Pompeo on Iran: Kerry can't seem to get off the stage

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," September 19, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS HOST: That's tomorrow, 9:00 Eastern, all happening right here on HANNITY. We are always fair and balanced. We're not to destroy Trump media. Let not your heart be troubled. The news continues this busy news night. Laura Ingraham in the swamp.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: OK, Hannity. Can you do me a favor in Vegas?

HANNITY: Yeah.

INGRAHAM: Can you do me a little favor?

HANNITY: Sure.

INGRAHAM: OK, roulette wheel. I need you to bet on 19, red.

HANNITY: Nineteen, red. How much do you want me to bet for you?

INGRAHAM: I don't know, just like $20.

HANNITY: How about 100? Go big.

INGRAHAM: Nineteen --

HANNITY: I'm going to videotape the whole thing. You can air it on your show.

INGRAHAM: I know you'll take it. It's a 19, red.

HANNITY: Nineteen, red.

INGRAHAM: Yeah. And then -- OK. I want you to do that. And I want to know this. How do you get to go to Singapore for a week, and then you're like your first big trip after that is Vegas? I understand you're taking in Donny and Marie.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: -- Helsinki and Great Britain and then I went in the middle of an anti-Trump rally and nearly got, you know, in a fist fight.

INGRAHAM: No, you are going to see Donny and Marie, what else? Come on.

(LAUGHTER)

HANNITY: No, I'm going to see Terry Fator, my buddy. I love the concerts in Vegas.

INGRAHAM: Are you a little bit --

HANNITY: I love In-N-Out burger. It's my favorite.

INGRAHAM: I have a question. Are you a little bit country or you're a little bit rock and roll?

HANNITY: I'm all country. Heart and soul.

INGRAHAM: OK. Good. I'm rock and roll.

HANNITY: Oh, good grief.

INGRAHAM: All right, Hannity. Great show tonight.

HANNITY: Have a great show.

INGRAHAM: Have a good trip tomorrow. Welcome to "Ingraham Angle." I'm Laura Ingraham on yet another busy night here in Washington. We have an exclusive very big interview tonight. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sat down with me for a rare interview to discuss, among other topics, whether John Kerry, Obama's former secretary of state, broke U.S. law by meddling in our foreign policy.

Plus, he will offer his first reaction to an undercover video where a State Department employee suggests that there is a resistance inside the administration. Oh, goodie. And Raymond Arroyo is here with a seen and unseen, I actually can say, for the ages. Here it goes. What is Roseanne's death, the sexuality of the Muppets, and Jack Black all have in common? We'll find out.

Plus, Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff employ a last-ditch effort to stall the president's order to declassify certain documents and texts related to the Russia investigation. So, like I said, what are they afraid is going to come out?

But we begin tonight with the very latest on the fast developing Brett Kavanaugh fight. The calls began early this morning. The message for the Kavanaugh resistance was clear. And it began with an appearance by the ghost of a confirmation past.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ANCHOR, ABC: They wanted an FBI investigation before she testifies. Is that the right move? Should the Senate honor her request?

ANITA HILL, CLARENCE THOMAS ACCUSER: Absolutely it's the right move. The hearing questions need to have a frame. And investigation is the best frame for that.

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I mean the FBI is good at this. They do cold cases all the time. They can, in a matter of probably days, figure out whether there is corroboration for Dr. Blasey Ford's account.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It would be helpful. Judge Kavanaugh came forward and said, I would prefer and have a background investigation by the FBI.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Oh, my god. I think one of them is less intelligence than the rest. I'm sorry. God bless them. But -- we are going to get to that. Amazing how none of them now want to examine the facts. So, we're going to do that. Now, just last night, we had a former high level FBI agent tell us that the Democrats are trying to use the FBI as their "political animal" against Kavanaugh.

The FBI doesn't like that much. If testimonials like that aren't enough, our own John Roberts reported today that a current highly placed law enforcement official is saying that there will not be an FBI investigation into the allegations leveled at Kavanaugh, and here's why.

First, there cannot be a criminal investigation. There is no crime alleged where the statute of limitations has not run out. There are no allegations of a federal crime. And third, the only investigation the FBI does is the background investigation. They find the info and pass it on. That's already been done in this case. They don't investigate the information.

The law enforcement source went on and tell Fox News "this is a political issue, not a law enforcement one." Boy, is that true? Isn't it just the politically inclined advancing this narrative? Their favorite media cheerleaders are piling on. Take NBC's Ken Dilanian, who tweeted this afternoon, "a number of former prosecutors and FBI agents have said today that people who make up allegations tend not to demand that the FBI investigate them."

He, of course, not the only one advancing this narrative, but there is one problem in this contention. Ford hasn't actually stated that she is willing to talk to the FBI. She just wants Kavanaugh investigated. Do you think that might be kind of an important fact or detail?

