Rep. McCarthy on impeachment: Democrats are afraid to face Trump at the ballot box

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from "Ingraham Angle," November 14, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: You did a great show tonight. All right, you take care. I'm Laura Ingraham, this is The Ingram Angle from the swamp tonight. And the reaction from the Democrats and media over the last 24 hours reveals many truths, but one truth in particular.

The folks who are pushing this impeachment are no longer confident in their position. Congressman Kevin McCarthy, Lee Zeldin are here to explain. Also tonight, his aggressive reporting on Ukraine and the Bidens has made him public enemy number one to the Left.

Tonight John Solomon sets the record straight, and we have new reporting that'll rock Washington tomorrow. Plus, violent leftist attacks from coast to coast. We speak to a former MMA fighter who took on Antifa and a Republican Congressman's son who was attacked and spray-painted in the face by young Socialists in North Carolina. But first, Democrats impeach themselves. That is the focus of Tonight's Angle.

Despite relentless attempts to play act about how competent their impeachment case is, well Democrats and their kissing cousins in the media seem pretty shaky and incoherent. After the claim of a quid pro quo has sizzled, Democrats are frantically grasping for something that people can actually understand about this Ukraine thing.

Let's just pick bribery out of a hat.


REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: Quid pro quo, bribery and that is in the Constitution attached to the impeachment proceedings.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So what was the bribe here?

PELOSI: The bribe is to withhold military assistance in return for a public statement of a fake investigation into the elections. That's bribery.


INGRAHAM: OK, here's the problem, yes. Of course Nancy, it's in the Constitution, we can read, OK. President may be impeached for bribery, treason or high crimes and misdemeanors. But even assuming the Democrats strained in ridiculous interpretation of the facts, and I do not assume them, but this is the sake of their argument, attempted bribery isn't in the Constitution.

Remember, Ukraine got its military aid, it was 14 days delayed, big deal. And remember, Ukraine never made any public statement about any investigation, and the fellow on the other end of the call, Zelensky, said he didn't feel pressured at all. He didn't even know aid was frozen to his country until weeks later.

So the call, in his words, was normal. So it's another swing and a miss. But that's OK, that's OK, because Democrats think they're cats. They have nine political lives when it comes to impeachment. So if the country is tuning them out and they were tuning them out, well it's only because their star witnesses lack a certain je ne sais quoi.

NBC News tweeting, the first two witnesses called Wednesday testified to President Trump's scheme, but lacked the pizzazz necessary to capture public attention. Reuters had a similar take, fireworks and explosive moments were scarce. Ooh!

Again, this just demonstrates that Democrats aren't serious about underlying substance. Their lack of dramatic flourish isn't the problem, it's the absence of facts that's the problem. The public though is I think a lot savvier than the Democrats think.

Case in point, we at Fox News crushed the competition last night and throughout the entire day of programming. Now, this must be very upsetting to the other cables and I want to rub it in their faces, no not at all, but after all this was supposed to be was it not their big payoff. Impeachment is upon us.

But even their viewers haven't seemed to have bought into the narrative. And just when you thought CNN couldn't go lower, they do go lower. Like this moment with Kellyanne Conway.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: I don't want to talk about your marriage. I know that there are issues there. Your husband George Conway is a lawyer.


BLITZER: Your husband George Conway--

CONWAY: No, you just said there are issues there, you don't want to talk about your marriage.

BLITZER: I don't want to talk about - no, I don't want to talk—

CONWAY: Why did you say that?

BLITZER: I don't want to talk about your marriage.

CONWAY: And you should not have just said to your audience, I don't want to talk about your marriage, "I know there are issues."


INGRAHAM: That was just disgusting. That is appalling. And remember Wolf is supposed to be the nice guy at CNN. But now, he and the rest of the left have become basically just - they're a bunch of humorless angry skulls (ph).

Media Matters and their pals in the media's reaction to Raymond Arroyo and myself joking about State Department official George Kent's huge water bottle at yesterday's hearing, all right, we were joking about it last night. Look at these headlines, they devoted headlines to our joke.

OK, Fox News stunned that impeachment witness drank water. Fish are not this hydrated, that was a funny line.

Well, so they all talk to this on Twitter, including Conway - George Conway, by the way. He gave a glancing blow to it. But we found it very interesting, because not long ago, a lot of these same characters thought the Republicans Watergate was actually pretty darn hilarious.


BLITZER: Can a drink of water make or break a political career?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did Ryan have a strenuous P90X workout before the debate. He was gulping it down like a dehydrated AAA shortstop.

STEPHEN COLBERT, CBS HOST: After the watch, I need a drink, OK. OK, all right, I got this.


I got this.


