This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," July 11, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: All right, good evening I'm Laura Ingraham. Welcome to "The Ingraham Angle." You're going to want to stick with us for the whole hour tonight because we are going to have major breaking news from all over the world. President Trump has promised to drain the swamp but now he's also shaking up the globe. We're going to have full analysis of Trump's tough talk at the NATO Summit with Victor Davis Hansen, cannot wait, Walid Phares and more in a just a moment.

Meanwhile former FBI attorney, apparent Trump hater Lisa Page today refusing to testify before Congress. Mark Meadows and Alan Dershowitz will be here to tell us just how much trouble Page is now in. Raymond Arroyo joins me tonight with the story of a comedian who bamboozled Sarah Palin and former Vice President Dick Cheney into doing an interview by assuming an unbelievable identity, it's really classy, you're not going to want to miss it. Plus New York City sanctuary mayor is accused of, I love this, illegally crossing the border. Ben Shapiro will react.

But first, Trump calls out the real Russian collusion. That's the focus of tonight's Angle. I don't know about you but I thoroughly enjoyed seeing the grim faces on some of those other cable networks today after President Trump's meetings with his NATO counterparts in Brussels. Now it was obvious that pundits and writers wrote their scripts long before Air Force One even touched down in Belgium. Of course Trump was going to be an American wrecking ball, a bull in a China shop, further damaging the North American Alliance that had helped keep the peace for 69 years, Putin's poodle, yada yada yada.

And then the President spoke bluntly when he arrived, that's not surprise, and plainly about a bizarre dynamic whereby Germany, the richest country in NATO, is enriching Russia, the very country that the alliance wants protection from.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Well we're supposed to protect you against Russia but they're paying billions of dollars to Russia and I think that's very inappropriate. Germany is a captive of Russia because they supply, they get rid of their coal plants, they got rid of their nuclear. They're getting so much of the oil and gas from Russia. I think it's something that NATO has to look at.


INGRAHAM: Now if you've listened to my radio show with any regularity over the past six years, which you should have, you would have heard me speak both of the Nord Stream One and the Nord Stream Two energy pipeline projects which are funded by Russian business interests and make Russia, and maybe even Putin himself, billions of dollars in energy profits. Now presumably, that's enough money to mean that Germany can finally pay all the money into NATO dues that it actually owes.


GENERAL JENS STOLTENBERG, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: I think that two world wars and the cold war focus that we are strong together going forth.

TRUMP: But how can you be together when your country is getting it's energy from the person you want protection against or from the group that you want protection?

STOLTENBERG: Because we understand that when we stand together, also in dealing with Russia, we are stronger. I think what we have seen is that--

TRUMP: No you're just making Russia richer.


INGRAHAM: Remember both Russia makes a lot of money off of this and German interests make a lot of money of these pipeline projects too. And as you can see there, the NATO chief responded to Trump's very specific concerns with a flurry of generalities punctuated by venalities. It's not very convincing. Now Trump is right, if another country Russia, controls a big chunk of your energy supply, well you're giving up a huge amount of your personal autonomy while at the same time, you're giving Russia the rope to hang you with. Or maybe the light switch to electrocute you with, to keep the right analogy going.

As the Washington Post rightly noted today, Germany's energy relationship with Russia has long frustrated Washington and Eastern Europe who fear that the Nord Stream Two Pipeline which will bypass the Baltic Nations and Poland could be used to cut them off from crucial energy supplies. Former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is a top executive at the Russian government controlled company that runs the pipeline. That's a cozy relationship. Now wouldn't you like to see Schroeder's Swiss bank accounts? Wouldn't you just like to know how much he had to be paid to agree to that?

Now what's clear after today is that Donald Trump is not only not sucking up to Putin, he's trying to disrupt Germany's cozy relationship with Russia. He's doing what friends often do with friends who've gotten off track. He's having a frank and brutally honest conversation with them with hopes of righting their course and repairing the relationship. German Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted to Trump's suggestion that Germany is captive to Russia, this way.


ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR: That I have experienced myself how a part of Germany was controlled by the Soviet Union. I am very happy that today we are united in freedom, the Federal Republic of Germany. Because of that we can make out independent politics and make independent decisions.


INGRAHAM: Well you're not going to be independent for long when Putin decides to shut down that gas line. Did you hear an answer to Trump's actual charges or questions? I didn't. As the American President, Donald Trump is over in Europe looking out for our interests and of course, for the independence of our allies which he thinks is really important and rightly so. The free rider days have come to an end. Americans elected Trump, in part, because they wanted to make sure that the billions that we spend overseas are billions very well spent. What a novel concept. But you would have thought that Trump had worn a Russian flag t-shirt to his NATO talks, given the hyperbole wafting from 30 Rock today


JOHN MEACHAM, RANDOM HOUSE EXECUTIVE EDITOR: Donald Trump is the most vivid manifestation of the least attractive characteristics in the national character. We haven't been captured by Donald Trump, we have had our worst instincts affirmed, exacerbated and put in front of the world. He could not be doing Putin's bidding more effectively if he were an active agent of Vladmir Putin and the KGB.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's all coming to fruition and there is a basic reason why Putin wants to do it. In President Donald Trump he has an American President who goes at NATO hammer and tongues and in a sense does Putin's work for him.


