Rep. Scalise responds to impeachment threats

close

Video

Rep. Scalise responds to impeachment threats

Democrats band together on impeachment; reaction from House Minority Whip Steve Scalise.

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 29, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Thank you so much. I'm Laura Ingraham. This is “The Ingraham Angle” from a buzzing Washington tonight. Now, you're going to want to stay with us through this entire hour. We dissect every aspect of what Bob Mueller did today when he came out and talked for the first time before the cameras.

The Dems impeachment lurch, the outstanding investigations into the Obama deep state and Trump's 2020 first reaction is straight ahead. We're going to be joined by Sol Wisenberg, Robert Ray, Harmeet Dhillon, Dan Bongino, Brad Parscale, Steve Scalise, Chris Hahn, Raymond Arroyo is here with a palate cleanser in between. Plus, with all the Mueller news of course we had to bring you that. That means the culture wars, everything happening in between with Biden out there, the touchy-feely Joe Biden once again and what's happening next week when Trump goes to London, who will not be there to be part of the ceremonies.

Raymond Arroyo is here with all that as I said and will be going to London on Monday. We'll be there on Monday and in Paris at the Normandy anniversary next week where I'm going to be interviewing exclusively President Trump. You're not going to want to miss any of that. That's next week. But first Mueller pulls a Comey. That's the focus of tonight's “Angle.” Today, the man behind the curtain, Robert Mueller spoke for the first time. Now, if you expected him to have a booming powerful voice and a reassuring presentation, you were sorely disappointed. He seemed and sounded older than his 74 years, almost tired, exasperated and yet determined to throw elbows on his way out the door.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT MUELLER, LAWYER: The order appointing me Special Counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation and as set forth in the report after that investigation if we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we wouldn't have said so

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now that one statement from Mueller, the man we heard was the consummate professional speaks volumes about perhaps the true motivations behind this investigation and speaks to prosecutorial bias and a sense of unprofessionalism.

Alan Dershowitz is accusing Mueller of putting his thumb on the scale saying Mueller went beyond the conclusion of his report and gave a political gift to Democrats in Congress who are seeking to institute impeachment proceedings against President Trump by implying that President Trump might have committed obstruction of justice. Mueller effectively invited Democrats to institute impeachment proceedings.

Now as I said in my podcast today as I was watching Mueller in real time, this kind of reminded me of Jim Comey, you remember the FBI Director, his absurd non-indictment indictment of Hillary Clinton back in July of 2016.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER DIRECTOR, FBI: Although, we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information. There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Oh! My gosh. I watched that whole thing again today several times. It is more disturbing the more you watch it. Now, as with Mueller, remember Comey's job wasn't to opine on Mrs. Clinton's conduct in writing or on camera. His job as FBI Director was to investigate the case than merely present his findings to the Attorney General, his bosses at the Department of Justice. But instead what Comey ended up doing, well he managed to tick off everyone. Now setting aside the glaring fact that Hillary got off for conduct that others would have been jailed for, Comey did enormous damage to the integrity of the FBI and the rule of law.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COMEY: Although, there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information. Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, there is nothing reasonable about a system of justice where at least half the country thinks the entire thing is rigged. The deep state said candidate Trump up after it became obvious that he was going to win the nomination because they were terrified of even the remote prospect of an outsider becoming President of the United States exonerating Mrs. Clinton was an essential step to stopping Trump. But it didn't work.

And once Trump won the presidency, they had to fire up the Russian collusion investigation via the phony dossier, the FISA court and of course Agent Mueller helping along the way. And when that didn't work after a two- year long investigation, they found no evidence of collusion and failed to get the obstruction goods on Trump. But now Mueller comes along in his final bow and is attempting to resuscitate the corpse that was his report. But for you little people by the way, he's going to say nothing more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MUELLER: Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report and the report is my testimony. And it's for that reason I will not be taking questions today as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: That's it. No questions. After completing their investigations neither Comey nor Mueller needed to appear before the cameras. He didn't have to do that today and Comey didn't have to do that back in July of 2016. So, why did they?

Now, it wasn't because of Comey's feigned concern for transparency or because Mueller was closing up the special counsel's office, leaving for the last time. Thinking about it today, it was all partly due to the old set of pride. We all suffer from it. But here it's a concern that they both had for their place in history.