INGRAHAM: Oh Stephen, so funny. I guess it's though only funny when Republicans get thirsty in public. I see, I just have to understand all their rules. None of these people should be taken seriously, because they know they do not have a legitimate case for impeachment and they're going forward with it anyway. And yet they pretend to be taking this entire affair very, very seriously.


PELOSI: On the investigation front, yesterday was a very somber prayerful day, because democracy depends on that republic and not a monarchy. So again with that responsibility, we go forward sadly, prayerfully with a heavy heart.


INGRAHAM: OK, she isn't going to win any Golden Globes, no way not with that performance. Prayerfully, don't hide behind prayer for what you're doing to the country. And I think she better pray that they have like a videotape of President Trump promising a lifetime stay at Mar-a-Lago to Zelensky because they got nothing approaching to impeachable acts here at all.

Is there a chance though, is there a chance, if they see their impeachment act going down in flames like the Hindenburg that they wouldn't vote on impeachment at all. Listen closely.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You kept saying that you haven't really decided whether to move forward?

PELOSI: We haven't, that'll be up to the committees to decide.


INGRAHAM: Oh that'll be up to the - so they haven't decided? They may not vote at all on impeachment after all of this?

Now remember, Pelosi said that she had evidence of bribery at her press conference, bribery. Then moments later, she isn't even confident that her caucus will impeach.


PELOSI: We don't even haven't - even made a decision to impeach.


INGRAHAM: Look, anyone else sensing there might be a wicked case of buyer's remorse here setting in. But at this point, who knows what to believe, because if Nancy Pelosi's lips are moving, there's a good chance she's not telling the truth.

But we do know one thing for sure. In the past year, since taking control of Congress, these Democrats have done nothing for working Americans, except act on their own maniacal desire to dislodge President Trump from office. That's the real impeachable offense and that's the angle.

Joining me now is Congressman Lee Zeldin of the Foreign Affairs Committee and Byron York Chief Political Correspondent for The Washington Examiner and a Fox News contributor. Congressman Zeldin, you see their narratives shifting, they're adding, it's like a little basket of their own deplorables.

They're throwing little new charges in because other ones aren't connecting or they're not panning out. What do you see the last 24 hours having revealed and then tomorrow?

REP. LEE ZELDIN, R-N.Y.: Shiny objects, they are looking for new shiny objects, moving goal posts, so it's quid pro quo last Sunday and then morning news shows, it's about extortion, and yesterday and today it's about bribery. And they don't have the evidence to actually convict the President on bribery.

So I don't know what they were going to do next, but they're going to have to move the goalposts yet again. I thought yesterday's hearing that took place with their star witnesses fell totally flat.

INGRAHAM: They clearly know it didn't work. I don't care what they say, I mean those NBC analysts aren't saying they fizzled, because they were the star - stars are bright, they were duds. I'm sorry, there might be the nicest people ever, but they were duds.

ZELDIN: Yes, right and I think there was high expectations for people who were tuning in, who thought that these 4th, 3rd, secondhand and no hand information in some cases, it was going to be firsthand really important dots getting connected.

INGRAHAM: No, there's nothing there.

ZELDIN: And Adam Schiff's parody was going to get proven, didn't happen.

INGRAHAM: Byron, tomorrow Marie Yovanovitch testifies. What do you expect knowing that they know clearly that this is in trouble?

BYRON YORK, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, if you read the transcript of Maria Yovanovitch, it's a long story of her not knowing what's going on.

INGRAHAM: Former Ukraine Ambassador-- YORK: Exactly.

INGRAHAM: --for Obama.

YORK: She's in Ukraine and some Ukrainians are telling her to watch her back, people are going - they're out after you, maybe Rudy Giuliani's coming after you, and she's thinking what's going on. So it's this long story of her not knowing actually what's going on.

And what I think is extraordinary about this whole thing is that Republicans have been pressing, this is just secondhand and thirdhand information and that kind of irritates Democrats. But there are people - if you want to investigate this - who talked to the President about this. John Bolton talked to the President, Mick Mulvaney talked to the President, and the Democrats have dropped their attempt to talk to them.

INGRAHAM: Very important for everyone tonight to understand. They are not pursuing - not legally--

YORK: Yes.

INGRAHAM: --right, you have to go to court to push this. So they're not going after Mulvaney, not going after Bolton. They don't want this to go to the court. Isn't that the case?

YORK: Exactly. If anything—

INGRAHAM: It's a smart strategy in the part of the White House too.

YORK: If anything were privileged, it would be the President's private conversation with his Chief of Staff or his National Security Adviser about foreign affairs. You would have to go to a judge, if you are the House and say--

INGRAHAM: Like hell.

YORK: Our impeachment investigation is so important that it outweighs whatever privilege it is, and they're not doing it.

INGRAHAM: Congressman, the Democrats' new leader, and I think there are two leaders, Adam Schiff and AOC, basically the thought leaders of the party, they have - she has a novel theory about why Trump should be impeached.


REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-N.Y.: With the impeachment of the President that we can hold the White House accountable and also build our future at the same time.


Let's not act or pretend that Donald Trump is not a climate crisis unto himself. If we want to protect our planet, we also need to make sure that holding the President accountable in this White House is a part of that too.


INGRAHAM: OK, went from quid pro quo to bribery, then they said, oh this guy overheard a phone call in a restaurant and then the Russians could have intercepted that. So now playing around with like top-secret information on an unsecured phone - now it's the planet. This is a - now it's gone planetary guys.

ZELDIN: Yes, way to think outside the box there. That has absolutely nothing to do with the charges that they want to level against the President. Really, charges don't matter for them, facts don't matter, evidence doesn't matter, they just want to remove the President. It is about a payoff to people who put them in charge.

That gavel that Speaker Pelosi has in her hand, she has because of a base that pledged to resist, oppose, obstruct, impeach every thing—

INGRAHAM: What about that idea that she may not call a vote? Could this get into a situation where she's feeling, they're feeling the heat in some of these districts and they are worried about losing the majority.

ZELDIN: Yes, they're going to lose the majority.

INGRAHAM: Is there a chance that they don't - is there a chance they don't call this vote?

ZELDIN: I think that there is because you have a growing amount of House Democrats who are getting burned back home. They're in districts that Donald Trump won.

INGRAHAM: What have they delivered?

ZELDIN: And these people have - yes, they didn't--

INGRAHAM: Byron, Bill Clinton actually called into CNN today to deliver a message to President Trump. Watch.


BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT: You got hired to do a job. Every day is an opportunity to make something good happen. And I would say I've got lawyers and staff people handling this impeachment inquiry and they should just have at it. Meanwhile, I'm going to work for the American people.


INGRAHAM: That bring us down memory lane, Byron.

YORK: That's what he said.

INGRAHAM: I can't believe I'm saying this. I agree with Bill Clinton.

YORK: Absolutely.

INGRAHAM: President shouldn't even talk about it. He talked about it too much at the rally.

YORK: He said it every single day in 1998. He got impeached, but it did work in the sense that he acquitted. On the other hand, Democrats are going to do this. I mean they have gone - there's - any time you're doing something, you reach a point where you can't just say—

INGRAHAM: Point of no return.

YORK: --never mind. And also, they got 232 votes to continue this inquiry. That's 14 more than they need.

INGRAHAM: How many they on the emoluments clause? I mean they were going to impeach him on emoluments like a few months ago, right.

YORK: Well, you've had Democrats who've been lodging articles of impeachment virtually since Inauguration Day and there have been counts articles accusing the President of dividing the country, of saying terrible things about the NFL, all sorts of stuff. There's been a core of Democrats who've wanted to impeach him from the very beginning. But now you do have 232 who voted for this.

INGRAHAM: But do you think tomorrow will change any minds, yes or no?


INGRAHAM: Congressman, yes or no?


INGRAHAM: Not going to change any minds.


INGRAHAM: And the restaurant conversation, man who overheard the conversation, deposed on Saturday.

ZELDIN: Yes, why didn't you say something a few months ago?

INGRAHAM: Finally, you'll have to work now on the weekends, I'm just kidding. Gentlemen, thank you so much, great to see you.

And we all know there's nothing bipartisan about this impeachment inquiry. And if you needed evidence, here are today's dueling press conferences from the respective party leaders.


REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY, R-CALIF.: There's nothing compelling, there's nothing overwhelming, it only emphasized again what is not being done in Congress, and what should be done in Congress. Impeachment has overtaken every single Committee. We're less than a year away from the election, but these Democrats do not trust the American public.


INGRAHAM: Now compare that to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.


PELOSI: What President Trump has done on the record in terms of acting to advantage his - a foreign power to help him in his own election and the obstruction of information about the cover-up makes what Nixon did look almost small.


INGRAHAM: This is unbelievable. If you miss that gym today, we just gave you a gift of laughter. Joining me now for some clarity, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Congressman your response to Nancy Pelosi. Now, it went from quid pro quo fizzle, bribery, the absurd. Obviously nothing was withheld.

Then they say, well someone overheard something in a restaurant, and now it's worse than Nixon. And they swing and miss every time, then it's worse than Nixon.

MCCARTHY: And don't forget climate.

INGRAHAM: Oh climate, oh yes.

MCCARTHY: Each week will be something new, because each time they fail to prove anything. But it really goes to the core, I always wondered why does Adam Schiff lie so much, I mean why would he say I have proof beyond circumstantial? Lie about meeting with Glenn Simpson, lie about knowing the whistleblower, lie about the transcript.

He wants to impeach this President so badly. I mean they are afraid to face him at the ballot box, so they want to frame them, and that's what they'll continue to do, whatever it takes to impeach this President, they'll start something new day.