INGRAHAM: What a ridiculous comment. Asking our allies to pay their fair share is going at NATO hammer and tongues? He's actually trying to strengthen NATO by saying, "We've got to keep this alliance together by keeping our military expenditures what we pledged to do and keep those at a level that are fair for everyone, two percent" But I got to tell you, this was perhaps my favorite of all the criticisms of Trump's NATO meetings today.


MEACHAM: What's the role of misogyny here? Does Merkel remind him of Hillary? Does that help explain the Theresa May? He does not have a particularly healthy relationship it seems with a lot of strong women.


INGRAHAM: Oh my gosh. I really like John Meacham, he's a respected biographer, historian. But that was just stunning. Yes John, that's what it's all about. It's not the unseemly energy deal that imperils Eastern Europe or a country that's been undermining its future safety while asking us to pay for their protection. It's all about strong women, my God.

Well here's an observation from one. Mueller has come up empty in his quixotic quest to find Trump collision with Russia but perhaps he should turn his investigation to Germany where politician's current informer are all too happy to sell out their own people for cheap Russian gas. Well I won't hold my breath waiting for that probe to start and in the meantime I'm glad we have a President that is unafraid to upset the apple cart over in Europe and call out truly dangerous international collusion where it exists and he's actually willing to do something about it. And that's the Angle.

Joining me now for reaction Michael Szanto, a researcher in International studies at the University of Miami. In London, very late Raheem Kassam , former chief of staff to Brexit leader Nigel Farage and with me here in studio Walid Phares, Fox News national security and foreign affairs analyst. Walid there's lots to unpack here but the criticism of Trump today was so overwrought, so over the top, so unhinged, it's like it's seamlessly dove tailing from the unhinged criticism of Brett Kavanaugh two days ago. We move from topic to topic with more overheated rhetoric. How is Donald Trump cozying up to Russia by saying, "Let's strengthen the military alliance of NATO?

WALID PHARES, FOX NEWS FOREIGN AFFAIRS ANALYST: Absolutely by also ordering a deployment in the Baltic Dates, by increasing the sanctions on Russia, by making sure that Iran is not going to get our dollars to buy what? Weapons from Russia. Is that being cozy to Russia? I don't think so

INGRAHAM: Raheem I want to go to you. This is what President Obama and President Bush both said about the need for each member nation to pay his fair share. Let's listen.


BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: The majority of allies are still not hitting that two percent mark. Everybody's got to step up and everybody's got to do better.

GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT: Building a strong NATO Alliance also requires a strong European defense capability. So at this summit I will encourage our European partners to increase their defense investments to support both NATO and EU operations.


INGRAHAM: OK so Raheem they just said these thigs and nothing ever happened. Donald Trump noticed that and he said, "No more Mr. Nice guy, this has got to get done" Now he upping it to four percent and sent everyone into paroxysms of outrage today. Raheem how are we seeing it from Britain tonight?

RAHEEM KASSAM, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO NIGEL FARAGE: Well how do you get to two percent? You obviously get to four percent first, that's a basic negotiating tactic. Anybody who knows how to haggle will tell you to do that. But isn't it interesting that you have a pleading Obama and you have encouraging words from President Bush. And now you actually have a President who recognizes that there is a significant discrepancy, not just a fiscal discrepancy, but a moral discrepancy going on within NATO that fundamentally needs addressing.

The American tax payer, the American deplorables have been expected now for decades to act as a protector for these protectorates in Europe. All the while, European leaders insulting the United States, insulting President Trump most recently and of course President Trump has pointed out, turning to Russia for gas, when it's convenient for them and then asking America to look after them militaristically. I mean you know the jig is up and here in London I can tell you people are taking what President Trump is saying very very seriously because the United Kingdom is one of those few NATO countries that does meet its two percent GDP and we want everyone else to do the same in terms of defense spending too.

INGRAHAM: Which is in part why Theresa May was so muted in her reaction to this. Not only her problems at home but look these numbers, Michael Szanto, don't look great for European contribution to military budget of NATO. Let's check it out, here are the countries that actually meet the two percent as Raheem said. We have the United Kingdom, of course the United States, Estonia, Greece and my half Polish side says, "Poland, go Poland" So those are the countries. Everybody else can't make, you don't not even have Germany with all its money including all of its money it's making off this Russian pipeline deal. We got to wait to 2024 to get to two percent? Most Americans watching this tonight going, "2024, what are you talking about?" Pony up the cash now or maybe people don't get so much vacation in the summer subsidized by the state.

MICHAEL SZANTO, INTERNATIONAL POLICY EXPERT: Well yes, I think that's a valid concern that our allies need to step up. But we all need to step up right now because the Russian threat is more serious than it has been for many decades now. The Russians are probably moving nuclear weapons into Kaliningrad which violate the INF treaty. That's the most important treaty that Ronald Reagan was able to achieve and Putin is violating it right now. They outgun us in the Baltics.