Remember, both men are lifelong products of the Washington legal establishment that at its core reviles a man such as Trump. Think about it. To be defeated or even embarrassed by a man that they believe is as uncouth and undignified as Trump and his supporters. Well that's unthinkable.

Comey turned himself and the law into a pretzel to give Hillary a pass. Then use the collusion crutch that led to the appointment of Mueller. And today, Mueller actually tried to turn a lack of evidence on obstruction into grounds for impeaching a sitting President. It is wild. Both of them are trying to get back into the good graces of the in-crowd. Both of them and their careers with a deafening thud. And that's “The Angle.” Joining me now with reaction Sol Wisenberg, former Whitewater Deputy Independent Counsel, Fox News Contributor and Harmeet Dhillon, Board Member of the Republican National Lawyers Association and Member of the Trump 2020 Advisory Council. All right, Sol, other than perhaps trying to save his legacy with the left what reason did Mueller have for speaking out today.

SOL WISENBERG, FORMER DEPUTY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: I think it was totally appropriate for Mueller to make a brief statement upon closing his office. I think we need to make a distinction between criticizing the Mueller Report, which I have criticized repeatedly and a good portion of which deserves criticism particularly the obstruction part and criticizing his performance today. He did not contrary to what Professor Dershowitz says, he did not go beyond anything that was in his written report. And by the way, he went out of his way, I believe to help Attorney General Barr.

He said that he appreciated Barr's releasing most of the report. And by the way he went out of his way I believe to help Attorney General Barr. He said that he appreciated Barr releasing most of the report to the public and did not question his good faith in releasing it in the way that it should. INGRAHAM: On that issue. But you've got to listen to him very carefully on that because I did. He said, I don't question his good faith on that issue. I mean you know you are parsing, we're all lawyers here, I'll do the parsing on that issue. So, while you have the right - he has the right to speak anytime he wants. My question is Sol and you're giving him a pass like you know a lot of people give him a pass, I'm not giving him a pass.

There was no reason he had to come out--

WISENBERG: I'm praising.

INGRAHAM: They're giving away the staplers, they're giving away the staplers today, so he has to come out in front of the cameras to resuscitate the whole impeachment thing. There was no reason he had to come out today. He came out because he's a member of this city. You don't live here. I do. This city's legal establishment has always hated Donald Trump. They think he's uncouth. They think he's not smart. They think he didn't deserve the presidency.

He didn't check all their boxes and they never wanted him to be President and the fact that he managed to get through two years of this investigation accomplished as much as he has, I think it sticks under their craw and I don't mean to cut you off Sol, but Harmeet I'm hot on this, because I don't like when prosecutors grandstand before the cameras whether It was Patrick Fitzgerald, with Conrad Black or whether it's this with President Trump. There is no reason for a prosecutor to get out there before the cameras. Your reaction.

HARMEET DHILLON, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION: Absolutely Laura and--

WISENBERG: You didn't mind Barr going in front of the camera.

INGRAHAM: He didn't prosecute the case. He didn't prosecute the case, Sol. Nice try. Go on.

DHILLON: Yes. So, the difference is that Mueller is now trying to rewrite his epitaph, his epitaph was going to be before he took this assignment that he was the g man consummate professional and going to do the right thing. But he obviously didn't like all the chatter after his smear attack did not meet its mark. And so, he's trying to rewrite that right now. But I think it's worse than that Laura. I think that by coming out and saying dropping this, he's that jerk who has to have the last word. Right. So, it's not enough to come out and smear the President again like his report does. But then he also has to say, I'm not going to answer any questions from Congress or the Senate, I'm gone. I had the last word, very arrogant.

INGRAHAM: That's really convenient, drop a little bomb. If I wanted to clear him of a crime I would have said so.

DHILLON: That's right. But it's a girl thing--

INGRAHAM: It's like a mean girl thing. I don't like that.

DHILLON: But Dershowitz said it and others have said it and it's very obvious that you cannot in his role take the role of judge, jury and executioner is what he tried to do. Now somebody else has noted that the fact that he indicted 13 Russian nationals, they actually have more of a - they actually have more of a presumption of innocence in Mueller's world than Trump because at least they're going to get a trial, but he's already declared him guilty without having to play outside.

