARKANSAS: I think what we have to remember is he was talking hypothetically about something he might do, not something he has done. And the real question is not what somebody might do, but it's what someone already has done namely when the FBI, the intel community and the DNC and Hillary campaign did in fact tried to solicit information and got it from foreign sources that really ought to be the question people are raising.

INGRAHAM: Well, Governor Huckabee, the Democrats are just so - I mean they really are shameless on this. I mean whether it was - what the Chinese have been up to all of our country and the issues that you've talked about for years stealing our intellectual property, stealing our supercomputing technology, forcing tech transfers at overseas with American companies, our universities hacking into our personnel files. Democrats say it's like crickets, you don't hear anything from them. But now it's because - Trump answered a hypothetical, it's like start the impeachment hearings. Unbelievable.

HUCKABEE: And people forget that Donald Trump has been far tougher on Russia, on Iran, on China, on every one of our trading partners, including Mexico in order to bring for America the best deal possible. Got to be applauding him, giving him a standing ovation, because he's standing up for the people whose jobs are at stake in this country. Instead they nitpick him to death over some interview that he had with George Stephanopoulos yesterday.

INGRAHAM: By the way would you have George Stephanopoulos hang out in the Oval Office and on Air Force One for two days. I don't understand that. I don't get that. Why is that in any universe a good idea.

HUCKABEE: It wasn't a good idea. I don't know why he was given that level of access. I think part of it is the President is fearless when it comes to reporters. He's never afraid of talking to them. In fact, he speaks to them almost every day and then they complain that they don't have press briefings. But the fact is they get the President himself something they didn't get under the eight years of President Obama. They ought to be grateful for that. Instead they whine.

INGRAHAM: I know but Stephanopoulos, I mean I went back and watched some of the old war room documentary and he did a really good job. He did a great job for Bill Clinton 92, he was Comms Director at the White House, had a big position, but there was a reason Ryan Reince Priebus didn't want him to moderate one of the big debates in 2016, it's not because he's not a nice guy or they like him personally. I like him personally, but it's because like he's a partisan. I mean. I'm not--

HUCKABEE: Most of the people in the news media--

INGRAHAM: I'm not going to be moderating a debate in 2020. It would be fun, but I'm not going to moderate--

HUCKABEE: Yes, but Rachel Maddow is, think about that. Here's the thing, for the most part many people who are in press positions for the national networks have worked for political candidates' campaigns and officeholders. And for them to even present that their journalists that they're objective. I don't pretend to be objective. You don't either. Neither does Sean or a bunch of other people. Some of them pretend that they are objective and they're not news people, they're political people and they need to admit it and be editorialist.

INGRAHAM: Yes. Just know what you're in for. Finally, today the President shared a really nice moment with your daughter Sarah Huckabee Sanders who is stepping down as press secretary. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: She's a special person, a very, very fine woman. She has been so great. She has such heart. She's strong but with great, great heart. And I want to thank you for an outstanding job. And thank you. Come.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: I got teared up watching that. I mean you must be emotional. The President was saying, you've got to run for Governor of Arkansas. Anything you can tell us tonight, Governor.

HUCKABEE: Well, I don't think she's made any decision about her future. She just wants to spend a little time with her kids and rethink about the future. He's gone ahead and launched her ship whether she liked it or not. But look the one thing I can tell you; she loves this President. She has been absolutely loyal to him and will continue to be.

And I think one thing she's looking forward to do, to doing is to be able to set the record straight about what a remarkable person he is, how well he has treated her, how much in command and control he is and so much of the things that are said about him by the press just untrue. And she's been there firsthand to witness it. And I look forward to her being able to tell the story not on the payroll of the federal government, but just as a person who truly appreciates and will forever be loyal and grateful to Donald Trump as President of the United States.

INGRAHAM: Yes, that affection was really obvious today. It was a really nice moment and all the sniping by the press that continued after that moment with the President. Governor, thank you so much. And Sarah Huckabee would win the governorship of Arkansas, hands down, if she wanted it. Even though the name is a bit of a handicap. Governor, thanks so much.

HUCKABEE: It would be.