Late this afternoon, Senator Grassley seemingly at wits end over this whole charade, submitted a letter which was scathing to the Judiciary Committee Democrats, slamming their persistent "abuse of this confirmation process through delay and obstruction with every argument available."

Here to shed more light on this is former assistant director of the FBI, Bill Gavin. Bill, it's great to have you on tonight. You were called out, by the way, by Ken Dilanian, which we will play in a moment. But your reaction to where we stand now with this drumbeat for FBI involvement. Bill?

BILL GAVIN, FORMER ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FBI: Laura, I just -- I am amazed at this whole thing. Number one, everybody is calling for an investigation. An investigation of what? There is no predicate offense for the federal government in the form of the FBI to conduct any investigation.

An investigation if there was a rape or sexual assault should have been done by local authorities and everybody knows that the statute of limitations has ran on that now. That's number one.

Number two, background investigations, it's over, it's done. Now, could the White House conceivably say, we like you to open it up again? They could, but it's not going to happen. In this particular case, what could come from opening the background investigation again? You go out and interview who?

Number one, the alleged victim has been offed by Senator Feinstein where she produced a heavily redacted letter that really hints at something that nobody knows what happened.

Number two, Judge Kavanaugh has already given his point of view. Number three, his friend has already alleged, I have no knowledge of anything like this, nor would I think that Judge Kavanaugh would do anything like that.

This is -- what they are trying to do is put the FBI at the jackpot. It's a no win situation for the bureau. You go out and nothing is found. They're going to say, you didn't do your job, you're only supporting the contention.

INGRAHAM: I got to say, Ken Dilanian from NBC, it took you to task on that analysis. I want to play it for you and then, Bill, get you to react on the other side. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEN DILANIAN, INTELLIGENCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER, NBC NEWS: My sources are frankly presenting another view than the one you just heard from Bill Gavin, which is that the FBI absolutely could investigate this, not as a criminal matter, but as part of their role background checking federal nominees.

But they can only do that if the White House asks them to look into this allegation. And if the White House did ask them to do that, they will be perfectly capable of shedding some light on this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: So this is the rub. It's the president. It always goes back to President Trump. If President Trump really cares about women and to protect women and cared about sexual assault allegations, he would demand that the FBI -- I guess go back and, you know, again find every house with a pool in Chevy Chase, Maryland or something and then try to get these old Georgetown prep kids to rock their brains about, you know, some keg party 36 years ago. But they are trying to put this on Trump. Is there any validity to that point?

GAVIN: No, there is no validity to that point at all. No, what he said, you could dig up? Who you are going to dig up? There is nobody that can tell you anything at this particular point in time. And then he said something about the fact that you could put them under oath.

You don't put anybody under oath in a situation like this. You obtain the facts, feed them to the White House and to the Congress, and let them do what they want. You know, it just seems to me --

INGRAHAM: This is political. That's all it is.

GAVIN: Enforcement business. That's all they are trying to do, is delay the vote and do it any way they possibly can. I probably shouldn't be sitting here and saying that, but that's the exact way I feel, and that's what is going on here.

INGRAHAM: Bill, it's the way a lot of Americans feel tonight. Thanks so much for being here. The American justice system, the burden of proof should be on the person leveling the accusation. In the case of Brett Kavanaugh, it seems that his political opponents want it the other way around.

Take this, for instance. Late last night, a second corroborating witness came forward with a letter to Senator Chuck Grassley's office. Patrick J. Smyth, who attended Georgetown Prep with Kavanaugh and believes he was the person labeled P.J. in the account Ms. Blasey Ford gave to "The Washington Post," he vehemently denied that the party she described ever happened. He further vouched for Kavanaugh's character.

Now, this huge development received very little pick up in the more dominant so called mainstream press, and even by CNN who broke the story. So, the question here is why? Hear what their answers are. Gregg Nunziata, a former chief nominations counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with Gayle Trotter, an attorney and spokeswoman for the Judicial Crisis Network.

Gregg, let's start with you. Your reaction tonight to the latest development, specifically, again, the attempt to kind of -- word "weaponize" but it is kind of weaponizing the FBI in what has clearly become a political calculation for the Democrats.

GREGG NUNZIATA, FORMER CHIEF NOMINATIONS COUNSEL, SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: That appears to be what is happening here. It's painful for me to watch. I used to supervise the background investigation process in the Senate Judiciary Committee. There is a process there. It's confidential. It keeps the politics out of it. It keeps the cameras away. It gets to the bottom of allegations like this.

It is designed to avoid politics and to get to the truth. And the Senate Democrats here clearly chose to go another way and to make it about politics in a way that is very unlikely to yield any truth.

INGRAHAM: Gayle, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who has been a big champion of the "Me Too" movement, spoke out today with a lot of passion. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D—N.Y.: They are creating a false choice. They are trying to bully her into testifying on Monday before a full FBI background check is completed.