So yes it's concerning that our allies are not doing as much as they can. But we also have to recognize that President Reagan and President George H. W. Bush heralded the end of the Cold War and we don't want it to all fall apart on us. So we need push our allies yes, but NATO is the most powerful alliance in history and we need to show Putin a resolve--

INGRAHAM: Right. I mean I agree with you Michael, it is the most powerful alliance but it is not 1975, it's not 1985, this is the year 2018. Soviet Union collapsed 20 plus years ago. We're now dealing with a new dynamic where $20 trillion in debt, Europe's making buku cash, especially in Germany because of this sweetheart energy deal. This has been a source of consternation for the Eastern European allies of ours too for many years. They went ahead with it anyway in the spring, which I think was a slap in the face to America and to out our allies, Poland, Estonia, the list goes on. They're not in favour of this pipeline, noticed that? They're right on the front lines, they don't want this pipeline.

SZANTO: No that is entirely entirely true but we also need to remember that we've been dealing with terrorist in insurgence so the US and her European allies have been largely focused in on insurgence and terrorists. And people need to understand that the Russian military has been focused in on defeating NATO. And the studies show that if they attack Estonia we do not have the forces in place. And the world's largest arsenal is Russia and not the United States so we have to be careful with the finger pointing. Yes Germany needs to spend more but that doesn't change that there is a real Russian threat.

INGRAHAM: OK then they better start acting like it.

SZANTO: I agree.

INGRAHAM: Europe better start acting like it. Walid I got to go to you because you met today with, I think we even have a photo of it, you met today with legislatures from the European Parliament. A lot of people think Europe hates Trump, Europe hates Trump, Europe hates Trump. You found something different in your conversations today, what did you find?

PHARES: Absolutely. After three days of meetings between members of the European Parliament, members of the US Congress, the myth that the so- called opposition media, mainstream media here is presenting that everybody is united against President Trump is simply inaccurate. Number one you have countries inside Europe who align with President Trump on many issues, some on migration, some on defense. You have Italy changing positions and even Germany. Do you know that south of Germany basically is aligning with President Trump on some issues?

INGRAHAM: The rise of populism which people like Richard Stengel who was on MSNBC this morning, part of the parade of grim faces. It was like election night all over again. Every time I see the faces, when their faces are grim, I'm almost always in a great mood. I was in a great mood this morning watching their reactions. And this Raheem is what Richard Stengel said today after Donald Trump took on Europe for failing to step up, many of these countries for their military obligations to NATO, let's watch.


RICHARD STENGEL, MSNBC ANALYST: Let's also go back to why the European Union was formed. It was formed in the aftermath of World War II where there was poisonous nationalism that caused two world wars in the twentieth century that killed more than 100 million people. The EU was meant to get around and away from that toxic nationalism, right. But who's bringing it back? Donald Trump. America First is toxic nationalism.


INGRAHAM: My God, again, Raheem there is banality after clich, after bromide. Put it on a bumper sticker and try to sell it somewhere because Americans aren't buying that. Globalism gone rye is what gave birth to nationalism were people like, "Wait a second, why haven't my wages gone up in like 20 years as all these guys keep getting richer in the elite class?" Your reaction to that toxic nationalism charge given your association with Nigel Farage, Ukip and the rise of the movement in Europe.

KASSAM: Yes absolutely and I mean we've been doing this for years now and whether you want to call it nationism or nationalism, some people call it populism or whatever. You know you could put the word toxic in front of any word or phrase and suddenly it's an incredibly bad thing. But actually what nationalism is to the peoples across Europe in Hungary, In Austria, In Italy, in the United Kingdom with our Brexit vote, what it represents was actually, "We don't want out jobs sent abroad anymore, we'd quite like to manufacture things for ourselves. We'd quite like to control our own borders"

What it is is a return to the status quo, it's a return to normality. Not sort of this global on acid that we become accustomed to and I'm so glad that you have a President that sort of reflects a lot of those things. You know you've got the lowest levels of black unemployment ever. The lowest levels of Hispanic unemployment in decades. Does that chap want to call that toxic? Maybe he should call that toxic, explain that to the minority communities across America and the same things happening across Europe Laura.

INGRAHAM: I would also say wages are going. Yes, wages are going up, Italy's waking up, Austria's woken up, Poland. I think you're going to go down the list and you're going to see more European countries saying, "Wait a second, it's worked out for Germany OK but a lot of these policies haven't worked out for our working class" A fascinating conversation, all of you. Great different insights and we really appreciate it. A former FBI attorney trashed at candidate Trump and those text messages, we'll remind you of them, refused to testify before Congress today. Republican Mark Meadows and Attorney Alan Dershowitz will be here to explain what going to happen next.

You remember Lisa Page, she's one half of the texting duo that her lover Peter Strzok, are they still together? Do we know? Ask the national enquirer, we got to find that out? It's really important. It is not, I'm just joking. But today she decided to defy a Congressional subpoena, that is important, refusing to show up for a closed door meeting with two different House committees.