INGRAHAM: Just kidding. Speaker Pelosi used her press conference today to tee off on a new target, Mitch McConnell. Well, guess what. He joins us next to respond.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Speaker Pelosi is opening up a new front in her war against the Trump administration and Republican leadership in Congress. Here she is taking a shot at my next guest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: Leader McConnell seems to take great pride in calling himself the grim reaper. It's part of his political campaign. It's part of the prize he takes as leader of the Senate and as you see what he wants to bury. None of these things are going to pass, they won't even be voted on. So, think of me as the grim reaper.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The Grim Reaper. What. Well, Senator McConnell your response to these new attacks from Nancy Pelosi, complete senator with props and poster boards and McConnell's graveyard.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, R-KY: She's got it right. She's got it absolutely right for the first time in my memory. I agree with Nancy Pelosi. I am indeed the Grim Reaper when it comes to the socialist agenda that they've been ginning up over in the House with overwhelming Democratic support and sending it over to America. Things that would turn us into a country we would never been sending it over to America. They're on the way to doing some additional things.

In addition, the ones I've already done, the Green New Deal, Medicare for All and by the way, you may have mentioned this on your show, but they plan to make the District of Columbia State that given two new Democratic senators. Puerto Rico state get two more new Democratic senators and as a former Supreme Court clerk yourself. You've surely noticed today plan to expand the Supreme Court. So, this is a full-bore socialism on the march in the house. And yes, as long as I'm the majority leader of the Senate, none of that stuff is going anywhere.

INGRAHAM: Senator, is there anything that can get done for the good of the country with this hot political climate that we're in. I mean we're going to talk about this crisis at the border. What we're seeing with people coming across the border, several hundred just in the last few weeks from African countries now.

MCCONNELL: Well, I could say, we're going to do on the humanitarian part of the problem down at the border. Senate Democrats insisted on stripping that out. I think it's fair to say the President's had more cooperation from the Mexicans than he has from this House and Senate Democrats so far on dealing with this crisis.

INGRAHAM: Well, the other thing we're hearing a lot from even some of your Republican colleagues, is this concern that you refuse to move legislation that would protect the country from future election meddling. The New York Times writing in a piece today partisan politics is the reason McConnell is standing in the way of better election security for him all that matters is the win even if he compromises and corrupts our democracy, Senator. That's what they're saying about you and saying look even Marco Rubio wants some legislation.

MCCONNELL: What nonsense. Look, I think you ought to compare the 2018 election when the Trump administration was in-charge to the 2016 election, when the Obama administration was in-charge, any stories about the last election. Just a handful of minor stories. This administration did a terrific job of working with state and local officials to make sure. We had an honest election in 2018 with minimal to no interference, where is the applause for that.

I'm open to considering legislation. But it has to be directed in a way that doesn't undermine state and local control of elections. The Democrats, Laura would like to nationalize everything. They want the federal government to take over broad swaths of the election process, because they think that would somehow benefit them.

Election security, I do care about. But we need to make sure the subject is election security.

INGRAHAM: And senator of course the big news yesterday was when George Stephanopoulos sidles around the Oval Office desk and presents this scenario to the President or foreign government comms and plops down oppo research about his opponent. And the President said, well maybe I'd go to the FBI and I'd probably listen to the information. Do you have a problem with that answer because the Democrats seem to be taking that and saying see we told you so? Now it's onto impeachment.

MCCONNELL: They just can't let it go, Laura. I said weeks ago. Case closed. We've got the Mueller Report. The only objective evaluation that will be conducted. Nobody has any confidence that the Democratic House is going to engage in any kind of appropriate oversight. The case is closed. Why don't we move on and solve the border crisis and prove the President's USMCA, the new trade deal with Mexico and Canada. We have work to do.

INGRAHAM: But do you think the President made a mistake in the way he answered that question when he said maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. And I'd hear them out. Would you answer that question that way?

MCCONNELL: Well, he gets picked out every day over every different aspect of it, but the fundamental point is they're trying to keep the 2016 election alive and the investigation alive, when the American people have heard enough, they got the Mueller Report. They would like for us to do some business. I would ask the Democrats in the house this. Is there anything you're willing to do other than harass the President for the next two years? Anything at all.

INGRAHAM: And Senator, I finally I want to turn to the courts and issue obviously you care near a lot about with all the confirmations, successful that you've gotten through and President Trump has always been pretty transparent about potential nominees.