Without the benefit of the FBI investigation where it is not partisan and objective and without the benefit of corroborating witnesses being able to testify, it's a sham hearing. And I don't think she should participate in it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Should not participate. Sham hearing. A couple of days ago, they were asking for her to testify. And she again uses the phrase "background check" which again is Ford applying for a federal job. You don't do a background check as part of this type of process.

So, I can't believe she is a sitting U.S. senator. Again, sure she is a nice person, but I can't believe she even uses those phrases. A lack of basic knowledge about the process.

GAYLE TROTTER, ATTORNEY, SPOKESWOMAN, JUDICIAL CRISIS NETWORK: It's legal illiteracy. I mean, when you talk about this Judge Kavanaugh has already passed six of these FBI investigations, they were --

INGRAHAM: Background checks.

TROTTER: You look at what happened with the accuser this week. Her lawyers went to "The Washington Post" to tell the story. Then they said they would let her testify. Then less than 36 hours passed and they said that she wasn't going to.

I think Senator Grassley and his team should be commended because they have said, we will fly to California, we will fly anywhere, we will do something public, we will do something private, we will do whatever she wants to do so that she can get her story out there, because they want to take her seriously. And yet I think the fact is this is a partisan smear and attempt to delay. And it's all falling apart.

INGRAHAM: Senator Mazie Hirono who has also been very vocal on this, she spoke out as well. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MAZIE HIRONO, D—HI.: The latest being a letter from the chairman to the Democrats saying we have done everything we can to contact her. That is such (bleep). I can't hardly stand it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: According to Senator Grassley's office, they have made several attempts both to contact her lawyer, phone calls. I think the total of nine different attempts at communication. Eleven total actually now. So, they have been trying.

But again, you can't -- they can't even agree on whether Grassley's people would be trying to -- that is so -- the courts are trying to get in touch with her. But, I mean, they know Grassley's number too if she wanted to testify. Correct, Gregg?

NUNZIATA: Correct. The Democrats and their staff have refused to participate in the investigation efforts that are going on right now. They are not taking part in the interviews of Judge Kavanaugh about these allegations. They are boycotting everything.

So, to take the position that somehow the Republicans are not taking these allegations seriously, it's the Democrats that sat on the allegations for weeks, and now the Democrats are obstructing any effort to look in the committee process where it is supposed to happen.

INGRAHAM: And Gayle made this point. Gregg, I really want you to chime in this. Senator Grassley -- President Trump said we want to hear from her today. He said we want to hear from here. I thought that was really good.

TROTTER: Yes.

INGRAHAM: He said -- I would like to get this done. He said take as much time as you need. He seems to be even going farther than Grassley did.

TROTTER: Yes.

INGRAHAM: Grassley said we will do it on the phone, interview on the phone, interview in person or in private. You know, we will do, a conference call. I don't know what else they can do at this point.

NUNZIATA: Chairman Grassley has been incredibly accommodating and patient in the face of lots of antics from the other side. Beyond that, he is one of the senators who is most well-known for his commitment to investigations and oversight. He has a team on the committee that is very experienced in doing these sort of things. He is trying to do his job which I can't say to be true for everybody else up there.

INGRAHAM: Gayle, again, the other so-called corroborating witness, this Patrick Smyth. I think Smyth might be Smith. He said he never seen any type of behavior like this on Brett Kavanaugh's part. But he was in the notes. So, every person she cites this other judge character, both of them are actually opposing her view on it. This case is falling apart.

TROTTER: Right, and I think you have to take the overwhelming amount of evidence that anyone who knows Judge Kavanaugh, and there are so many people who do, none of them believe that this is a credible allegation.

INGRAHAM: What happens Friday?

NUNZIATA: I don't know. We will see day-to-day. I think people on the committee still want to hear from her.

INGRAHAM: She has a Friday deadline. That's what Grassley said. Friday deadline. We're going to vote.

TROTTER: Hold the vote.

INGRAHAM: I would do the vote on Friday. This is game. You got to end the game so they keep doing this. You have to teach your kids a lesson sometimes. You have to teach the senators playing this game a lesson. Thanks to both of you. Great analysis tonight.

NUNZIATA: Thank you.

TROTTER: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: We have seen how this fight is playing out in the halls of Congress. But how are the voters processing all of this? For part of that equation, let's bring in GOP pollster Frank Luntz. Frank, from the people you're talking to, how will this entire Kavanaugh circus play out or if at all as a midterm issue?

FRANK LUNTZ, GOP POLLSTER: Based on what that conversation just held, I question whether this will be significant 10 days from now, because it does look like she isn't going to testify. The American people believe in fairness. And they believe that everyone deserves their day in court. They want to hear what she has to say.

She has leveled some very strong allegations. But I will tell you that one of the big questions among the men I talked to is how far back are you going to hold someone accountable for the behavior that they did? Is what someone did when you're 17, is that applicable to what someone's life would be when they're in their 50s?

Now, for women, the question is, is she going to get her day in court? Is she going to respond to those -- both that support her and oppose her. They want to hear what she has to say.