INGRAHAM: Sol, I want to get you specifically weigh in on the back and forth between CNN's Jake Tapper and this guest. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAKE TAPPER: Do you agree is that the headline here is President Trump likely committed a crime, but I could not charge him because of the legal guidance that sitting presidents can't be charged.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I think he finally made it crystal clear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, that's my point Sol, because Mueller decides to come out today and have that little line in if we wanted to say he will declare him a crime we would have said that. That's the line that everyone and the lame stream media is running with. So, Mueller knew because he chooses his words carefully. He said that today that was going to be the takeaway line. That's the problem I have with this and I love you, Sol you know that. But that's the problem I have with him. Go ahead.

WISENBERG: First of all, I lived in Washington for 20 years and don't want to be criticized for moving out. I'm very happy where I am.

INGRAHAM: I'm glad you moved out.

WISENBERG: But secondly, look, there is nothing inappropriate. It's totally normal for somebody in his position leaving office to give a brief public statement.

INGRAHAM: Why? Why you keep saying that. Why do you keep saying that? I'm sorry. I mean to stick on this issue, he said repeatedly his report is his testimony then we don't need to hear from you again. If that's really the case Sol, we're going to take the face value--

WISENBERG: Look--

INGRAHAM: Because of the line that I read in “The Angle,” the line about if we wanted to clear him, we would have cleared him. That's the line, I'm paraphrasing.

WISENBERG: He's already said that.

INGRAHAM: But again. But you're making my point, you're making my point, why did he have to come out? Why?

WISENBERG: Why did Bill Barr come out?

INGRAHAM: He's the Attorney General. This guy is underneath Barr. This guy is not the boss.

WISENBERG: Wait a minute. I defended him. He didn't have to come out before the Barr report was released and frame it in the way that he did. I have no problem with--

INGRAHAM: He is the Attorney General. He is the boss of the other guy.

WISENBERG: So, what?

INGRAHAM: I have a question, I'm sticking on this, Sol. Would an associate of yours at your - you have a great law firm, Nelson Mullins. If an associate of yours came out in a case that you were defending and started giving comments to the press, would you appreciate that. The answer is no. You wouldn't, you'd fire him, you'd fire him. Would you not?

WISENBERG: I believe he told the White House. Well, it's too late to fire him. He resigned.

DHILLON: Yes, that's exactly.

INGRAHAM: But you know what I'm saying, my point is I'm a stickler on this because I'm getting to the motive of Mueller who we were sold this bill of goods on Mueller that he was beyond reproach, can never question Mueller because he's the FBI. I'm sorry when I hear that about someone, I usually think OK, my antenna are going up and maybe I'm being unfair--

DHILLON: No, I don't think you are Laura.

INGRAHAM: Maybe I'm being unfair because it's my defense, the defense attorney background that kicks in here. And maybe I have my--

DHILLON: I'm a civil rights attorney and the reality is that the prosecutor has amazing power. So, he has the power to go into a grand jury without the defense present and make his case. So, you know, balanced against that is his duty under the DOJ guideline not to come out and smear somebody the way that he did. And so, you know on top of that he made the illogical argument that he rubbed in again today that he did not have the right to indict the President.

INGRAHAM: We're going to get to that. So, I've got to get Sol on that point, Sol has been very critical of that volume to the report, but Sol on that issue you addressed it on the podcast today brilliantly, we got a lot of comments and your comments on the podcast. But what about that when Mueller came out and said specifically that we didn't - we made this decision because we couldn't indict him or charge him because of the longstanding DOJ rule. And you say?

WISENBERG: Well, the problem is when he says you know it wouldn't be fair to say he committed a crime, since we can't indict him, it wouldn't be fair to say he committed a crime because he can't defend himself. But then he says, well, if we could have exonerated him, we would have, but we can't exonerate him. Well, there's no difference. He still really can't. He's putting the same position. If Mueller to be consistent, I think should have said, look, here is the evidence we found on obstruction. Here is the evidence, we're not making a conclusion about it, here it is, which by the way is what Leon Jaworski did when he sent his report to Congress. He said here's what happened on this day. Here's the evidence you can look to find it. And he gave it to Congress. So, I think that's the way he should have done it.

But again, I've been very critical of--

INGRAHAM: You have.

WISENBERG: A lot of the things he said in the report. I don't have any problem with him going out and making a 9-minute statement when he's closing down the office. I have no problem with it.

DHILLON: Well, I think it really raise more questions than an answer Laura. Because I mean if he can't indict the President, why did he take the assignment in the first place. Why did he even do this? It's illogical for him to go down that way.

WISENBERG: He spoke today.

DHILLON: He didn't answer.

WISENBERG: He spoke to that.