However, I think that the Left is basically getting ready to - as you mentioned earlier try to pack the courts in the unlikely event that they win in 2020. It's all being funded. We found out yesterday by dark money groups who won't - names we won't know are not going to be revealed. And this comes as Ron Klain, a former Obama and Clinton aide warns, quote, "The next decade could feature a radical right Supreme Court that would not only narrow past gains but also erect barriers to prevent progressive political action."

So which is it? Will the courts to be champions for the left or are they just too darn far right?

MCCONNELL: The kind of people the president has been nominating and we've been confirming believe in the simple, quaint notion that maybe the judges ought to follow the law. I am amazed that that is controversial, but their being upset about it reveals that they want the judiciary to be just like a legislative body, and to have outcomes in mind before they've heard the arguments.

With regard to the nominees, not only did the president make two great Supreme Court nominees in Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, but we are making an important difference for the country that will last for a very long time. And my motto for this Congress is leave no vacancy behind, either in circuit judges or district judges.

INGRAHAM: All right, Senator McConnell, thanks so much for spending some time with us tonight. We really appreciate it.

MCCONNELL: Thank you, Laura.

INGRAHAM: And now after a Texas city shut down a children's story time hosted by drag queens at a public library, a radical church stepped in to save it. But why? Where else is this happening? An opponent and a Christian supporter will debate the drag story time, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Now, your local library is a wonderful resource for school aged kids, their reading groups, mommy and me classes, arts and crafts programs, and now drag queen story time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The transition from nightclub to libraries has been absolutely overwhelming and astounding. There may be a child in the audience that is feeling a little different, and now he may see me, or she may see me, and say, wow, hey, I feel a little different too, and here is someone who is comfortable feeling different and is OK with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: When Leander, Texas, a city of 56,000, decided to put an end to this, citing upset citizens, a leftwing church known as Open Cathedral stepped in to hosted the event this weekend. So what happens there? Joining me now to debate is Arthur Schaper, director of Mass Resistance, and Jonathan Merritt, a progressive Christian writer and author of the book "Learning to Speak to God from Scratch." All right, Arthur, what is your group's main objection to these drag queen story hours that are popping up all across the country?

ARTHUR SCHAPER, DIRECTOR, MASS RESISTANCE: Thank you again, Laura, for having me on the show. My name is Arthur Schaper. I'm the organization director for Mass Resistance. We are the international pro-family group that makes the difference. We have had parents contacting us all over the country about these perverse programs. The bottom line is this. You have adult homosexual men, adult entertainers going into a public library reading to children. That alone should not only be setting off alarms, but people should be demanding this to be canceled even before it starts. We're not talking about diversity. We are talking about deviance. We're talking about perverse and destructive lifestyles being animated or advertised to children as if it's normal. You can just look at the website itself.

INGRAHAM: Wait, wait, hold on, Arthur, are you saying that gay people can't read to kids ever? We're talking about a very specific issue with drag queens. That's what we're talking about here, so try to keep it focused on that issue.

SCHAPER: We're talking about drag entertainment here, drag entertainment. This is adult illicit entertainment, to put it mildly. And we are having these entertainers reading to children? Why stop there? why not have poll dancer story hour? How about having porn actor story hour. This is just nonsensical.

INGRAHAM: Jonathan, my question to you is --

SCHAPER: This is what you want children experiencing? You do?

INGRAHAM: Jonathan, this is how this whole started. I want to go to you here because you support these events. This is how "The Washington Post" described what is happening in this particular controversy, "The organization Drag Queen Story Hour started in late 2015 in San Francisco just as the country's reinvigorated right wing was coming into form. But it has found many fans, with chapters in areas outside traditional liberal cities, outposts now in Milwaukee, New Orleans, Mobile, Alabama, and San Marcos, Texas." So this all began in San Francisco. This isn't some organic, just a local person who decides I want to help the kids. This is to a lot of people organized as an attempt to advance a particular agenda or viewpoint or understanding, and beginning itself in San Francisco.