INGRAHAM: I got to tell you, Frank. I got to tell you, from my radio -- I kind of do an informal poll on the radio in the morning. It's very interesting to hear from both the women and men. And this is across the country, every state. They don't like the whole high school thing. Going back to high school, going back these many years.

Memory is foggy. People moved on. Unless there was a reputation that was known by everybody, oh, yeah that guy. People don't like it. I think that word "fairness" that you just used, I'm telling you, I think that cuts right to it. And you can't lob these allegations and then expect you are not going to get any questions, because people are being mean to you online. People are mean online. Welcome to the NFL.

LUNTZ: You have to be willing to respond. But I tell you, that's why the Democrats have used Anita Hill. Because they realized within 24 hours that this story was turning. That people were starting to wonder why is she backing off.

Why -- when you make a claim as significant as this, you're not willing to back it up at that hearing. And so they bring out Anita Hill and that conversation. And what you could have is what happened to Donald Trump in 2016. You know he won a majority of white women.

And everyone thought that because of what happened during the campaign, he would crater. One of the reasons why he did is because they thought that he meant what he said. It doesn't mean they liked his language.

In this situation, you may see women angry, that they are being used, that they are being scapegoated, that they are being pulled into a political process that they want no part of it. Make no mistake, Laura. Authenticity matters more than anything in 2016, and this doesn't seem authentic right now.

INGRAHAM: All right. Thanks so much, Frank Luntz. And up next, we have a big exclusive. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo joins me in a rare interview. He will take on John Kerry's attempts to undermine President Trump on the Iran issue, and his thoughts on Google kowtowing to the Chinese communists. You do not want to miss this. Up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Trump has said of his secretary of state, we are always on the same wavelength. As you will see in my interview with Mike Pompeo, that's apparent. We begin our conversation today discussing Iran and his predecessor John Kerry's wildly destructive communications with the world's largest state sponsor of terror. Here's part one of my interview with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

INGRAHAM: Mr. Secretary, thanks so much for joining us tonight. We really, really appreciate it.

MIKE POMPEO, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: Great to be with you.

INGRAHAM: Iran in the news. Brian Hook, your special envoy, saying, you know, we want to deal with Iran, but a treaty with Iran. Iranian leaders, no, go. Like, we don't want any dealings with the United States at this point. What is going on?

POMPEO: President Trump has been very clear since the time he was running for office that the arrangement that the previous administration put in place was bad for America, frankly bad for the world.

And so, I and Brian are working to get Iran to behave like a normal nation. Right? Stop being the world's largest state-sponsored terror. Stop launching missiles through proxies. Stop attacking our embassies.

When we get those basic things in place, President Trump made it very clear, we would love Iran to rejoin the community of nations, but their revolutionary seal caused them to be a bad actor and they need to shape up. And if they do, we will get it right.

INGRAHAM: Again, you and John Kerry have gone back and forth on this. Former secretary of state, Barack Obama, has met four times with Iranian leadership. And you guys criticized saying that's not appropriate given, you know, you cannot have a two track foreign policy here.

But he responded by saying, "there is nothing unusual, let alone unseemly or inappropriate about former diplomats meeting with former counterparts. Secretary of State Kissinger has done it for decades with Russia and China. What is unseemly and unprecedented is for the podium of the State Department to be hijacked for political theatrics."

POMPEO: Secretary Kerry can't seem to get off the stage. And he has to. When I am the former secretary, I will get off. Every previous former secretary has done that too.
It's one thing to meet with your counterparts, it's another thing to do what Secretary John Kerry, Wendy Sherman, Ernest Moniz, frankly the whole gang has done, which is to actively seek to undermine what President Trump is trying to achieve.

It's OK to talk with them, but you have to be working for America, working for American foreign policy. They are not. They are working for the foreign policy that is theirs and not the one that belongs to the United States.

INGRAHAM: Our own Dana Perino last week had Kerry on, and he did not deny that he wanted to basically tell the Iranians to wait it out for the next administration.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN KERRY, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: I think everybody in the world is sitting around talking about waiting out President Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: At what point does the administration pursue some type of legal action against former Secretary Kerry and others from the former administration?

POMPEO: I will leave the legal actions to others. I am trying to execute America's foreign policy. They are not only unhelpful but they are acting in ways that are harmful to achieving what is best for the American people. That's my criticism. Stop it. Let it go. You had your day. We think you fundamentally got it wrong with Iran. And we are trying to make it right for America.

INGRAHAM: And reducing the refugee number. That caused great consternation. It's another issue that President Trump campaigned on. Extreme vetting. Security for our country. Down to 30,000 next fiscal year. Bob Menendez, big fan of the administration, called it cruel and short- sighted. Human rights first. Another group, it's an abdication, Mr. Secretary, of our humanity. Your response?

POMPEO: America is the most generous nation in the history of civilization. It always has been and it continues to be under President Trump. We want to get it right for the American people. We are taking in over four million legal permanent residents in the last almost two decades now.

