New migrant caravan forming could be largest caravan yet

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

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: All right. I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” back in Washington tonight. We have a lot to get to. At any moment, we are expecting the text of the actual border compromise. Well, it's the bill and it's going to drop any moment. We're also awaiting word on whether the President will actually sign it. So, you want to stay with us right through this hour. We're going to be analyzing it line by line for you and you got to know what's in this thing, plus the failure of the high-speed rail project in California.

It's one of my favorite issues ever. I've been tracking this for years. It's just the latest in a long line of liberal pie-in-the-sky disasters. My ANGLE will explain what politicians have lied to you along the way and what lessons you can take from this. And also tonight, the revenge of the Esmonde (ph). Why am I having to say this? We told you about this last week. A lot of you apparently are interested in this, okay, and I have a question. Are you celebrating Galentine's Day? This is so disturbing. Raymond Arroyo is with us in a very wild Seen and Unseen tonight.

But first, I want all of you to understand what's at stake and what's going on here tonight. No matter what anyone tells you, this so-called border deal is a complete abdication of responsibility by Congress. It has nothing, zero, nada to do -- it doesn't do anything to stem the crush of humanity that we're seeing at our southern border right now.

There has been a 290 percent increase in the number of so-called family units illegally crossing into America just in the first four months of this fiscal year. As The Washington Post reported, "After surrendering to authorities, the families are driven to Border Patrol Stations, where they typically state a fear of deportation and a desire to seek asylum in the United States."

In most cases, the families are released after a few days and assigned a court date. Last month, an unprecedented 59 percent of all the border apprehensions were comprised of migrants travelling in family groups. Well, what The Post didn't tell you is that 90 percent of these migrants are not really eligible for asylum, but instead have been coached by immigration activists or lawyers or by the other family members or friends already in the United States, and their claims will ultimately be rejected by immigration judges. But, it doesn't matter because most never show up for their hearings and many, during that interim period, have children here. So then, they're never going to be sent back.

Democrat lawmakers will invariably say that border crossings are down, they're not up. Well, guess what, don't fall -- don't fall into that trap. That's irrelevant. It's a red-herring. When 1,800 adults and children crossed illegally into the U.S. on Monday alone, including two groups of more than 300 just in El Paso, we have a full-blown border crisis. Smugglers get rich, cartels and infiltrate the caravans and hardworking Americans get stuck with the tab.

Education costs, healthcare costs, housing and court-appointed interpreters just to lay out a few budget items. Of course, this could all stop tomorrow if Congress did what it should do tonight, all asylum applications should be filed outside of America. This itself removes the incentive to both storm border checkpoints and to cross illegally.

Secondly, the law must be changed to allow for immediate border turn backs. In other words, you come here from Honduras or Guatemala, and you're sent immediately back, which is what we do now with Mexicans who cross illegally. Third, one illegal border crossing and you're out. You're back home and that means back to zero tolerance.

Meaning once we caught you, you're deported and you may not apply to return legally to the United States. That would have a powerful deterrent effect to people who want to come, maybe they'll actually apply to come legally.

And finally, prosecute more adults for child endangerment. American parents, they're thrown in jail for letting their kids walk home from school alone, let alone putting them in situations where they don't have proper food or water. So, why do illegal aliens get special treatment? Dragging kids through very dangerous territory, the desert; food, water limited; cartels, coyotes, people who will prey on them. That is irresponsible. Those are just a few of my ideas. What are yours? Congress, what are you going to do?

Here now, Mark Morgan, Obama's former Border Patrol Chief; Luis Miranda, who's the former Communications Director for the DNC; and Dan Bongino, former -- excuse me, not former, Fox News Contributor.

Mark, you've been at the helm of an important enforcement agency in all of this; what did I leave out in my prescriptions?

MARK MORGAN, FORMER BORDER PATROL CHIEF: Laura, as I was listening to you, my first reaction is you can just drop the mic because everything you said was just right. And from a border security perspective, this proposal is an absolute failure. They not only didn't listen to the experts on the tools and resources, they needed they have absolutely rejected that. And one thing I want to add that's very important, the American people need to understand what they're doing with ice beds. So think about this.

This proposal reduces the ICE beds and I'm not a mathematician, but reduces the ICE beds. As you just point out, the legal aggression is skyrocketing. Again, you don't have to be a mathematician; what does that mean? Catch and release 2.0. They're going to have to release them.

INGRAHAM: They're codifying catch and release, Dan Bongino, and I know there are a lot of Republicans out there trying to put a good face on all of this because they love the President and they want him to be successful. But, I say tonight, they are failing this nation and they are failing to enact the Trump agenda. And then they put him up against the wall saying, "You're going to shut down the government." And this was planned to go this way all along, in my view. Dan?