JONATHAN MERRITT, PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIAN WRITER: Yes, to me where it began is really irrelevant. I think the question is what's happening in these events now. And I think you have a lot of people who are upset about it. They are upset about it because, and your guest I think articulated that perfectly, that they are disgusted by certain people in society, by the LGBT community, by drag queens, who, by the way, are not always a part of the LGBT community. And they feel that their children will be contaminated if they come into contact with these people. I think that is not a mainstream view. I don't think even many conservatives I don't think agree with that anymore. I think that really is --

INGRAHAM: But Jonathan, what is the point? I get what you're saying, but what is the point here? What is really the point? Because there are a lot of people that are different. There are people that you probably wouldn't want to come in and do story time. I'm not trying to compare them, but there are drug addicts --

SCHAPER: You're having children --

INGRAHAM: Hold on, hold on, Arthur. Wait a second. There are drug addicts.

SCHAPER: This is ridiculous. Lots of people are opposed to this.

INGRAHAM: I'm talking to Jonathan. Jonathan, not everybody you would welcome into the library traditionally.

SCHAPER: See if he can defend that.

MERRITT: Yes. If you read the stories that are coming out about these events and you listen to the individuals who are actually reading the stories who speak for themselves, they are saying we were looking for a way to give back to the community. We are entertainers, we dance, we sang, we make merriment in various establishments, but we were looking for a way to give back. And they wanted to pour into the children of their communities. These events are voluntary. Nobody's children are being forced to go and sit in front of a drag queen and listen to a storybook. They're going there because they want to give back to their community, and I think in the United States of America anyone should be able to do that.

SCHAPER: Oh, brother.

INGRAHAM: Absolutely, there's a lot of ways to get back to the community. Arthur, close it out quickly.

SCHAPER: There are normal ways to do this. We are not talking about knitting. We're not talking about a Bible class. We're talking about degenerate, perverse entertainment. And not only that, not one but two sex offenders were exposed at one drag queen story hour in Houston, Texas. That is what our organization revealed. Mass Resistance, I'm with the California chapter. If you want real reading --

INGRAHAM: Don't hold up props. Here's one thing I don't like on this show, when people bring props. OK?

SCHAPER: This is what people should be reading to understand at length what's going on with this whole agenda.

INGRAHAM: OK, I got it, I got it. This is not a segment or promote one particular a group. We are trying to figure out what is really going on here. People have legitimate concerns on both sides of this issue. What is the point of doing this with kids? Is there a point? That's what we are trying to find out tonight. We wanted to have a really good conversation. We appreciate it.

And President Trump, by the way, is hosting, this is a really great event, beneficiaries of his criminal justice reform law at the White House today. And a brand-new set of poles spells perhaps some danger for Democratic candidates and African-American voters. The debate coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We are here today to announce a vital new action that we're taking to help former inmates find a job, live a crime life, and succeed beyond their wildest dreams. We are taking crucial steps to encourage business to expand second chance hiring practices. We want to cut the unemployment rate for these individuals to single digits within five years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: While President Trump was delivering remarks on his second chance hiring plan, a new poll spells perhaps some trouble for the top 2020 Democrats among African-American voters. The Black Economic Alliance found that between 27 percent and 33 percent have reservations or are very uncomfortable with Booker, Warren, Beto, and Buttigieg. Yikes.

Joining me now is Leo Terrell, civil rights attorney, and Pastor Mark Burns, CEO of the NOW television network and South Carolina Congressional candidate. Pastor Burns, let's start with you. Is this just an issue of these specific candidates being unpopular with about a third of African- American voters, or is Trump making some gains in the African-American community?

PASTOR MARK BURNS, R-S.C., CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: It is clear that President Trump is making not just some gains but huge gains, huge gains. I believe that the black vote in this election is truly up for grabs because, again, black Americans have been hearing what the Democrats have been saying but doing no action. But now they are seeing, they are seeing President Trump actually doing things. This is unheard of. You mean to tell me that President Donald Trump, the racist President Donald Trump, is now helping inmates when they get out of jail to stay out of jail by making sure that they get a second chance at life. It is not an accident that this is Donald Trump's first chance at helping minorities and people who have been forgotten by giving them a second chance at a real life. This is an unprecedented opportunity, and I believe the black vote is up for grabs.

INGRAHAM: Leo, your reaction to today?

LEO TERRELL, CIVIL RIGHT ATTORNEY: You asked a very specific question. Was this poll directed at specific Democrat candidates? Yes, because that same poll, which I read, Pastor and Laura, said that 75 percent of African- American support Joe Biden. So, they like a candidate, they just don't like Booker and Kamala Harris. African-Americans have said we want Joe Biden.