INGRAHAM: The reporting on the whistleblower, and we haven't confirmed this, but the reporting on the whistleblower out there has some very interesting associations with the Deep State--


INGRAHAM: --with the highest level Deep State actors in the previous administration. And it certainly makes people wonder whether this was all a big setup from the beginning, whether it was a patriot on the inside all Strzok and Page, and it was - it's the new Strzok and Page White House style.

MCCARTHY: How many different times have they gone after this President? This so-called whistleblower, whoever he or she is, only Adam Schiff knows met with Schiff's staff before they ever met an attorney or to the IG, and when they met with the IG, never told the IG that they met with the staff.

And Adams Schiff says, oh I don't know--

INGRAHAM: That was a disaster, if Schiff (ph) to do this. I'm sorry, it was a complete disaster. That was one of Nancy Pelosi's biggest mistakes, shifting this over to Schiff.


MCCARTHY: And Nadler is pretty in it.

INGRAHAM: Oh yes, Nadler's there, but Schiff isn't working. I mentioned this with the Nixon comparison.


INGRAHAM: --but Nancy Pelosi clearly gave the thumbs-up or the green light for this new framing. It's like a framing a day, because everybody was repeating it today, it became very comical. Watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's remember what Richard Nixon did. At the very least, he kept it within the bounds of the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Far more serious and far many more witnesses than Richard Nixon had.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is Speaker Pelosi right that this makes what Nixon did look almost small?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It does. This is so much more serious than Nixon's activities.


INGRAHAM: Congressman, wasn't an actual crime--


INGRAHAM: --at the center of Watergate.

MCCARTHY: And what's so ironic here is you have the transcript. We all know what is the evidence, we can all read it, and they bring person after person that wasn't on the phone call that have never met the President, has never met Mick Mulvaney, and they think well it's how I feel, I just don't like the President.

They're bringing somebody--

INGRAHAM: Who would tell they would - who would tell for eight years? Obama.

MCCARTHY: Yes. You know what the one expertise these witnesses have about Ukraine, is that Ukraine is actually safer today with the Trump administration, because he didn't send blankets. They sent actually a javelin that could stop a tank.

INGRAHAM: But the President tonight in his rally said Adam Schiff should be prosecuted for his comments on this. He's a thief, he's a crook, he's a corrupt politician, frankly he should be prosecuted. Got a huge resounding applause on that, what do you think about that?

MCCARTHY: I just think Adams Schiff is only focused on impeaching this President, so he'll lie about anything to get there. He auditions his witnesses in the basement, he's going to do more this weekend. He cherry- picks who can come to the hearing.

If you watch it, it's all about Adam. Adam gets the first 45 minutes.

INGRAHAM: You got a new OMB witness coming out, someone who is going to defy the White House's request not to appear. OMB witness I guess who would be able to say something about why the money was frozen or released. Are you concerned about that?

MCCARTHY: No, think of this, you have the transcript, it was in July 25th. It wasn't until August 29th, the end of August, that they even know that money was being withheld. September 11th, the money was set free. What did Ukraine do for the money to be set free? Nothing. So there is no crime, there is nothing wrong.

And if this is taxpayer money, I want to make sure the President knows, yes is it being spent properly.

INGRAHAM: Do you think there's a chance they don't call a vote, is there any chance? She sounded no, so she's just talking it.

MCCARTHY: This is what they are going to do.

INGRAHAM: She's just phony - she's into more phony Pelosi-- MCCARTHY: They'll go one more week, then we'll go out for Thanksgiving, then they'll have two more weeks and watch. They'll move the continuing resolution to December 20th, the week of December 16th to December 20th, they will vote on impeachment and then they'll try to do USMCA or something--

INGRAHAM: Right before Christmas, we accomplished a lot for the American people.

MCCARTHY: Yes. They have not solved one - any one problem this new majority has got.

INGRAHAM: Not one problem. No, I've done nothing for the working people. But you summed up the timeline well. This is going to be a fun - this is the - we're going to call the 20 days of impeachment or how many days of impeachment--

MCCARTHY: But everybody should call their Representative, tell them what they think.

INGRAHAM: Tell them that they're not working for the people, they're working for themselves. Congressman, thank you for stopping by tonight. And he's become the central figure in the Ukraine drama and his reporting has drawn the ire of the Left.

Investigative Journalist John Solomon joins me with brand-new revelations from Ukraine.



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Ukranian Foreign Minister said on Thursday that the United States Ambassador did not link financial military assistance to a request for Ukraine to open up an investigation into former Vice President and current Democratic President - can you believe.


Like we need help to beat Sleepy Joe Biden, I don't think so.