DAN BONGINO, CONTRIBUTOR: Yes. I mean, Laura, listen, the President has been candid. He said himself yesterday in the Cabinet Room that this was a bad deal, but what is he going to do? You know, here's the problem, Laura. We're dealing with a political party in the Democrats; it has given up on America completely. They've committed to the destruction of our borders, our economy, with this Green New farce and all this other stuff out there.

We're having ridiculous arguments like, do walls work? These aren't even sane arguments. We're not dealing with a rational party anymore, so we have one party committed to the destruction of the country as we know it and another party, not all Republicans but a good swath of them, let's be candid, who've abandoned the President and are complete cowards. They were afraid of the media. What do you want the President to do? Hey, guy is in the corner. He's sitting there fighting the swamp sometimes, almost entirely by himself; it's embarrassing.

INGRAHAM: Luis, I want to go with you -- to you, because people who have been saying, "Well, Americans are against the wall." Okay, I was down in El Paso, Texas. I think and this was an underreported fact and you could see it when - in our overhead shots of the crowd. It was at least 50 percent Hispanic and they were people from Central America, mostly Mexicans, but other parts of world, and people of third and fourth generation Americans, Hispanic.

LUIS MIRANDA, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR OF DNC: Where you looking at Beto's rally or--?

INGRAHAM: No, I was at Trump's rally.


INGRAHAM: I mean, I was covering it and broadcasting, and it dwarfed Beto's. That guy too had a good turnout but it wasn't anywhere near Trump's - I mean that's just a fact. I mean I'm not going to debate that. I was actually there instead of hearing these people in Washington telling me what I saw with my own eyes. But, this is what the new polling is saying. Fox News poll just out today for support for the border wall; it's up 3 percent from last month. So now, it's up at 46 percent; September, it was 39 percent.

But, what they're -- what people are hearing I think is, "Oh, well, Trump wants to build a wall from sea to shining sea." Of course, he has never said that. He wants to build a wall where a wall makes sense. Why? When we see all the waste, fraud and abuse in Washington, D.C., why wouldn't people want to come to our country legally -- we say, good, we want to make you feel more secure about your country. If a wall makes you feel more secure, it's fine with us because we're going to come legally.

MIRANDA: Well, I'm glad you said that because there isn't a good legal system and all that the President has done so far is actually made it harder for people who do want to seek asylum to actually find that, and there's legitimate violence and incredibly big violence and a very difficult environment for people who really are fleeing their homes to come to the border. And I agree with you, what you said earlier, like let's create points for them to be able to request asylum along the way and let's assign more judges to be able to adjudicate those cases more quickly.

INGRAHAM: Okay, we cannot read (ph) on that.

MIRANDA: We can do that.

INGRAHAM: I mean if people want us to fight on everything--

MIRANDA: We can do that. But that's not what he's trying to do; he's trying to -- he promised a wall for 2,000 miles.


MIRANDA: And here's the reality. If there was an emergency today, it is going to take ten years to build it.

INGRAHAM: Are we a country - I have a simple question. I'm going to cut through all this CRAP. Are we country on peace?

MIRANDA: Of course.

INGRAHAM: Or no? A core poor country, right? We are a country.

MIRANDA: I haven't disputed it.

INGRAHAM: What does a country have? A thing called sovereignty, yes?

MIRANDA: It has citizens that have lost--

INGRAHAM: Can we determine who comes in and out, yes or no?

MIRANDA: It has rules, here's the thing--

INGRAHAM: You won't answer that question?

MIRANDA: I will, I will because here's a thought.

INGRAHAM: You won't answer that question. We get a sovereign right, a God- given right.

MIRANDA: They're not coming here to sit by the pool; they're coming here to work because there are employers who are giving them--

INGRAHAM: Wait, you can't say that you know what everyone's going to do.

MIRANDA: George W. Bush himself--

INGRAHAM: Oh, thank you. Spare mentioned (ph) his name.

MIRANDA: Extended (ph) wage laws to be able to be bring in--


INGRAHAM: Yes, that was a big success.

MIRANDA: To rebuild the Gulf Coast a huge success. So let's not pretend like they are coming on their own volition.


MIRANDA: --coming because they're being given jobs by industries that are not getting fined under the Trump Administration.

INGRAHAM: Yes, well. First of all, I'm happy to find all those industries. Dan, Kevin McCarthy tried to sum up the situation, building on the political situation that this President finds himself in. Let's watch.


REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY, R-CALIF.: The president is getting a victory there. They tried to eliminate the beds. We have the same cap that we had before. What it really is, is not providing the $5 billion, just one-tenth or one percent of the whole budget. This bill is a down payment. The President still has other avenues that he can use to get the rest of the money and finish it.