Fox was told exclusively that Page's lawyer was served tonight, an electronic subpoena and chose just to ignore it. In response Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and member Trey Gowdy just sent a letter to Page's attorney warning that their committee will initiate contempt proceedings against Page Friday morning at 10:30 am. Joining us now to discuss how much trouble Ms Page might be in and why the hesitation to testify today. North Carolina Congressman Freedom Caucus Chair Mike Meadows and noted Attorney Alan Dershowitz, author of the new book, 'The Case Against Impeaching Trump'.

Congressman Meadows I got to say reading her lawyers comments that the only reason that she didn't testify today was because apparently they were not provided with the requisite documents to have adequate preparation for the scope and breadth of the questions that she would be asked. Your response to that.

REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C.: Well I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt until I called DOJ and there's three problems with that. One she's had seven months to prepare because we started initially asking her to come in December of 2017. Secondly, she wasn't even going to be prepared, FBI reached out to her counsel to say, "By the way, you may want to come in and review the some of these documents" And then the third thing is actually she reviewed documents yesterday at 15:45, reviewed most of the documents. The only thing she didn't review was top secret documents that we didn't anticipate any questions arising from that anyway. So the attorney is doing a disservice to her suggest that she was going to come in a voluntarily--

INGRAHAM: But they said today that she will testify this month, later this month.

MEADOWS: I'm hopeful we'll see her tomorrow or Friday--

INGRAHAM: But if it's not tomorrow or Friday--

MEADOWS: She will be held in contempt.

INGRAHAM: And then what does that mean for people who aren't familiar with the term?

MEADOWS: Obviously at that point she gets referred to the department of justice for prosecution--

INGRAHAM: Rosenstein's in charge of that, that's not going to happen.

MEADOWS: It creates another issue because then all of a sudden it's incumbent on the DOJ to actually act and press charges. We actually have other constitutional ways to do it but as argued yes they will opine on them I'm sure.

INGRAHAM: Alan Dershowitz I've never heard of an attorney, or maybe you have, who refused to open an email. Like not click on it, I'm just going to pretend like this that it doesn't exist. Refused to click on an email which you know is a subpoena for your client. That seems kind of weird to me but your reaction to that.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Look even if all the reasons she gave were good ones, you don't just don't show up. You write a letter to the committee asking the committee to give you more time to review but the idea of just not showing up makes no sense at all. And of course the Congressman is correct, the justice department is supposed to take the case over. But if the justice department doesn't do it, Congress is an independent branch of government. It can hold somebody in contempt, it can literally order the person to go into the basement jail cell and that person would have to court to seek a rid of Habeas corpus. It is almost never done, it was done in the 19th century but it's rarely done today.

But it's rare that the justice department doesn't go after somebody and enforce a subpoena so we may see a conflict between this justice department and the legislative branch. But in the end the legislative branch must enforce its own subpoenas and the justice department must comply with that otherwise our separation of powers and checks and balances is really in trouble.

INGRAHAM: It's been thwarted all along I think in this probe on the Congressional Oversight. Again, a lot people watching now, they hear the name Lisa Page and they think, "Oh why is she important?" they forget what actually happened with the text messages that sent off so many alarm bells. I want to review this with people, March third 2016 OK heed of the Presidential election cycle she texts to her friend Peter Strzok, "This man cannot be President" March 16th Page says, "I cannot believe Donald Trump is likely to be an actual likely to be a serious candidate for President" She's having a meltdown. Strzok says, "They fully deserve to go and demonstrate the absolute bigoted nonsense of Trump" July 18th Page says, "Donald Trump is an enormous d-word" July 21st Strzok says, "Trump's a disaster" August 8th Lisa Page says, "Trump's not ever going to become President right, tight?" That's my favorite one, right right? Just to emphasize, Superman Peter Strzok says, "No, no he's not. We'll stop it babe" Oh wait, he didn't say babe, I just added that. I mean that's modern day courting at the justice department I mean come on, get a room and let's just stop it.

But Alan that's what sticks in the craw of people is that you have these people who are burrowed into the justice department who had an enormous amount of influence, obviously Peter Strzok being the lead investigator in two of the seminal investigations and he was like, "Don't worry about it, I got it" Now was it just boasting, it could have been but then just testify.

DERSHOWITZ: You've just explained why Strzok doesn't want to testify in public and why she doesn't want to testify at all. There is no way they can explain those messages. He's going to try to say, "Oh it was pillow talk" But when you have a man who was in charge of FBI investigations saying he's going to stop a man from being elected president. A man who I voted against, I didn't want to see him be president. I voted for Hilary Clinton but the idea that the FBI would put a thumb or even a pinky on the scale of American elections is akin to what is alleged with Russia.

I mean the FBI putting a thumb in some ways is even worse than enemies or other countries trying to influence elections. Look, we know that happens but to have our own law enforcement agency that is supposed to be neutral and objective saying that we are going to stop this, we need insurance policies, the American public has to hear everything.