We continue to take in more people than most countries in the rest of the world. But we got to get the security piece right. We got to make sure that we allow those who are in most trouble, most harm's way to be taken care of in the best place to take care of them near their own country.

Those are not hurtless things. Those are things that are kind and caring and descent. It's the way we ought to treat our fellow human beings and that's what we in the Trump administration are committed to do.

INGRAHAM: What does this administration say to the Christian refugees who feel -- many of them abandoned for many years, predating this administration, in Syria, in Iraq and beyond. They can't go to these camps because they are afraid of going to the camps. How do we reach them? How do we get some of them into the country?

POMPEO: So, it's an important and difficult challenge. We want to bring all of those who are most in trouble and having the most difficulty in the places in which they reside. Vice President Pence has made this a real priority to ensure that Christians are being treated fairly and equitably in our processes.

We have seen some of these issues in these camps. Rest assure that the State Department is working to make sure that Christians are not being mistreated, prosecuted, persecuted or treated in any way that is unfair as they try to make their way into the United States of America.

INGRAHAM: The U.S. commission on international religious freedom lists China and Saudi Arabia. I think Saudi Arabia is number three as the worst violators of human rights. I think about this yesterday. I think of the old Soviet Union and President Reagan, who both of us admire so much.

We didn't do that really heavily engaged trade with the Soviet Union, not just because of nukes, but because of what they were doing on human rights. So, how do we justify this huge trading relationship with Saudi Arabia and China, given how we treat the North Korea and a place like Cuba? It seems like there is selective treatment of human rights violation.

POMPEO: It's always the case when you are trying to advocate for America's interests, that you have to weigh the relative concerns. It is the case that each country presents its own situation. What I think we have been incredibly consistent on is making sure that we identify. We call out these concerns.

I have done it with respect to China. I have done it with respect to every place we find religious minorities being mistreated. We held the first ever religious ministerial in the very room in which we are sitting here. It was quite an occasion. People from nearly every religion and 80 delegations. This administration is taking religious freedom all around the world, in China and other places, very seriously.

INGRAHAM: A million Muslims in China been detained. Christian churches, crosses being smashed. Churches driven underground. Pastors being imprisoned. And, you know, we have to talk about my good friend, President Xi, it's heartbreaking to so many of us who care about religious liberty. I know this isn't an administration priority, but what do you do? What leverage do we have with China at this point other than what we are doing now with trade?

POMPEO: Laura, I'm comfortable we talk about China in other context too. It presents a myriad of opportunities but lots of challenges. You speak of one. This is a non-transparent government. It is still a very centralized government. It treats our intellectual property horribly. It treats its religious minorities horribly.

In each of these cases, we have an opportunity. You have seen what the president is doing with trade, to try and make it fair and reciprocal. What we are asking of China is to behave in a way that if they want to be a power that they want to be on the global stage, they have to operate in the way that global leaders have. Frankly, as you point out in the religious dimension, they have not done that.

INGRAHAM: We talked a lot about big tech and relationship between big tech and this administration. But Google specifically in China, assisting Google in developing an app to further censor free expression and the ability of Chinese citizens to get information. Any thoughts on that. How a U.S. company, obviously huge global company too, assists China in that oppression of free expression?

POMPEO: Laura, it is personally and professionally troubling to me when American companies behave one way here and another way when they are dealing with China. It gets at the core problem that President Trump is trying to address, which is that China doesn't permit American investors to invest on the same terms that Chinese companies can invest here. Joint ventures.

The list is long of the nonreciprocal relationship. The president is trying to balance that. When we get that right, when government gets that right, we can enforce American companies to behave under that set of rules. I want every company including global giants to treat American citizens as well as they treat the governments, some of these despotic regimes.

INGRAHAM: And they hit the administration, President Trump, a couple of days after the election. You've got Sergey Brin up there, brilliant guy, brilliant people, but criticizing this administration's immigration policy when they are assisting despotic, totalitarianism, basically communist regimes overseas. But Trump is the threat?

POMPEO: I think we have American foreign policy on the right track on each of the dimensions that you're describing. And when we get it right, when we ultimately see the end results of President Trump's efforts, I think you will see many of these things in a place that America has not seen before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: And later Secretary of State Pompeo will provide exclusive reaction to a new undercover video of a State Department employee hinting at a resistance inside the department. And next, Raymond Arroyo is here. Roseanne is about to die and horribly, on TV at least. And the hidden sex lives of the Muppets? A wild "Seen and Unseen." Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's time for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we explore some of big culture stories of the day.

How will Roseanne meet her demise when her formerly eponymous show is rebooted? And why did "Sesame Street" feel compelled to put out a statement about and Ernie's sexuality? To answer these pressing questions on such a big news night, we are joined by Raymond Arroyo, "New York Times" bestselling author of the "Will Wilder" series, Fox News contributor. Raymond, a lot to get out there. What the heck is going on?

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: It's a big news night.