INGRAHAM: Dan, hold on one second. Mark, I want you quickly on that, then I want Dan.

MORGAN: He shouldn't have to resolve to level two and three, right? Congress should do what their - 230 miles, the experts. It's not sea to shining sea; that is a false narrative and you know it. 230 miles is all they're asking from the experts and their beds -- right now, ICE has 49,000 people. The experts are saying, we need 52,000 and Congress says will give you 42,000. This is a failure, a colossal failure.

INGRAHAM: Yes. And Dan, this last minute little trickery that they always engage in--


INGRAHAM: --is when you really have to look closely at what -- that's why we're waiting for this, this hour, for this thing to drop. There's always little golden nuggets tucked in the language of the bill.


INGRAHAM: They tried to do that with the Amnesty back in 2013; that flamed out. But we got to look at it very carefully and I don't like the cram through--


INGRAHAM: --the rush through to the very last minute. Got to sign it, sir, you are going to shut down the government. It's an irresponsible abdication of duty. Everyone on Capitol Hill who's supporting this thing, who got us to this situation, should be ashamed of themselves. I'm sorry, I'm so angry about what they did here.

BONGINO: No, you should be Laura and you're right. There'll be a poison pill and my suspicions are, the poison pill will be some limitations on the construction of a barrier and the barrier will be one the Democrats want, which means it will be no barrier at all. It'll be like a 3D hologram barrier, like that will be the poison pill.


BONGINO: Here's what the Republicans need to do, the Republicans need to sign a quickie short CR here. But when this bill is out there, to give them enough time to look at this thing because, Laura, you nailed it, there will be absolutely some poison pill. And just one quick thing, Mark is absolutely right. Luis, with all due respect, you came in here with talking points and that's non-sense. Nobody has advocated in this bill for a sea to shining sea.


BONGINO: Well, you're just making that up. You are - literally, you are making it up.

MIRANDA: The President campaigned for a wall, okay? So, I'm talking about the President's promises. He made a promise--


BONGINO: And Mark is right. It's a 230 - no, no, no. It's 230 - that is not what's happening now.

MORGAN: Secure this nation? Yes ,that's what he's promising and I hope he does.

INGRAHAM: But you - so you want him to do the wall? Now, I'm confused, like the Democrats -- you promised the wall. So, do you want him to do the wall?

MIRANDA: I think we need a comprehensive set of measures. It doesn't--


MIRANDA: This is exactly what this compromise is, it's democracy; it is Democrats and Republicans working together, neither side is going to get all that it wants and it's going to work towards providing some fencing, but also providing other measures that are important. If you do just one thing, that doesn't work.

INGRAHAM: Why should we have to pay? Why should the American worker have to work two jobs, so they can send their kids to public schools that are teeming with kids -- the classrooms are already overcrowded. And now in Fairfax County, Virginia; Prince William County, Virginia -- they are overcrowded classrooms and teachers are trying to do their very best, but they're dealing with seventeen languages in Fairfax County spoken by children coming in.

Now, I love languages. They're wonderful but that's a huge burden on the regular working person who's busting their butt every day to put food on the table and the politicians are given them the big middle finger because they didn't vote for this.

MIRANDA: Well, the politicians are doing nothing--


MIRANDA: --about the fact that there is a legitimate labor drop (ph) bringing people lower. Let's give them a legitimate way to come when there are jobs available and let's give them a way to apply for asylum without creating these fake crises. There's definitely--

INGRAHAM: So, 1,800 people coming to the border, crossing the border illegally with kids just on Monday is not a crisis?

MIRANDA: What I'm talking about is the fact that this has been turned into a -- you want a wall built?


MIRANDA: It's going to take years to build it. It's not going to be built tomorrow. So, if there's legitimate crisis today--

BONGINO: Another talking point, crisis.


MIRANDA: --what we could be doing is, again working with those countries to make sure that there is ways for them to apply for asylum and do (ph) some of these situations earlier.

INGRAHAM: We're going to talk about - we are going to - I think we reached some agreement. Look in and decide (ph). I think we actually reached some agreement on one point and that's where people should apply for asylum. The President, I hope, is listening to this tonight. I thank you for joining us, Luis; and thank you so much, Mark and Dan. Our panel was fantastic.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Well, you have thousands and thousands of people coming from Guatemala, from Honduras and El Salvador, and they march up through Mexico. And by the way, if we didn't have walls in those areas in some cases that we put up, in many cases where we reinforce, in many cases where our great military helped us with barbed wire, you would have people pouring in.



INGRAHAM: Well, that was the President the other night spelling out the dangers that are involved inside these caravans that make their way from Central America through Mexico to our southern border. Tonight in an “Ingraham Angle” exclusive, we have word that yet another caravan is forming, one, of course, that our next guest says could be the biggest yet. Joining us now exclusively, Guatemalan Secretary of Intelligence Mario Duarte.