INGRAHAM: President Trump talking about a new report out today that crushes the Left's impeachment narrative, just another one. According to Reuters, Ambassador Sondland did not tell us and certainly did not tell me about a connection between the assistance and the investigations, you should ask him.

Joining me now is John Solomon Fox News contributor and Lee Smith investigative journalist and author of the new book, The Plot Against the President. John, they're talking there about Ukraine's Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko. And Vadym says - well basically confirming what Zelensky already said, that yes we know in general they wanted us to look at this corruption, but there wasn't a connection to that.

JOHN SOLOMON, CONTRIBUTOR: Here's the Democrats' greatest problem. The only witnesses that here collusion or here - that there was a connection between the aid or hearsay witnesses, all the people who've talked to the President, Zelensky, his Foreign Minister, the two Ambassadors from the United States, all say he said no quid pro quo. I don't know how the Democrats will finish this case. They have a real problem.

INGRAHAM: Lee, this has been an odd series of events for the Democrats. I think they were completely just blown away when the transcript was released by the White House, and that was brilliant, I'm so glad they did that. And that - since then, this thing has been a pebble that's gone - it just gotten more and more and more and more steam going down a hill. Built up, build out the big boulder going downhill.

LEE SMITH, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: Right. Unlike the earlier leg of the operation against Trump, with the Steele dossier, this was a mysterious thing that came out of the blue, and we didn't have revelations until a long time after. With the whistleblower's complaint, we had the transcript and we had transparency immediately into what actually happened. And yes, since that time, it's been a catastrophe.

INGRAHAM: John, you recently dug up this on Maria Yovanovitch, the former ambassador to Ukraine who was relieved of her post. In the midst of 2016 election, in multiple drafts of a question-and-answer memo prepared for Yovanovitch's Senate confirmation hearing, the Department's Ukraine experts urged the incoming Ambassador to stick to a simple answer.

Do you have any comment on Hunter Biden, the Vice President's son serving on the Board of Burisma, a major Ukrainian gas company? The draft Q&A asked that. The recommended answer for Yovanovitch? For questions on Hunter Biden's role in Burisma, I would refer you to the Vice President's office.

John, draft Q&A, do you expect her to be asked about that at the hearing tomorrow?

SOLOMON: I completely do. Listen, you saw - in the deposition you saw George Kent being asked repeatedly about the concerns he had in 2015. Six months ago, everyone was saying Joe Biden's story, that's the tinfoil hat conspiracy, turns out Joe Biden's own people were worried about it. And the only person who doesn't see it as a Joe Biden problem is Joe Biden.

Even the ambassador who was preparing to defend him said, refer that to Joe Biden, that's Joe Biden's problem. It's a really remarkable revelation of these—

INGRAHAM: But the way they're selling Yovanovitch, I mean this is another in the parade of patriots. Because if you work in government and you don't like Trump's policies, you're a hero. If you support the President, you're a zero. It's as simple as that.

And so, whether it was Kent, or whether it's Marie Yovanovitch, they hold them up on a pedestal, and whatever they say, it's a damning but solemn day for America.

LEE SMITH, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: It's not a particularly impressive group that is getting marched out here. Again, with the Russia-gate operation, we could look and say, oh, my goodness, these are serious G-men that we are looking at here, James Comey and Andrew McCabe. Right now, what we're looking at here is entitled bureaucrats who are complaining that they don't get to make the foreign policy of the United States, and they are supposed to be selling that to the U.S. public.

INGRAHAM: They didn't like the fact that Trump was very skeptical about this endless foreign aid, yet the American people are with him in both the Democrat Party and the Republican Party, and the establishment in both parties ignored the American people for decades. Trump comes in and says, why are we still doing this? Oh, no, you're not going to not take our fiefdom over.

And by the way, remember, everyone has to remember that she cried -- I know you wrote about this -- she cried -- people cry, it's fine -- but she cried in her initial testimony behind closed doors. There's a sense that we might see the waterworks tomorrow, is that -- do you want drama? I'm sorry, but they said they want drama. All these Democrats this week said they need drama. They didn't get it with Mr. And Mr. Boring. Sorry, they didn't get it with them.

JOHN SOLOMON, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: I agree. Listen, I think tomorrow is going to be a bad version of the movie "Untouchables." You can't criticize Marie Yovanovitch, she might cry. You can't call Hunter Biden. You can't even mention the whistleblower's name or interview him. All these people are untouchable because if they were really put under oath, we would know the real story.

INGRAHAM: OK, but crying if you lose a loved one, crying if you suffer a huge personal loss, that's fine. Crying because you lost your job when a new president came in and you don't like -- it's ridiculous. I'm sorry. You want to play in the pen with the big dogs, you better put on the big dog face, because it's a tough deal out there in diplomacy land.