INGRAHAM: What the heck is going on with these stories?

ARROYO: Well, on "Sesame Street" it's brought to you by the letter "S" for sexualization. A writer, Mark Saltzman, who wrote for "Sesame Street" from 1984 to about 1998 did an interview this week with something called "Queerty" in which he said this, and we'll put it up on the screen. He said "I always felt that without a huge agenda, that when I was writing Bert and Ernie, they were gay. I didn't have any other way to conceptualize them or contextualize them. The other thing was, more than one person referred to Arnie and I," he and his lover, "as Bert and Ernie." So he was claiming that Bert and Ernie are gay. This has been talked about. We've seen it mentioned since 1969 when these two characters who were roommates on "Sesame Street".

INGRAHAM: I just thought they were puppets.

ARROYO: Of course, they're famous Muppets. Well, Frank Oz has now come out, Frank Oz who created Yoda and Miss Piggy and Fozzie Bear and was very instrumental in creating these characters, he tweeted out almost instantaneously --

INGRAHAM: Oh, goody.

ARROYO: "It seems Mr. Mark Saltzman was asked if Bert and Ernie are gay. It's fine that he feels they are. They are not of course. But why that question? Does it really matter? Why the need to define people as only gay? There is much more to a human being than just straightness or gayness." He went on to say "I created Bert. I know what and who he is."

This is a real important -- why does this matter? And why are we sexualizing and politicizing these beloved children's characters? And we see this with Harry Potter. I've even seen it with Pooh and Piglet. Children's characters, particularly as an author, they should be sacrosanct. There's something innocent and beautiful about them. When you try to politicize them, and it tells us something about our culture where we want to be adolescents forever and take these childhood icons and impose our own hang-ups and problems on them, I'm really opposed to that. Leave Bert and Ernie alone.

INGRAHAM: So what's Eeyore? I'm just kidding.

ARROYO: Oh, stop.

INGRAHAM: So what's the next topic?

ARROYO: The next topic is Roseanne. In an international this week, and this is connected, interestingly enough. She spilled the beans on how the ABC reboot of her show, "The Conners," will apparently when the show returns in a few weeks, there's going to be some sad news for fans. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What will happen to Roseanne?

ROSEANNE BARR, COMEDIAN: Oh, they killed her.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They killed her?

BARR: Yes. They had her die of an opioid overdose. So it wasn't enough to just do what they did to me. They had to so cruelly insult the people who loved that family and that show.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: She is obviously impugning the motives here and saying ABC wants to hurt not only her and the character she created, but the audience. She is dying of an opioid overdose. We knew in the reboot that she was taking pills for a knee injury, but now she's an opioid junkie. This is really --

INGRAHAM: This is stupid. They are killing their ratings, that's what they're doing.

ARROYO: That's the question. They're going to kill Roseanne off this way. But my feeling is this show is going to die of Roseanne deprivation. Watch. This reboot will never work.

INGRAHAM: No, it's other. And actor Jack Black, what is he up to?

ARROYO: Jack Black received a star on Hollywood's walk of fame this week, Laura. I know you were ready, had the DVR set. He was moved, he was grateful, and political. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACK BLACK, ACTOR: I love you all so much, except for Donald Trump a piece of --

Peace out, love you!

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Go eat another cheeseburger.

ARROYO: He is promoting a movie "The House with Clocks in its Walls." He's the actor with rocks in his head, I think.

INGRAHAM: Wait, wait, the movie is "The Clocks on the Walls?"

ARROYO: No, no, no, the house with clocks in its walls.

INGRAHAM: It's another --

ARROYO: It's a children's book.

INGRAHAM: OK.

ARROYO: But again, children were present at this ceremony. Jack Black does a lot of kids programming. And his own children were there. Why would you tape this moment where you are being honored, and if you really despise this person, this president, why are invoking him and using a profanity to tar him at the end?

INGRAHAM: But this is all they have. You know what I was watching this afternoon? This is when you know --

ARROYO: Family Feud.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: No. I was watching Judge Judy. I love Judge Judy. No. I was Johnny Carson's interview in 1975 --

(LAUGHTER)

ARROYO: Very contemporary. Ingraham is right on top of things. She knows exactly what's going on.

INGRAHAM: With Ronald Reagan.

ARROYO: Oh, boy.

INGRAHAM: Everyone has to watch this. I'm going to put it up on my Facebook page. It is so interesting because late night television was classy. It was funny. Reagan of course was unbelievable. But Carson was just so cool. And it's not nasty. It wasn't nasty. It was interesting.

ARROYO: He had charm. They were great.

INGRAHAM: Reagan. Nothing touches that today. All they can do is get up, OK, expletives, fine, we all say expletives. But it's not funny.

ARROYO: Mount an argument. If you want to convince people, mount an argument. You are a celebrity. But throwing out invectives, it doesn't work. I am with you. Give me Johnny any time.

INGRAHAM: I'm doing Yoda, you're doing Johnny. This is only Wednesday.