Well, (SPEAKING IN SPANISH). Good to have you on.


INGRAHAM: What do we need to know here? I mean, you've been warning about this for years actually, but a lot of people think about Central America. I've been there a lot, as you know; spent a lot of time in El Salvador and Guatemala, but what they - the American people say like, why can't we get a little more help from our friends in Guatemala or El Salvador or Honduras? Why the transit allowed by the people from Honduras where these caravans start? You guys are letting them through and they're making their way to Mexico, why?

DUARTE: Well, first off, thank you for having me, Laura. I think it's not completely correct to say that we're just allowing them through. Guatemala signed with different countries of Central America a treaty that allows the Central American citizens to flow freely through Central American territory. However, with the -- under the condition that they -

INGRAHAM: There is a Guatemala-Mexico border that's--

DUARTE: Correct. That they report -- that they report at the border. Now, this is a different situation.

INGRAHAM: No, that's in New Mexico.

DUARTE: What happened there though was a violent overpowering of our police forces and of our border. Unfortunately, these people -- these -- the organizers of this -- of these caravans, put little kids, babies, women and the elderly at the front and were -- and started pushing them against our police forces. We need to take care of their human rights, of their dignity, of their lives. And obviously, we had to - it was either the lives of those people, of those innocents or allowing them into (inaudible) territory.

Now, we did an effort and President Morales ordered security forces to set up all these different checkpoints, and we ended up returning more than 6,500 Hondurans back to Honduras that were illegally in Guatemala in these caravans.

INGRAHAM: You guys arrested 100 ISIS suspects back in the fall? They were not part of the caravan that was -- that was erroneously reported, but they were arrested in Guatemala?

DUARTE: Actually, these are special interest aliens--

INGRAHAM: Special interest, so it's reported as ISIS -- but these are people from countries that are--

DUARTE: Suspicious or aliens.


DUARTE: And some of them with links, possible links--

INGRAHAM: Some with what? Possible links?

DUARTE: Correct.


DUARTE: Terrorism organizations.

INGRAHAM: But, we - so, that's a lot of people in Guatemala.


INGRAHAM: --that you guys sent. Is there a concern at all that through the caravan, other people can slip in? We know MS-13 has slipped into the caravan and cartel - mini-cartel forces have made their way into caravans in Mexico because that's the reports we're getting.

DUARTE: Those are only parts of the threats and the risks that come with these caravans, right? Think about them as they have been weaponized. These poor people, these innocents have been weaponized as literally political tools of the socialist movement throughout Latin America that are coming towards the United States.

INGRAHAM: So, political activists are pushing these caravans?

DUARTE: Correct. They are weaponizing those-

INGRAHAM: Now, this group Pueblo Sin Fronteras in the United States, they have one particular kind of lead organizer, ?Irineo Mujica. He's -- this individual is a problem and he has been -- I believe he was arrested down there in Mexico and they're part of the coaching squads to who coach everybody to say they have a credible fear.

DUARTE: That is correct.

INGRAHAM: Why is Central America being depopulated?

DUARTE: It's not so much as depopulated. Like I said, all these activists - - leftist activists, with the purpose of undermining conservative movements both in the United States and in our countries, are really weaponizing these people in need offering them a false opportunity in the United States and they're falling for it.

INGRAHAM: Yes. Well, what about this other caravan? What can you tell us? New caravan.

DUARTE: It's amassing, it's coming through the Colombian jungle into Panama.

INGRAHAM: Colombian jungle? So, it's coming from South America?

DUARTE: From South American into Panama.

INGRAHAM: So, Venezuela - any Venezuelans hooking in with this caravan.

DUARTE: There are some Venezuelans, there's mostly Cubans and a lot of Africans. That's the latest we know. We shared a video already with some people--

INGRAHAM: 30,000 strong?

DUARTE: Well that's their purpose, that's what how many people they want to put together.

INGRAHAM: Oh okay. That's their goal.

DUARTE: Right now, there's around 1,000 or something like that. But again, it's another caravan forming with the same intent, again being coached by people, being weaponized like I said with - by these Leftist movements.

INGRAHAM: What can - I want to play something, this is an American commentator, this is what he says about our wall and whether there's any crisis. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: History will really frown on the Republicans. You just give one instance, how about sending troops down, when there is no caravan coming? Sending American troops down literally like tinker toy soldiers, and we can go on and on and on, and they stand by.

And to me, you see what you get with Trump.


INGRAHAM: Okay, so he was talking about the caravan and not the wall. No caravan, there are no caravans coming.

DUARTE: Probably they're watching the wrong channel. You need to watch Fox News more.