SMITH: It's a magical event. The Democrats are going to have to up their game and do something, either its crying, or it's going to be Adam Schiff waving a magic wand over something like that, incantation, strange things. No, it's really terrible, and the people who are paying, it's the American public for this farce, instead of these people getting back to work.

INGRAHAM: And Horowitz's report, we are hearing days. Do you think days after --

SOLOMON: I think it's going to be days after Thanksgiving.

INGRAHAM: Can we plan our Thanksgiving right now at this table, all right, because that's what's most important.

SOLOMON: Not if you are at the "Huff Post," you're not allowed to have Thanksgiving. Otherwise --

INGRAHAM: We can't do "Huff Post," but I.G. report, do we expect this to move the needle at all?

SMITH: I think so, certainly. I think that one of the reasons we are seeing all this drama here on Capitol Hill with the impeachment stuff is people are concerned what will be in this report and what the attorney general is looking at as well, and U.S. Attorney Durham.

INGRAHAM: Gentleman, it's always great to see you both. Thanks so much. And John Solomon, I'm glad your still -- they come after you all day. I love it. The same with you.

SOLOMON: It just means you are hovering over the target.

INGRAHAM: Same thing, Lee Smith.

Coming up, guys, radical elected to power positions. Well, power raising safety concerns in some of America's biggest cities. A new video emerges of bikers intimidating New York police. Is the left's antipolice sentiment now spreading across this country? It certainly seems like it. Bernie Kerik, Leo Terrell are here for a fiery debate next.


INGRAHAM: Lawlessness and chaos are their new twin pillars of the activist left, and this was demonstrated in two stores this week. First, George Soros' national campaign to elect radical prosecutors bore fruit in the Virginia D.C. suburbs this year. They won elections in Fairfax and Arlington counties on platforms put racial justice over public safety. But their agenda is so extreme and dangerous it even has Democrats now sending the alarm.

In our second story, a biker gang surrounding and harassing a lone NYPD officer at a Bronx gas station. Luckily, no one was hurt. But it comes after a summer of escalating attacks on police, from water buckets to chunks of concrete. Here to discuss this disturbing trend is Bernie Kerik, former NYPD commissioner, and Leo Terrell, civil rights attorney. Bernie, these stories might not seem to be connected, but they really are in that one feeds another. Your reaction to this tonight?

BERNIE KERIK, FORMER NYPD COMMISSIONER: Well, Laura, what bothers me is that it's happening all over the country. And when this stuff is happening, you're going to have diminished quality of life. You're going to have increased violent crime. You're going to have increased murder. And we see cities like Baltimore and Chicago and others around the country where those numbers are at the highest they have ever been. And it takes aggressive law enforcement to deal with it. And that is not what we are seeing. We're seeing the opposite really. And we're seeing prosecutors who are basically promoting a diminished enforcement.

INGRAHAM: Leo, one thing that I noticed when I was spending some time in September with Chicago police officers is it was common thread in what they said to me. They said, if you don't go after people for the smaller infractions, it sets the tone for larger infractions. And that's what Giuliani -- I always think of Giuliani in New York. New York became a safer, cleaner place because they didn't let things slide. Your reaction to this antipolice sentiment that we see developing across the country, Leo?

LEO TERRELL, CIVIL RIGHT ATTORNEY: I disagree slightly, Laura, because I think Bernie is talking about the boogie man approach to scare people. In California we started with Prop 47. And when you talk about those bikers there, I would submit to you that there is no felony committed. If there was a crime, I would like to know with a crime is, because all they are doing is just riding around. It's called expression.

But what we are talking about is this. There has been an overcharging of people in this country, and even, we will all agree that even President Trump saw that with the First Step. I would be curious to see if Bernie would agree that Prop 47 works in California --

INGRAHAM: Prop 47, FOX News just had a big piece, one of the most clicked on pieces on FOX, showing that prop 47 has led to an increase in a wide array of crimes already in California. You guys want to screw up California more? Let's keep letting people out of prison before they have done their time for violent offenses, or not putting people in jail for serious other infractions.

TERRELL: Are the two of you opposed to First Step?

INGRAHAM: No wonder people are leaving that state. It's a disaster.

TERRELL: Are the two of you opposed to the First Step? Are you opposed to the First Step?

INGRAHAM: I am opposed to decriminalizing the active criminals. And if you want to let people go, then everyone should live in those same neighborhoods, because the poor people are the ones who get hurt the worst. Bernie?

KERIK: If I can respond to Leo's question, I sat on the First Step Act panel. I helped draft the legislation. I fought for the legislation. I helped get the president to sign the legislation. I was all for it. But what I'm not for is the lawlessness. Those bikers, they didn't commit a felony.

TERRELL: Thank you.

KERIK: They were obstructing. They were harassing the cops. They were interfering with his duties. That's what they were doing.

TERRELL: Then Bernie, answer this. Why did they only charge one and not the other five? And I guarantee you -- tell me why.