INGRAHAM: It is foreign to uphold the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, domestic is the justice department. Now not everybody is convinced about the need to hear from Lisa Page. A lot of critics out there Jerry Nadler, lots of comments from him today said, "This investigation, a political charade, a platform to elevate far right conspiracy theories, Congressman Meadows and undermine the special counsel's ongoing criminal investigation" And then there were others today Congressman. I'd like your response, let's watch.


JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: This is a line of argument that has worked for the Republicans. It has worked for the President to latch onto these text messages and therefore declare the entire Russia investigation somehow biased against the President.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY, D-ILL.The Intel community, the justice department are people who work there don't live in a vacuum. They have their own personal views and they're entitled to them.


INGRAHAM: Congressman Quigley, Congressman Meadows your reaction. This is all political theatre. You're all trying to hum up the Mueller investigation?

MEADOWS: Listen, this makes for a great book but it would be sad if were making up the facts. The facts are we have their own words, it's not my words, it's not Alan's words. It's Lisa Page, Peter Strzok and I would suggest a number of other people where we're seeing a growing body of evidence that says that there was actual coordination, not only just the DOJ or the FBI as it relates to this investigation, but perhaps with other agencies that really create a real troubling message. So here is the thing is it is important. Alan hit it. If we are putting even a pinky on the scale of justice, that's wrong and we can't have that. Transparency, I'm for making it all transparent. And let Jerry Nadler come in and read the same documents I've read. I think he'll have a different --

INGRAHAM: Chuck Grassley said there's more evidence of political bias, congressman. Do you know what he's talking about?

MEADOWS: There is more evidence of political bias. We have got some additional emails and some additional text messages --

INGRAHAM: We want you on the show.

MEADOWS: -- in the last four or five days.

INGRAHAM: Alan, go ahead.


INGRAHAM: I was just going to say, Alan, I was in New Hampshire over the weekend, some old friends, and went up there with our families. And I pick up "The Boston Globe" and I see that everybody was mean to you up in Martha's Vineyard. No one inviting you to any afternoon lunches?

MEADOWS: He can come to west North Carolina.

INGRAHAM: This on Fourth of July.

DERSHOWITZ: What we're doing is -- this is my book. This is the actual cover. But we produced a special cover for Martha's Vineyard, a plain brown wrapper so people can read the book on the beach, and nobody will know they're reading it.


DERSHOWITZ: It is like the plain brown wrappers we would use as kids when we were reading dirty books. So that's the way it's going to be sold on the Vineyard, and a lot of people are going to be reading it in the plain brown wrapper.

INGRAHAM: I've got to come up there, and do we need to do the show from Martha's Vineyard, professor?

DERSHOWITZ: Absolutely. You're invited.

INGRAHAM: On the porch, Martha's Vineyard, with all the snowflakes who can't take the fact that there's a civil libertarian out there who is actually principled on these matters of criminalizing politics.

DERSHOWITZ: You were there last year, and my friends loved you. They loved you, they love your children. You're welcome back anytime.

INGRAHAM: I love the paper bag idea. Congressman Meadows, we want those emails when we can get those from you. That's fascinating.

MEADOWS: Right away.

INGRAHAM: And the other political bias. And up next, guys, one comedian attempts to humiliate political figures by assuming an unbelievable identity. We'll tell you about it when we come back.


INGRAHAM: It's time now for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we expose what is really behind the big cultural stories of the day.

Apparently for many comedians, the cruder the better. The latest example, Borat creator Sacha Baron Cohen is tricking politicos into doing interviews, interviews with him, of course, by assuming a new identity. How clever. For more on that why so many are outraged, we are joined by FOX News contributor, "New York Times" bestselling author of the "Will Wilder" series, Raymond Arroyo. Raymond, why is Sarah Palin upset about this?

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Maybe she has grounds to be upset. She got a communication for a request to sit down with a veteran, a disabled veteran, to take part in a Showtime historical documentary. It turns out that disabled veteran was Sacha Baron Cohen, who you'll remember did that Ali G. series years ago where he dressed up as a rapper, and he basically plunked well-known political figures. Palin wasn't the only one who fell for this. Dick Cheney did too. Look.


SACHA BARON COHEN, COMEDIAN: Is it possible to sign my waterboard?

DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: Sure. That's a first. That's the first time I ever signed a waterboard.


ARROYO: As you can imagine, he is assuming multiple identities in this new Showtime special. None of these people knew about it. Alberto Gonzalez, Petraeus, a number of people. Here's the problem. You will remember Martin Short as Jiminy Glick, Barry Humphries as Dame Edna, they were outrageous characters who interviewed people, but the celebrities were in all the routine. You have to have real talent as a comedian to fill that gap when people know who you are.

Cohen is a hit-and-run artist. And there is a mean, bizarre edge to this that is largely politically motivated. It's really nasty. There's one guy, though, a few years ago, Ali G., Baron Cohen, came in, tried to interview him. He didn't fall for it. Watch.