INGRAHAM: I think - there's no caravans. I mean there's no caravans, there's no crisis. Did you see it as a crisis in Guatemala with people coming through and--

DUARTE: Well it definitely was a crises for us. We had to deploy over 3,000 strong police officers, our military EMTs, first responders throughout the nation, throughout our borders in trying to stop these illegal flow of migrants, and we had to check on them and make sure that they were--

INGRAHAM: We're going to keep checking with you, but we got to work together, our countries to get this to stop. But thank you for joining us.

DUARTE: Absolutely. President Morales would love to meet President Trump and find solutions for this problem.

INGRAHAM: All right, less than a week after the Green New Deal was rolled out to disastrous effect, California scrapped another enviro-obsession, their absurd high-speed rail project.

I'm going to tell you all about it in “The Angle” next.


INGRAHAM: The liberal train to nowhere, that's the focus of tonight's “Angle.”

Oh the excitement, oh the promise, it seemed like yesterday when the Democrats were crowing about how government funded high-speed rail would revolutionize travel in the United States.


JERRY BROWN, D-CALIF, FORMER GOVERNOR: I make no bones about it. I like trains and I like high-speed trains even better.

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: Building a new system of high-speed rail in America will be faster, cheaper, and easier than building more freeways or adding to an already overburdened aviation system, and everybody stands to benefit.

JOE BIDEN, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: We're making to achieve the goal through the development of high-speed rail projects that will extend eventually all across this nation.


INGRAHAM: And in 2011, Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood appeared with an array of Democrat darlings to sell the high-speed snake-oil.


RAY LAHOOD, FORMER SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION: 35 states have accepted high-speed intercity rail money. If there's more money made available, they're ready to get in.

When you look at our budget that we hope that we can turn into a transportation bill, $550 billion over six years. I don't know of another time in the history of transportation any President has been so bold to put forth such a plan and such a big vision.


INGRAHAM: Yes, he had blurry vision. Okay, Obama's 2009 stimulus bill dangled billions to states to get them to invest in this high-speed rail. Well now, a lot of states smartly turned down the seed money, knowing full well that the final cost could be a lot more, it could be double or even triple the original projections.

So, they didn't want to be left holding the bag. But two of the most reliably Democrat states in America, Hawaii and California, gladly took the money. California received grants of $3.5 billion to connect San Francisco and Los Angeles, meaning 100 plus miles of high-speed rail had to go through the Central Valley's beautiful farmland.

And as with so many liberal pipe dreams, a myriad of problems dogged this project from the start. The original cost projection for the San Fran to LA track was $45 billion. But soon, the estimate jumped to $77 billion.

Now, two years ago, The LA Times diagnosed this situation accurately, saying the California system is being built by an independent authority that has never built anything, and depends on a large network of consultants and contractors for advice.

Even after five years of effort to buy property, the rail authority still lacks 25 percent of the parcels for a 29 mile stretch from Madera to Fresno and just over half of the parcels needed for the 118 miles in the Central Valley.

And another fun fact, it keeps getting better, to achieve their Nirvana of high-speed rail, Democrats were even willing to throw their other religion under the bus, environmentalism. So, huge opposition to the project developed from greeniacs and also farmers, and that led to mongo delays.

So, my friends, this was a joke from the start, and the only people who benefited were the countries that bought our debt to fund it and the consultants who lined their pockets selling this as a panacea for congested roads.

Now, this is no different, though, from so many other unnecessary and unwanted liberal projects that require billions to fund and just end up driving us further into debt. I think of Vermont's idea for the single payer dream in 2011 before -- it ended basically before it began when Governor Peter Shumlin realized it had become too costly to implement, and then he just called the whole thing off.

Who can forget Obama's solar energy grants to Solyndra and Fisker Automotive, just to name a few. There were five defaulted loans that American taxpayers were on the hook for as a result of that boondoggle. And of course, none of these examples of waste, fraud, and abuse ever mattered to the fanatics on the left. Their goals of their Green New Deal, oh, my God, what does that tell us? It tells us that they are actually doubling down on all the failures of the past. In fact, yesterday, California Governor Gavin Newsom lowered expectations for the project, kind of yanked it from under its feet, but he kept insisting that he won't return the $3.5 billion that his state wasted on this nightmare.


GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM, D-CALIF.: Abandoning the high-speed rail entirely means we will have wasted billions and billions of dollars with nothing but broken promises, partially fulfilled commitments, and lawsuits to show for it. And with all due respect, I have no interest in sending back $3.5 billion of federal funding that was allocated to this project to President Donald Trump.