ARROYO: "Seen and Unseen."

INGRAHAM: The left is obsessed with learning every detail about Stormy Daniels's love life. But when it comes to one of the most politically combustible issues of our time, they don't care. But Bongino and Schlapp on the declassification, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: The left is wide-eyed and salivating over every salacious detail of Stormy Daniels's love life. But when it comes to issues here in Washington like the surveillance of American citizens, they don't have much interest. Take Trump's impending declassification of Russia related documents. Now Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff are calling to block the declassification. Eleventh hour obstruction seems to be the preferred tactic of the modern Democratic Party.

Joining us now from Florida is Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent, and here in the studio with me, Matt Schlapp, the chair of the American Conservative Union. Dan, let's start with you. I know you're not surprised by this. But this is now just so transparent. They are either great actors are they're really worried about what is in these documents.

DAN BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Laura, you know what is so comical about this, I'm trying not to laugh, is even the left can't make up their own mind what they want. Laura, do you remember a few months ago, let's go back even six months or so. When the Nunes letter came out and exposed this entire spy-gate, Russia-gate for what it was, do you remember what the Democrats said, Laura? They said, no, no, no, the real information, what we used to target Donald Trump, is in the additionally redacted material. And then when the redacted FISA came out and it turned out they used the dossier, what did the Democrats say again, Laura? No, no, no, next time. It's the redactions that contain the really devastating material about Donald Trump. Let's release it.

Then all of a sudden when it got wind of what was actually in the redactions, now all of a sudden, wait, wait, wait. Time out. Throw the red flag on the field here. We don't want to see the redactions anymore.

INGRAHAM: It's a threat to national security, that's what they're saying. Eric Swalwell, your favorite, Matt Schlapp, was out there on CNN today making this point.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D—CALIF.: This is quite lawless of the president to selectively declassify. He's only putting forward to the American people what he believes helps him, completely and recklessly risking sources and methods who could be put at risk and have their lives at risk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: He is so smart the way he says sources and methods, like right out of James Bond.

MATT SCHLAPP, CONTRIBUTOR, "THE HILL": Do you know what "selectively" means, Laura? That the president, the commander in chief, is going to make responsible decisions about the information that does get out and is made public and the information that doesn't. I am glad he is going to do that.

By the way, you talk about the liberals on the Hill that are raising objections about national security. I have journalists, reading about journalists saying this is reckless. When was the last time magazines and newspapers talked about how reckless it was to get information from the government. They will print anything that makes the Army or the Marines or the Navy look bad.

INGRAHAM: Bongino has a great point. Now, there is an aggressive lack of curiosity on the part of the American media. Don't give us more information. We don't want to know. Hands over the eyes. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, write no evil. We don't want to know. Schlapp made a great point. This is transparent. Seamless coordination between the Democrats and the dinosaur media.

BONGINO: Listen, this reminds me of that "Billy Madison" line. I award you no points. We are all dumber for having this conversation. Laura, the "New York times" outed Stefan Halper. They're the ones that outed the source. They didn't use his name, but they gave you every single identifier outside of his officials and home address so that every single person knew who he was. The "New York Times" outed this guy. Are we living in Bizarro Superman land or like that Seinfeld episode where me does everything backwards? This is crazy. They outed him.

INGRAHAM: Guys, real quick, in just moments, part two of my interview with Mike Pompeo is going to air, and I'm going to ask him about this undercover video at the State Department. But there is another video that's been released involving the DOJ and another is going to be release tomorrow. Let's watch this first one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But are they doing anything to fight against Trump?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. A lot of us talk about it. So most of them are vaguely politically involved, so they might support candidates and do fundraisers, and some of them canvas. And then there's a lot of talk at work about like how we can resist from the inside and there's a lot of pushback.

(INAUDIBLE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Matt Schlapp, it's a little hard to read that script, but we talk about how we can resist from the inside, and there is a lot of pushback. It's lucky because at the DOJ you really can't be fired. I am actually offended most by the valley girl speak of taxpaid salary, but what do you make of this?

SCHLAPP: Anybody who has worked in a Republican administration realizes what the real swamp is. The real swamp is Republicans win the presidency but the agencies are populated by people who live in Maryland, northern Virginia, and D.C. who are overwhelmingly Democratic. And in getting a handle on these agencies with your own agenda like the Trump agenda is damn near impossible. And this is something that Trump, he has done so many things I can't believe he's doing. If he could do something to change the system where you could actually fire people who are breaking the law by overturning the will of the voters on the agenda, that would revolutionize America.

INGRAHAM: Dan, we haven't independently verified the Project Veritas video, but the DOJ is taking it very seriously, as is, as we'll see in a moment, the State Department. But your reaction to this? It seems like we do have a very active, young resistance inside, burrowed inside our government and the civil service. And they are very bold, frankly, brazen and stupid about how they talk about their political affiliations and activity on taxpayer time.