KERIK: I don't know all the facts of the case. I would bet they only have one, they have identified one. If you see these guys, they are all masked, they knew they were doing. This is no different than the Antifa groups and all these other groups that go out there and act like animals. Listen, if you harass, intimidate, threaten, obstruct --

TERRELL: You just said they didn't commit a felony, and now you're talking about calling them monsters.

INGRAHAM: Hold on, I've got to get in here. Leo, are you saying that if a person at another line of work who happened to be a minority was surrounded by a bunch of people, maybe they happened to be nonminority, and they are masked people, but they are surrounding them, at least temporarily blocking their way, you wouldn't find that to be threatening? I know a lot of people right on the street who would find that threatening, let alone if it's surrounding a law enforcement officer.

TERRELL: Laura, you are a good lawyer, but the situation is different. Bernie has to admit, these are officers. That's a government. It's not the same workplace situation. And what they did up there was nothing more than First Amendment expression. I guarantee, those cases would never see a court of law.

INGRAHAM: Oh, please. Masks? You like people in masks. No one should be going around in a mask.

TERRELL: Oh, come on. First Amendment rights. Come on, it's called expression.

INGRAHAM: The masks, yes, that's, nice. Antifa's expression, especially when they're bashing someone's head in.

TERRELL: I'm going to wear a mask tomorrow and see if I get arrested for it. That's called expression.

INGRAHAM: Why do people wear masks, why do you think?

TERRELL: Choice. Choice.

INGRAHAM: Really? That is their way of expressing themselves? OK, that's fine. That's really going to add to the social good or add to the public discourse. It's to hide from security cameras so no one can identify you. That's why they are doing it.

The NYPD has a statement out tonight. Let's put it up for people so we can read it about what happened. "The officer was attempting to take the vehicle into possession when the group started to circle their bikes around him." Then it goes on, "One of the individuals attempted to take the bike from the officer, at which point the officer took his teaser out."

TERRELL: And nothing happened thereafter. And nothing happened thereafter.

INGRAHAM: It's setting the tone. And Bernie, I think when you see -- just the general attitude in certain communities. Certain communities, things seem to be OK. But it's a really sad thing, because who is going to go into policing? Who is going to want to go into policing?

KERIK: Listen, the numbers in recruitment in policing all over the country are down. The cops now, the active cops around the country feel like there is this anti-cop rhetoric. They are not appreciated, they are not supportive. That's fact. That's fact. I am not making this stuff up. That is the reality.

The local legislators, the mayors, the governors, they've got to support the men and women out there that do this job that nobody else would do. And if they don't, you are going to see it a continuation of diminishment in recruiting. And people, they are just not going to take the job.

TERRELL: Two words. Body cameras to keep police honest. Body cameras, two words.

INGRAHAM: By the way, Parisa Dehghani-Tafti, the commonwealth attorney in Arlington who beat a phenomenal commonwealth attorney who happened to be a Democrat, in Arlington, this is what this new commonwealth attorney has said. "In Arlington, Black people are eight times more likely to be arrested for marijuana than white people. We need a commonwealth attorney that" -- I think it means who -- "seeks end racial disparity in the criminal justice system."

TERRELL: That's factually accurate. That's a true statement. That's a true statement.

INGRAHAM: So that's the goal of the commonwealth attorney in Arlington, Virginia, to pursue --

TERRELL: What's wrong with that?

INGRAHAM: Because they are supposed to be prosecuting crime. That's why.

TERRELL: Right. And they are making sure that criminals -- they want to make sure that the criminal justice system is not being disproportionately to the disadvantaged minorities. Sounds pretty fair.

INGRAHAM: It's the law. Law should be colorblind, no matter what color your skin is.

TERRELL: It's not.

KERIK: Listen, we just went through this in New York City where you had two cops arrest two women for selling food in the subway and everybody went bonkers. At the end of the day, if you don't want them to arrest those women, then take the law off the books. If you don't want them to arrest people for minimal possession of narcotics --

INGRAHAM: They do want to take the law off the books, that's the problem.

KERIK: -- take those laws off the books. But stop harassing the cops were doing their job they are sworn to do.

INGRAHAM: Bernie and Leo, fascinating conversation, as always. Thank you so much.

TERRELL: Thank you. My pleasure.

INGRAHAM: And our next separate is related. Two separate violent assaults on conservatives caught on camera. Is this the new normal? We'll talk to both of these victims of these incidents in moments.


INGRAHAM: Two events in the past week paint a picture of shocking behavior by leftist activists, and both of them were caught on tape. First, to North Carolina, where activists spray-painted a conservative student in the face. The activists were trying to cover up ads he just posted for an event featuring Lara Trump and Charlie Kirk. That student will join me in moments. And in Portland, Oregon, footage shows and MMA fighter intervening to take down an anti-Trump protester at a Veterans Day in the Antifa hotbed.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Get the -- out of here! Get the -- out of here!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're live in Portland at the flag wave! Guys, stop, stop! Hey, stop! Guys, no!