INGRAHAM: Well, shazam. Isn't that a neato trick? Newsom is basically shutting down huge parts of the high-speed rail project, but he's keeping all of the money. Just moments ago, we had a little tweet-off. The president telling Newsom and California that he wants the money back for the American taxpayers. And Newsom responded in the last few minutes that this is California's money, and, quote, "We're not giving it back." Typical liberal, thinks it's their money -- other people's money is their money. It's the taxpayers' money, Gavin.

You know what I was thinking. Think of all of the Congressional Democrats who tonight are opposed to spending $5 billion on a wall that will help the entire country, something that can actually be built under budget and will actually be effective. Radical Congressman Juan Vargas, who by the way represents areas in the extreme southern portions of California, he's actually even opposing the measly $1.375 billion border deal, saying "We shouldn't give him a penny for his wall. It was a political stunt. It's a total waste of money." Waste of money, coming from California. What a travesty.

If the new and improved, more socialist Democrats get their hands on the reins of power in 2020 you can bet your bottom dollar that we are all going to be hurtling down the tracks to fiscal ruin and feeling a bit like this.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What are you doing to my momma?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Making a wish. What the hell do you think I'm doing, Owen?


INGRAHAM: It will be just like that.

And that's THE ANGLE.

Coming up, last week we brought you the urgent case of a man with an unfortunate last name who was denied a license plate bearing that name. Well, he must've been watching, because we have an important update for you. Raymond Arroyo is here with that and a lot more in "Seen and Unseen," next.


INGRAHAM: FOX News has just been notified that the final text of the border security package should be available within the next hour. And from there, the process could start in the Senate as early as tomorrow. That light is on still in the Capitol Dome, meaning they are still in. Still at this hour, we can't tell you if the president is going to sign it or not. We are told that he is looking for, quote, "landmines" in the bill as he comes to his final decision. We'll bring you any updates as they come.

And now it's time for our "Seen and Unseen" segment, where we expose the big cultural stories of the day. Tonight, holiday you've probably never heard of, a Grammy surprise, and more. Joining us now with all the details, Raymond Arroyo, FOX News contributor, "New York Times" bestselling author of the book, "Will Wilder and The Amulet of Power" that the Ingraham children are reading because I'm reading it to them, available at bookstores starting on Tuesday.

All right, Raymond, tomorrow is Valentine's Day.

ARROYO: It is Valentine's Day.

INGRAHAM: But today I guess I missed my opportunity.

ARROYO: Not yet.

INGRAHAM: What is it, apparently it is Galentine's Day.

ARROYO: Galentine's Day. Now, Laura, this so-called holiday entered the cultural consciousness in 2010 with an episode of "Parks and Rec." Now it's become a phenomenon. Here's the episode in question, and then I'll tell you what's happening.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What's Galentine's Day? It's only the best day of the year. Every February 13th, my lady friends and I leave our husbands and our boyfriends at home and we just come and kick it breakfast style. Ladies celebrating ladies.


ARROYO: Laura, now bands of women are filling restaurants to celebrate each other. Hallmark even has 16 Galentine's Day and other cards, feature greetings like "You are a goddess, a glorious female warrior," or "Uteruses is before Duderuses."

INGRAHAM: Isn't it "uteri"?

ARROYO: I don't know. You know what's driving this. There was a survey by the National Retail Federation.


INGRAHAM: Only 51 percent of Americans are celebrating Valentine's Day, down from 63 percent in 2007. It's all about the green. And you see, Saint Valentine, you will remember, was beheaded for erroneously marrying couples. The Emperor, Claudius, wanted them outlawed. He went forward with marriage. People are losing their heads over this silly Galentine's Day thing. I don't like Galentine's. There's an anti-male bias in Galentine's that I don't like.

INGRAHAM: It does seem a bit defensive. It's a defensive holiday.

ARROYO: It is.

INGRAHAM: I've never been one to sit around with a bunch of women at the table. I've always been more of a guy's girl. Shocker.

ARROYO: The restaurants want this because they want a table full of ladies, and women love buying flowers and candies and candles for each other. Men, not a big thing.

Now, we have a valentine to share with each other which the staff has made up.

INGRAHAM: Apparently. Is yours first?

ARROYO: Yes, can you put it up?

INGRAHAM: Yours first?

ARROYO: You're the right angle for me.

INGRAHAM: Rebecca would love that. That's just in general.

ARROYO: There's another one now.

INGRAHAM: OK, this would be for Raymond. Arroyo wants to be your boy-o. OK, you are fired, whoever did that.


INGRAHAM: That is really bad.

ARROYO: One person who really loves themselves, Laura, emerged this week.

INGRAHAM: Michelle Obama made a surprise and very, very glamorous appearance at the Grammys on Sunday. Now, a new series of text messages between her mother and her have been released, and it is a bit curious. Mother Robinson, as she's called.