BONGINO: Yes, Laura. This is personal to me. I was a Secret Service agent. I loved my job. I had no personal problem with President Obama but I felt the country was moving in the wrong direction, and I thought it was inappropriate to stay. I left. I would not take the taxpayer dollars anymore. I ran for office, it didn't work out. But I'll give a pat on the back, but if you have a serious problem with the will of the people, because Matt is right. They are not resisting Trump. They're resisting you. The American people voted for Trump. This is your will, and they are collecting your money to do it. Then stop being cowards and just resign, and you have the First Amendment right to go out and be an activist. Get out.

INGRAHAM: All right, guys, thank you so much.

Next up, part two of my interview with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. What does he think of that shocking undercover video we just talked about in which an employee at his own department talks of a resistance within the Trump administration? His answer, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: First the anonymous "New York Times" letter and now it's an undercover video that an employee at the State Department is seen hinting at a resistance within the Trump administration. In part two of my exclusive interview with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, we get his reaction to that and much more. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Russia versus China. There's a lot of focus on Russia because of election meddling, threats to future election meddling, Ukraine, relationship with Europe and trade and so forth. As you see things, who is the bigger threat to the U.S. position in the world economically or strategically, Russia or China?

POMPEO: I often get asked these prioritization questions, and it always makes me a little bit queasy to answer them. They present such different concerns. To rank them I think sometimes sends the wrong message to the American people.

Russia has been aggressive. Russia has tried to meddle in our election. Russia under Vladimir Putin remains a bully. We need to push back and constrain them where we can. But longer term, if you're looking at the things that threaten American livelihoods, that put America truly at risk of its continued economic growth, China presents the far greater threat to the United States.

INGRAHAM: There was concern from the foreign policy elites, Mr. Secretary, early on and expressed throughout this administration the Trump deem bumbles through these events. They promise a lot but then the deliverables aren't there. Of course, they site North Korea. North Korea is not denuclearizing at a pace that maybe we thought they would and so forth. But what is the real status with our relationship with Europe, our relationship with the North Korean leadership given how things have transpired?

POMPEO: I will start with North Korea. We have made steady, albeit slow progress. But we have always known this would take some time. The South Koreans had a successful engagement. President Moon with Chairman Kim just over the last 48 hours where we made another step, where we will get verification of an element of North Korea's program on the ground. That's a good thing.

We are moving forward. The relationship between Chairman Kim and President Trump is good. I talk to my counterparts there with some frequency. It doesn't get reported. I'm glad about that. I'm glad we're able to keep that quiet. And so we're making the progress that we need.

With respect to Europe, there was a reset that needed to take place in the relationship. We needed Europe to step forward and begin to share the burden of defense for the European countries in a way that they had not done under previous presidents. President Trump is trying to right that ship. We still have a fascinatingly important relationship with Europe and I am confident that trans-Atlantic relationship will always remain.

INGRAHAM: Project Veritas, I'm sure you know, released this video. A State Department analyst bragging about his exploits working for the Democratic Socialists of America, typing things after hours and so forth. But it's a concern. Other videos coming out. DOJ employees similarly part of the resistance, perhaps bragging about it.

Does this portend more problems of an internal resistance to this administration? Are you concerned about it, and what next in this investigation of this particular employee?

POMPEO: I can't speak about the particular case. But rest assured, we are aware of it and we're taking a good look at it.

But step back for just a minute. Here's my commitment to President Trump and to the American people. Every single person working at the United States Department of State will be on President Trump's mission. We all have good ideas. We'll all share them. We'll give our best thoughts. But at the end of the day we have a single foreign policy that we're executing, and it's the foreign policy that President Trump is directing. And I want every person all across the United States government to understand he is our leader and we all need to be --

INGRAHAM: But they shouldn't be in this administration. If they are going to working against the administration, they should go probably find another job, don't you think?

POMPEO: Absolutely. If this is a mission you can't sign up for, it's time to go do something else for your time. Thank you for your service but we need to be delivering for this president.

INGRAHAM: Do you miss the CIA?

POMPEO: I loved my time at the CIA. I'm loving my time here at the State Department as well.

INGRAHAM: Mr. Secretary, thanks so much for being so generous you're your time.

POMPEO: Thank you. Good luck to you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

INGRAHAM: We have a pool. How many other cabinet positions will Mike Pompeo end up assuming? He is one of the president's favorites. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, for appearing.

And up next, a tasty last bite.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's time for the last bite.

I don't have even your thing. It's Raymond's birthday in an hour and a half. So this is the last bite.

ARROYO: Oh, no. I was here to comment on something. Not to --

INGRAHAM: Raymond Arroyo, you are 40 years old.

(APPLAUSE)

ARROYO: It's awful being 39.

INGRAHAM: OK. What are you, 49?

ARROYO: Thank you.

INGRAHAM: Thanks. You just blew it on my dress.

ARROYO: It is a happy birthday.

INGRAHAM: Happy birthday, Raymond.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.