COHEN: I have got some business ideas that I just want to tell you about. And I'll be a fool if --

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Very quickly. Good luck, folks. It's been nice seeing you. You take care of yourself.

COHEN: Is you going to be in on that?

TRUMP: It sounds like an interesting --

COHEN: We got that P-Diddy is going to be in it.

TRUMP: Good.



ARROYO: Good, bye-bye.

INGRAHAM: Trump has a radar on people. He saw that crap for what it was.

ARROYO: By the way, Sacha Baron Cohen's last movie, $3.2 million.

INGRAHAM: Flop. No one even knows who he is. I'm sorry, our audience doesn't care about him.

ARROYO: Speaking of crude comedians, Michelle Wolf, who some might remember from that nasty act at the White House correspondents' dinner, she surfaced this week a new Netflix show where she offered a salute to abortion.


MICHELLE WOLF, COMEDIAN: Some people say abortion is killing a baby. It's not. It is stopping a baby from happening. It's like back to the future and abortion is the DeLorean. And everyone loves DeLorean.

Pro-life is a propaganda term that isn't real, like healthy ice cream.

Abortion, I salute you. Women, if you need an abortion, get one. God bless abortions and God bless America.



INGRAHAM: Can I say something? You have such great points to make. They just need to play that voice in Gitmo. They will get everything they want from -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, you didn't even need to waterboard him with that jug. Play Michelle Wolf's voice. That's all they need. It's horrible.

ARROYO: It's cruel. There is something breathtakingly vicious about that kind of humor. When you are talking about abortion where two victims come out of abortion, a mother and the child whose life is snuffed out, to celebrate that and say let's have a party about this, I frankly couldn't believe this. and it shows I think something deeply wounded in Michelle Wolf.


ARROYO: I almost think we should pray for Michelle Wolf.

INGRAHAM: You just took the words.

ARROYO: Prayer service at 11:00.

INGRAHAM: Power twins activate.

Finally we have the next story, the Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is being hazed this week, my old friend Brett, not for his judicial rulings so much, but for his name. OK. Stephen Colbert.


STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE LATE SHOW": I don't know much about Kavanaugh, but I am skeptical because his name is Brett. That sounds less like a Supreme Court justice and more like a waiter at Ruby Tuesday's. Hey, everybody, I'm Brett. I'll be your Supreme Court justice tonight. Before you sit down, let me just clear away these rights for you.


INGRAHAM: Stephen had to pretend he went to Dartmouth College as part of his M.O. Brett actually went to Yale College, went to Yale Law School, succeeded at every level. But he doesn't try to play someone he's not.

ARROYO: I guess name discrimination, name-ism. Name slander. But you know what I thought as I watched this, and NARAL also had a tweet where they said damned if we are going to let five men, including some frat boy named Brett. So now he's a frat boy or a waiter at Ruby Tuesday's.

INGRAHAM: What is wrong with Ruby Tuesdays?

ARROYO: I know an anchor named Bret. There are a lot of famous Brets. Brett Favre, the great hall of famer. And of course "Match King" star Brett Somers. And there she is?

INGRAHAM: There she is. Is she still with us, Brett Somers?

ARROYO: She died in 2007. I just looked it up. But it is getting so desperate, the campaign against Kavanaugh. They are now complaining that he ran up credit card debt on buying baseball tickets to Nats games. Who cares if he paid it off, who cares what he ran up?

INGRAHAM: Now they are looking at you, before it was the videotapes you are renting. Now it's you can't buy baseball tickets. Who cares?

ARROYO: There's only one thing I'm happy about. I'm glad Trump didn't tap Raymond Kethledge because they'd be attacking Raymonds, and then we'd have big problems.

INGRAHAM: With a name like Raymond, anything is bound to happen.

ARROYO: With a name like Raymond, it's got to be good. Do you know what Raymond means?


ARROYO: Wise protector. It's all making sense now.

INGRAHAM: It is. I'm feeling very protective of you. Brett.

ARROYO: Brett Somers is spinning in her grave.

INGRAHAM: They are really scraping the bottom of the barrel. If it's Nats tickets and his first name, OK, that's the best they have.

ARROYO: Confirmation is assured.

INGRAHAM: Welcome to Supreme Court justice for life. Eat that, left, for life.

Up next, Victor Davis Hanson will be here to opine on the left's meltdown, speaking of meltdowns, over Trump's comments at NATO and of course the Putin summit. Stay there.


INGRAHAM: As we mentioned at the top of the show, the left is going absolutely berserk over Trump's challenge to NATO countries to contribute their fair share to their own defense. Another novel concept. It's undeniable that NATO is important, but why should it be off-limits from criticism from a U.S. president? And what about Germany? Doesn't Europe's largest economy have a responsibility to lead rather than just complain?

Joining me now is one of the truth sages of history of international relations, Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution. Victor, I've been dying to talk to you all day about this, because I am always in a good mood when the globalists on the other cable networks with fewer viewers are all upset. They are grim-faced, they can't stand the fact that the old order is being shaken up. But is this a dangerous moment for NATO in the alliance of NATO with a U.S. president reading them the riot act?