ARROYO: We will put it on the screen. You Mother Robinson writes "I guess you were a hit at the Grammys." Michelle writes --

INGRAHAM: "I'm sitting here with Valerie" -- Jared I guess -- "and this text is so typically you. Did you watch it?"

ARROYO: And she says "I saw it because Gracie called me. Did you meet any of the real stars or did you just run right after you were done?"

INGRAHAM: "I told her I was going to be on it."

ARROYO: "No, you did not. I would have remembered that even though I don't remember much."

INGRAHAM: Emoji, emoji, emoji laughing. "I thought I told you. And I'm a real star, by the way." "I am a real star by the way."



ARROYO: She is the only one that can put Michelle in her place, and she did.

INGRAHAM: I love Mother Robinson.

ARROYO: Laura, an update to our story last week, your member Dave Assman from Saskatchewan, He was forbidden by the government from putting his name on a personalized license plate. This week he found some self-love. He got a decal of his name, Assman, on the rear end of his pickup truck for all the world to see.

INGRAHAM: On the rear end.

ARROYO: Assman --

INGRAHAM: It's pronounced Oss-man.

ARROYO: No, it isn't. Oss-man is the original pronunciation. I heard him repeatedly in interviews. He said Assman, Dave Assman. He's proud to be an Assman. Let him be proud. It's his day. It's Valentine's Day. He's finding the love.

INGRAHAM: We are not playing the "Seinfeld" again.

ARROYO: No, we're not doing that again. We did that last week.

INGRAHAM: By the way, Mother Robinson, remember, she used to call into my radio show.

ARROYO: She did. She did.

INGRAHAM: At least someone said she was Mother Robinson. She said M.R. And it was always a little fishy.


INGRAHAM: What is that gold packet?

ARROYO: Random House sent me this. I'm opening it on the show.

INGRAHAM: Talk about like the Grammys. And the winner is?

ARROYO: This is like the Grammys. And the winner is -- I can't open

INGRAHAM: I hate this plastic bubble wraps, they never --

ARROYO: This is awful. You always should have the props pre-done.

INGRAHAM: Thirty seconds.

ARROYO: Just seconds. Can I get it open? They sent scissors. My first hardback, they sent it. "Will Wilder" three, so excited.

INGRAHAM: It's coming out Monday?

ARROYO: Tuesday. Tuesday, bookstores everywhere, a written adventure for the family, the whole family can take part, an adventure --

INGRAHAM: All I can say is we started reading, and Niko's eyes got really big because they are demons crawling --

ARROYO: It's scaring him --

INGRAHAM: Demons are crawling on the ceiling. And it's in the Louvre in Paris during World War II.

ARROYO: But good wins in the end.

INGRAHAM: We have -- great segment. We have an important update on the story that we brought you. Covington Catholic boys of course. An independent investigation has just wrapped up. We are going to you what it concluded. Plus, the Trump family is fighting back against the New York attorney general. Joseph diGenova is here on why they may have a case.


INGRAHAM: A brand-new independent investigation revealing tonight that Nick Sandmann and the rest of the Covington Catholic students did nothing wrong at the March for Life. The MAGA hat wearing student made headlines, of course, when the media leftists freaked out and jumped all over them after this video showing Sandmann smiling when the Native American leftwing activist Nathan Phillips got in his face and banged the drum.

Now, if the media had bothered to do any homework, be responsible in any way, they would've realized that Phillips was full of it, as behind the scenes video we played on THE INGRAHAM ANGLE showed.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think, sir, you should've walked away.

NATHAN PHILLIPS: That's what I was trying to do. We were surrounded. We couldn't go right. We couldn't go left, back.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Though Mr. Phillips later claimed he was trying to get to the Lincoln Monument, he bypassed the most direct and unobstructed pathway and went straight to where the Covington boys were standing.


INGRAHAM: After initially adding to the pile on, the Covington bishop in the diocese soon realized that they too had unfairly tarred these kids. That was unbelievable. And to make amends, they hired an independent team to reach their own conclusions.

Get a load of the wasted resources that came as a result of jumping to conclusions. Four investigators who spent a whopping 240 man hours on this case, they watched 50 hours of videos, interviewed 43 students, sent multiple requests to interview Nathan Phillips, which went ignored, and sat for six hours outside of Phillips' home. After all of that, the report concluded, quote, "We found no evidence of offensive or racist statements by students to Mr. Phillips or members of his group."

All this as a result of a leftist mob who wanted so badly to ruin the life of this white kid because it fit their preferred narrative. I would hope that there are some lessons to be learned here. Stop jumping to conclusions. Take a breath before you tar everybody with the worst pejoratives. And unfortunately we know all too well, though, that the mob wonders move on to the next target.

Also tonight, the Trump family fighting back against the New York attorney general, Letitia James, who they claim is on a mission to destroy them.