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You had to have it, now you got it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are going to jail.


INGRAHAM: Wow. Joining me now is Tara Larosa, the MMA fighter from that video you just saw. Also with me, Jack Bishop, the student spray-painted in the face. He is also the son of North Carolina Congressman Dan Bishop.

Tara, first to you. Critics say your response was disproportionate. Now explain very briefly to our viewers what happened.


TARA LAROSA, TOOK DOWN ANTI-TRUMP PROTESTOR: Disproportionate. This girl came at us. She came up behind us. We were on a bridge isolated. She came up behind us and she started -- she should till mike stood there, planted her feet, and started saying f-you, f-you, f-you b right at me, and pointed right at me. And then I was like, no, I'm not doing this. So I turned around. I was waving my flag, and just looking at cars. And then the next minute I know, there is a fight going on, and the guys are calling for me to come break it up.

INGRAHAM: So there were guys, and there was a fight between two women? Or was she attacking a man?

LAROSA: Yes. She went after another woman after she didn't get the response that she wanted out of me.

INGRAHAM: OK, so then the men didn't want to jump in because they were afraid probably of being sued. That's the world we live in, right?

LAROSA: A hundred percent, yes, exactly. They did not want to touch her. That is up with why they were like, Tara, Tara, come here, break this up. I was like, OK.

INGRAHAM: So she was provoked, but because someone put a flag in her face, and this person, by the way, our viewers should understand, the person on the ground right there, is a professor!


INGRAHAM: That's a professor.

LAROSA: That's what she said.

INGRAHAM: Yes, well, I guess you get credits. I don't think she understood with whom she was dealing there. But you kind of put her down pretty quickly.

And Mr. Bishop, what happened to you? You got spray-painted in the face? That must've felt really good.

JACK BISHOP, SPRAY PAINTED IN FACE BY PROTESTOR: Yes, ma'am, it felt excellent actually. We were advertising for our event that we just recently had with Charlie kirk and Lara Trump. And it was myself and a few other members of TPUSA. We were accosted by a few members of the YDSA club here, the Young Democratic Socialists of America. There were multiple altercations between them and ourselves. Mine, I happen to be spray painted by a woman, I don't know her name, but I happen to be spray-painted by her. It required an EMS to take care of it, and --

INGRAHAM: But they said -- this is what they are saying. This is what they are saying. You are standing, they said, in the way of what they were spray painting, so you were kind of asking for it. Imagine if you said that in any other situation. The liberals would go crazy. You were asking for it. That's like the worst thing to say to a victim of an assault.

BISHOP: It's unbelievable. We were there merely expressing our free speech, and these people rolled up in a concerted, intentional attempt, preplanned attempt, to censor our speech. And it's, I think, indicative of what's going on in campuses across the country today where conservative speech is censored.

INGRAHAM: I've got to say, all these alumni who just write blank checks to these universities, or a lot of checks, a lot of money, they've got to stop giving money until this kind of nonsense stops on college campuses. Invite liberals to speak, invited conservatives. They can't -- this cannot be tolerated.

Tara, any word on the professor? You two going to sit down and have a -- pop a cold one together and talk it all out?

LAROSA: I would absolutely have a conversation with her. I have no idea who she is. The investigation apparently is open, and I am not able to attain the police report. So I have no idea who she is. Meanwhile --

INGRAHAM: And she bit you.

LAROSA: -- the entire world knows who I am. She did. She bit me.

INGRAHAM: Did she bite you?

LAROSA: Yes. She bit me.

INGRAHAM: That looks like it hurt. Wow. I can't believe the MMA didn't teach you how to hold you down where she couldn't bite you.

LAROSA: I did. I just wasn't exactly expecting it.


INGRAHAM: All right, guys, thank you very much. And everybody out there, no matter what your political views are, stay safe and try to respect one another when you have a conversation or debate.

And we ask and you answered. The second edition of "Dear Laura" when we come back.


INGRAHAM: It's time again for "Dear Laura."

Here's a message from Janie Mercado. "It's very annoying the way you and Hannity flirt at the beginning of the show. I don't care if you all have a thing going for each other," what? "But it's annoying to watch." Who put this in here? "I wish you would tone it down a bit." OK, I have no words for that one. OK, that's ridiculous.

All right, and here is what Lindsey Jaffe wrote, Laura, "Your new habit of chuckling and giggling at some of the Dems antics is in no way endearing. Do you think their destruction of our country is a joke? I don't find it funny at all and you making light of it makes me sick."

OK, I don't take them seriously because I don't think the country takes them seriously.

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.