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON, HOOVER INSTITUTION: No. I think NATO was through a lot of iterations. It's 73 years after World War II, 69 years after its creation. There is no more Warsaw Pact, no more Soviet Union. Germany is up, Russia is in. We are sort of out.

But I see this a little different. It's really a German problem if you think about it. Germany is, as you said, the largest economy in Europe. It adjudicates financial terms for the debtor, southern Mediterranean. It adjudicates immigration to eastern Europe. It adjudicates the conditions on Brexit.

And here's the problem. Even under Obama, who was a godhead in Berlin, 52 percent of Germans have a negative appraisal, now it's down to about 35 percent have a positive. That's all. So 70 percent of Germany doesn't have a positive appraisal of the United States, and yet it has the world's largest trade surplus, about $240 billion. It runs a $65 billion trade surplus with us. It has about 100 tanks. Not just it spends 1.2 percent on defense, but even that number does not reflect the paucity of its forces. It only has about five or six jets.

You sum it all up, Laura, and here's the conditions they are presenting to the United States with. Our population for historical reasons or whatever doesn't really like you anymore. But we want you to protect us from Russia which we just cut a 30-year, $400 billion deal with. And by the way, in a recent German poll, Germans have a more favorable perception of Vladimir Putin than they do Donald Trump. That's not a sustainable matrix. It just won't work.

INGRAHAM: You need to bring Dr. Phil in. You need real marriage counseling for that relationship.

I want to play some of the Republicans criticism. They had this resolution in the Senate, 97 to two, supporting the NATO alliance today. It was seen by many as a rebuke to this president. But specifically Republican criticism of where Trump is, things like trade and NATO. Let's watch.


REP. PAUL RYAN, R-WIS.: I subscribe to the view that we should not be criticizing our president while he's overseas, but let me say a couple things. NATO is indispensable. It's as important today as it ever has been.

SEN. BOB CORKER, R-TENN.: My concern is that we have a bad NATO meeting and then some kind of consolation is given to Putin, and, again, it just continues to destabilize something that's already fraught with concerns by our partners.


INGRAHAM: We should reiterate two outgoing members of Congress, senator and speaker of the House, both on their way out of town.

HANSON: That's not a solution to be a historical. NATO is important and it's iconic. And we want to have good relationships with Europe, our fellow western civilization countries. But Germany used to have 500,000 people, and its army is down to 180,000. There is no more 500 Soviet divisions, there's no more Warsaw Pact. So come on. It is metamorphosing. It has been since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

But again, because of deep historical traditions in Germany vis-a-vis the United States and World War I, World War II, the division of the East and West Germany, Germany has some deep-seated ambiguities about NATO and about Russia and about the United States. And the problem is not Donald Trump. It predated him. It is with George Bush. It was with Barack Obama. Germany has to get its act together and decide what it wants to do. And if it wants to cut a deal Putin and feels that Russia is a more favorable country than the United States is, and if it doesn't want to spend money on its own defense, then it should tell us. And we can adjust accordingly and we can still work with NATO.

INGRAHAM: Yes, the free ride is over.

HANSON: But it's a German, not an American problem.

INGRAHAM: The free ride is over, Victor. Americans made that clear in this last election, carrying everybody on our backs. We want to have a good relationship but it's got to be honest. It's got to be give-and-take.

I want to play something for you from Adam Schiff who sees that what happened today is actually helping Vladimir Putin. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why is president Trump so admiring of Vladimir Putin? Have you figured this out? You see all the intelligence.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, D-CALIF.: It's either his general fondness for dictatorial figures, or it may be that the Russians have something over his head, that the Russians have been laundering money through his businesses, or there is some other leverage the Russians have.


INGRAHAM: I've heard of rank speculation before, but that really does take the cake, Victor. Close it out.

HANSON: That's absolutely unhinged because Germany just cut a deal with Russia for $400 billion, as I said. We had Barack Obama, remember, in Seoul, South Korea, saying in a hot mic conversation that he would be fixable after the election, and basically dismantled U.S.-eastern European missile defense so that Putin wouldn't do something that would impinge on his reelection bid. It was a classic case of in some ways collusion.

So that's just unhinged. It doesn't make any sense. And it's part of this pathological Mueller investigation that they can't let go of the more and more tenuous it become.

INGRAHAM: And Victor, we will have you on on Monday when the big meeting takes place, of course, between the president and Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. We really appreciate it.

And up next, irony alert. A sanctuary city mayor is accused of illegally crossing into the United States. Ben Shapiro will be here to explain why Bill de Blasio may have violated the law.


INGRAHAM: New York Mayor Bill de Blasio tried to get in touch with his inner illegal alien earlier this month. According to a letter from the Customs and Border Protection obtained by FOX News, de Blasio illegally crossed into the United States. He went over the U.S.-Mexican border while protesting family separations, so he allegedly violated both U.S. and Mexican law. Nice going, Bill.