LETITIA JAMES, NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL: I believe that this president is incompetent. I believe that this president is ill-equipped to serve in the highest office of this land. And I believe that he is an embarrassment to all that we stand for. We would join with law enforcement and other attorneys general across this nation in removing this president from office.



INGRAHAM: Attorneys for the Trump Foundation, the president, and his three eldest children, wrote in a filing today New York Attorney General Letitia James "ran on an anti-Trump campaign where she expressed grave antipathy and animus towards Mr. Trump, referred to the president as an illegitimate president, and has vowed to use every area of the law to investigate Trump and his business transactions and that of his family."

Here now, former U.S. attorney Joe diGenova. All right, Joe, do the Trumps have a point here with Ms. James?

JOE DIGENOVA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: They do, indeed. Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, both in her campaigning and her rhetoric since being elected by the people of New York state, God help them, has, with her inflammatory, unprofessional, and unethical language and conduct, has created for herself unethical bind. Everything that she does now will be against the public interest because she has created the belief in the public mind that she will abuse her power in order to accomplish her goal.

That is a disgraceful message for a public official with law enforcement power to send to the people of the state of New York. And I hope the people who elected her paying attention to the embarrassment that she is bringing to this office. This is like Comey squared, Comey squared. If you can put in your mind a dirty cop coupled with a woman who, I think her language so awful, for a law enforcement official, an attorney general of the state, I think that Trump family has great, great motions against her activities and the lawsuit if she files any. I didn't see --

INGRAHAM: She kind of reminded me a little bit in the early stages, that Freddie Gray death in Baltimore. Wasn't the city attorney there?

DIGENOVA: The city attorney there.

INGRAHAM: Just went ballistic early on. She backed off a little bit.

DIGENOVA: She mad very, very inflammatory comments.

INGRAHAM: It poisons the well.

DIGENOVA: It hurt the police, hurt the community.


DIGENOVA: That's exactly what Letitia James is doing here. It's an embarrassment. Members of the bar should be filing complaints against her.

INGRAHAM: She's pushing back, though, Joe, on any criticism of her, two days ago saying this --


LETITIA JAMES, NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL: As the attorney general, I follow the facts and evidence wherever it leads. And I don't believe that I lose my First Amendment rights as an attorney general. And so we need to make sure that we investigate all cases, whether it involves the Trumped Foundation or any other case.


DIGENOVA: This is childish. What you are watching is an adolescent who just happens to be the attorney general of the state of New York. Some of the most embarrassing public statements you could ever have mouthed by someone with a law degree. She doesn't lose her First Amendment rights when she's elected attorney general? Wow, there's a showstopper. Really? We're going to follow all the facts in every case. That's not what she was saying before. She's an embarrassment of the state of New York.

INGRAHAM: What about Manafort? Amy Berman Jackson, Obama appointee, district court judge, couldn't have picked a tougher judge in his case to oversee? This was a revocation of his plea agreement, basically saying that he lied to the special prosecutor and others.

DIGENOVA: It's a very, very difficult situation for Mr. Manafort. We don't know whether Judge Berman is right or not. The problem in a situation like this is she has all the power. She can do whatever she wants. That's what courts of appeals are for. If she's abusing her power, we will find out. If she's right, God help Paul Manafort. But she could be wrong. And no federal judges are perfect. Believe me, after watching what the FISA court didn't do and how they were snookered, I would be very careful about paying homage to federal judges these days.

INGRAHAM: And anyone doing business overseas in these murky waters, it's always, you're always skating a little close to the line.

DIGENOVA: And remember, the Justice Department investigated this for two years and decided not to prosecute anything that Manafort had done. And then Mueller picked it up, and when you have one guy with one job to do, this is what you get.

INGRAHAM: It's a complete fraudulent investigation from day one. A complete travesty that this continues with everything that we know.

DIGENOVA: Rod Rosenstein special.

INGRAHAM: My gosh. Joe diGenova, it's always great to see.

And coming up, a brand new segment, my Twitter smackdown of the day. Find out who I think needs to take a seat, next.


INGRAHAM: OK, it's time for a new closing segment, my Twitter smackdown of the day. Michael Bromwich, former Clinton DOJ inspector general tweeted earlier today "Three of four Republicans more inclined to believe Trump then Mueller. Mueller, war hero, lifelong Republican, appointee of two Republican president, FBI director. Trump, prodigious liar, conman, fraud. Believe T rather than M?"

Any man that uses three question marks, I guess we all do that. Trump probably uses three question marks. My response. "This is the same guy," Bromwich, "who represented Blasey-Ford" in that tour de force performance, "and represents Andrew McCabe. Obama partisan."

New podcast dropped today. And that's all the time we have. So check out the podcast, PodcastOne. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team take it all from here.


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.