And secondly, regarding the Pastor's comments, a first step of releasing these individuals, how about a job? You know why? Because these employers will still ask you, have you been convicted of a felony? Yes. You won't get the job. So President Trump needs a first step, he needs a second step. He needs a second step, Laura.

INGRAHAM: I hear you --

BURNS: This is why the president --

INGRAHAM: What happened today, guys --

BURNS: This is why the president threw the Department of Justice and Bureau of Prisons in a new ready to work initiative, connecting employees. You've got to understand what the second chance job opportunity is. Go read it.

TERRELL: I know what it is, sir.

BURNS: The Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons is launching a new ready to work initiative connecting employees to --

TERRELL: Laura.

(CROSSTALK)

INGRAHAM: Leo, hold on, hold on. Leo, Joe Biden has his own problems in his own past statements about certain issues. We documented that earlier.

BURNS: Sleepy Joe.

INGRAHAM: -- earlier this week about bussing as so forth. But today was not just a throwaway event. This was another incredibly important step to helping people who are the most marginalized, and for people to kind to just blow it off and say, well, anyone could do this. If anyone could do this, why didn't everybody do it. Trump has actually done this, and he gets zero credit, Leo, and that is ridiculous. Go ahead and finish it out, Leo.

TERRELL: Let me give the president some credit. First step, great. But Laura, here's the question that the pastor won't answer. If you are an employer, you still get to ask, have you been convicted of a felony. They say yes, you won't get the job. So you've got to remove that barrier, and that has not been done. I'm saying we need a second or third step. That is the key, Laura. Unable to get jobs when --

INGRAHAM: At least he has us on a path here. Kim Kardashian gets a few votes, too, I think today.

BURNS: I've got to say this real quickly. President Trump is getting most definitely the credit. This is the first, second, third, and fourth act. This is simply President Trump unwinding the hands of Democrats Bill Clinton.

INGRAHAM: We'll continue this conversation. Thank you both for joining us tonight. Up next, the media flips out for a story that they say proves Trump's utter cruelty. Then we'll reveal the truth, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: The left is outraged this evening after reports emerged that the Trump administration is planning to shelter migrants at a military base with a troubled past. But they're leaving one important detail out. For more we go to Ed Henry in New York. Ed, tell us.

ED HENRY, CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Laura, great to see you. This sounds very similar to months and months ago when the mainstream media was railing against the president for allegedly putting migrant children in cages, except they were using as evidence photos from 2014 when Barack Obama was president.

Fast forward to this week when some of the media were back at it, blaring headlines that because of the soaring numbers of families trying to claim asylum, the president is sending migrant kids to an army base once used as a Japanese internment camp.

The full context, though, is far different than that. The migrants are being sent to Fort Sill Army Base in Oklahoma because the Trump administration wants to provide emergency shelter for kids while they are detained. A good idea to use an army base where there's food, beds, bathrooms, such a good idea that in fact Barack Obama used this facility for migrants back in 2014. The media did not attack him or highlight that connection to internment camps, just the opposite of the freak out now. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: New plans for detaining migrant children, this time at the same Oklahoma army base that once served as an internment camp for Japanese immigrants and Japanese-Americans back in World War II. Sadly, this is consistent with how the administration treats migrants in general.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The implication, of course, that they are going for is that we're putting people in concentration camps. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. This is a military base. We are looking for places to house kids in a humane way. How are we supposed to trust members of the media when they put out stories like this?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: Bernie Sanders, a presidential candidate, he tweeted out that we are going to look back on this and see that Trump is a racist. Again, he didn't have all the facts.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCU BULLOCK, FOUNDER, FLIKSHOP AND BRING IN THE COMMUNITY: This is why I'm so grateful for what happens around the country, and around the First Step Act and what we are doing now with these second chances, because we do understand that this crisis is huge. But with your guys' leadership, I feel very, very optimistic about the future.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, I wanted to hear more from him. That was an amazing event today at the White House. Marcus Bullock has been active in helping former inmates get jobs through President Trump's second step hiring initiative. And event that really didn't get the attention it deserves cuts against the usual narrative you hear about this president.

Up next, Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team will take it from here. Shannon, take it away.

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.