Joining me now to react, Ben Shapiro, editor in chief of "The Daily Wire." Ben, it seems like every day there is just a panoply of fun issues that shows the left is totally out of ideas and all they are is about stunts. What about this? Did he actually violate U.S. and Mexican law?

BEN SHAPIRO, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, "THE DAILY WIRE": Apparently he did. Apparently he walked over the border with a bunch of his aides, and then he was asked by the border patrol where did you come from because you are not at a port of entry. And he juts pointed over toward Mexico. And then immediately proceeded with his friends to walk back across the border into Mexico again.

To be fair to Bill de Blasio, the guy probably doesn't know where he is half the time. Last week, the socialist Bill de Blasio spent time with the socialist Bernie Sanders at Bernie Sanders' socialist lake house. So I think it wouldn't make sense to convict him and imprison him for illegal immigration considering he probably thinks he was in a playpen at Chuck E. Cheese's or something. I just don't think he knows here he is.


INGRAHAM: He actually had an excuse. OK, we've got to listen carefully to what the mayor said.


MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO, D-N.Y.: Why suddenly, weeks later, is this letter showing up from the federal government? It is another attempt to distract from an inhumane policy. Threats by the Trump administration will not stop me from speaking out, and they won't stop my fellow mayors from speaking out.


INGRAHAM: Is that a profile in courage indeed?

SHAPIRO: I hope he continues to speak out. At least it stops him from throwing groundhogs.


INGRAHAM: You know what I would say, then? I will say we can trade 10 illegal immigrants who are good people, want to work here, already have family here, and deport Bill de Blasio. Bill de Blasio goes to Mexico. That's a good deal, don't you think?

SHAPIRO: Yes, 100 percent.

INGRAHAM: We've got that settled.

OK, I have to talk to about this anti Antifa bill that Republicans in New York have offered. "Daily Beast" has a piece on this. And this is from Mark Bray, the Dartmouth College lecturer. "Whenever I see politicians talking about Antifa, the level of information they have is minimal. Mark Bray told "The Daily Beast." In a certain sense, they are talking about what they perceive as leftist" because Republicans believe you shouldn't be able to threaten people with a mask and call yourself a legitimate protester. What's going on there? You have been the target of these kinds of radical groups.

SHAPIRO: I think that one of the problems here is the bill itself is probably too broadly drawn for First Amendment concerns. It talks about intimidation or obstruction. And these terms are probably a problem in terms of just First Amendment jurisprudence. But the attempt to distant wish Antifa from other violent groups that have worn masks before is really stupid. We have laws on the books are all over the Nazis, for example, you are not allowed to go around freaking people out if you're wearing a KKK hood, for example. And so this is very similar to that in that if you're going around attempting to do violence with your face covered, this is an attempt to obstruct who you are so the police can't catch you, obviously. And it seems more like that than anything resembling a crackdown on law- abiding citizens to me.

INGRAHAM: Speaking of the law and constitutional matters, Ben, here is esteemed would be jurist Katy Tur at MSNBC today. Let's watch.


KATY TUR, MSNBC: Based on where American stand on the issues, and Americans have really moved in a much more progressive direction over the years, do you think it's appropriate to continue to take such a strict originalist view of the Constitution given it's 2018 and not 1776?


INGRAHAM: Ben, this is where I say kids, don't try this legal analysis at home. Your reaction?

SHAPIRO: Oh, the levels of stupid. 1776, the constitution was not yet written, number one. Number two, if you believe that America has evolved beyond the constitution, it has an amendment process. Also we have legislatures that you can elect.

And finally, the idea that any of this justifies the Supreme Court moving away from the text of a law simply so they can interpret the Constitution as poetry is more evidence that the left wants the Supreme Court to be a super legislature as opposed to an actual judiciary that is using judgment instead of will as per Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78.

INGRAHAM: But Ben, isn't it scary, though, when you watch the analysis of the Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh, you see people now criticizing his name. I mean, the comedians are going after his name. Brett is apparently a frat boy name. I've never heard that before.

SHAPIRO: My favorite thing about the name thing is the same people who think Brett is an inappropriate name for a Supreme Court justices are celebrating that Cardi B just had a kid she named Kulture with a "K."


INGRAHAM: I think it shows just how desperate the left is, and I am thoroughly enjoying the meltdowns about NATO, the meltdowns about Kavanaugh, the meltdowns about Antifa. I love all of it. All the balls have to be juggled at one time because this provides unending humor for you and me. Ben Shapiro, great to have you on as always.

SHAPIRO: Good to see you.

INGRAHAM: And everyone out there, we will be right back closing out.


INGRAHAM: What a big night it was tonight. We might even have a bigger night in store for you tomorrow. President Trump, day two in Brussels. What will happen? Will there be more grim faces on the other networks? What fireworks might we see?

And speaking of pyrotechnics, anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok testifies in front of Congress tomorrow in an open session. We'll see you right back here tomorrow, tackling all those issues, also having a lot of fun.

That's all the time we have. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team are next. Shannon?

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. 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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.