DHILLON: It was kind of like on top of like I'm not going to do this and by the way, I can't and by the way that's why I didn't. And actually, I think he does not have the right. He does not have the right to exonerate anybody, it's not his job.

INGRAHAM: All right. Sol and Harmeet, thank you so much. And the left-wing media today deemed downright - they seem downright giddy at the prospect of Congress moving forward on impeachment. In fact, it's almost like they were all reading from the same script.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's basically Congress. It's now up to you. It's your call.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He was virtually announcing Congress, do your job.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The train whistles blowing, and Pelosi got to make a decision.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is saying to Congress and in the House, Democrats were in Congress, I can't do your job for you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The ball is in their court.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The ball is essentially in their court.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's up to you folks in the House of Representatives to deal with this. The ball is in your court.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Oh! My God. Do they all have the same script writer. Joining me exclusively Brad Parscale, Trump's 2020 campaign manager. Brad, are you worried after today?

BRAD PARSCALE, TRUMP 2020 CAMPAIGN MANAGER: No, I'm not worried today. Look, the person who had a bad day today was Nancy Pelosi. The people had bad days here are the people running for President, for the Democrats. I mean they expected, I think they were salivating thinking someone was going to come in and what they get today, another day of no case against obstruction, no collusion.

INGRAHAM: Well, he said--

PARSCALE: No conspiracy.

INGRAHAM: He said, we couldn't charge. I mean everybody today is running with he couldn't charge because of this old DOJ policy, Barr came out and said, it was a conversation we had, it didn't seem like that was his justification. They have a bit of a conflict and they said, they don't have a conflict. I think that's a wash. No one can follow that. But I do think it was muddying the waters once again on this issue of did he obstruct justice in a way that Congress could use to impeach him.

PARSCALE: Look, I still think this goes back to Democratic talking points and what they want. And this is what the truth is. Their impeachment to their base is like a wall to our base. This is their fundraising thing. And the truth is, this is a made-up false problem in crisis, but our walls are real crisis. And you know, you know that because what's happening with human trafficking and all these things but this this is about them raising money. What do they do? They're going to raise money on free stuff. What are they going to do? This is the one issue they have.

INGRAHAM: Well, I think one of the things that's a real problem for them is this economy. I mean there is going to be gyrations with the trade stuff with China, but in general, it's a booming economy. What are they going to do? So, they have to dangle that little prospect of impeachment out. Well, really. I'm thinking as a Democrat. If I were a Democrat, you've got to kind of have people thinking you might impeach, you might not. So, Pelosi today and I think we have it.

Pelosi today talked about her being disappointed with the DOJ. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: I am gravely disappointed in the Justice Department for their attitude their misrepresentation of the Mueller Report to begin with. They're hiding behind something that you could never find in the constitution that the President is above the law and their misrepresentations even under oath by the Attorney General to the Congress of the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PARSCALE: Look, you're beating this drum because they think this is going to raise the money, but the problem is, this actually empowers our campaign. It's going to - it doesn't help them. It actually strengthens our campaign--

INGRAHAM: How?

PARSCALE: Going forward. Because this is something that most Americans when you look at don't actually agree with. I mean like sometimes this thing pulls less than 5 percent. People don't believe this, they think they're just trying to beat them in some way because they have no other way to beat them on policy, America see through this. And poll after poll shows that and it strengthens the campaign. It has every single poll since they started doing this.

INGRAHAM: Justin Amash is now the one Republican who is now - he's the courageous one.

PARSCALE: Yes.

INGRAHAM: I want you to watch this exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JUSTIN AMASH, R-MICH.: I think it's really important that we do our job as a Congress that we not allow misconduct to go undeterred. That we not just say someone can violate the public trust and that there are no consequences to it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PARSCALE: Look, this guy goes out and says he's libertarian. But what does he believe in? He believes in fake dossiers. He believes in spying. He believes in false FISA things. I mean like he is not a libertarian, he is not--

INGRAHAM: You're worried about him running against the President and as an independent.

PARSCALE: No, not worried about him at all. No, I don't think so. And look, I think libertarians is going to see through him. I think you'll see them coming out against him, because he doesn't believe in liberty.

INGRAHAM: Brad, a nice muscle shirt on him.

PARSCALE: Yes. I'm not allowed to wear those.

INGRAHAM: All right. Thank you so much. And coming up, Speaker Pelosi boxed into the corner as Democrats grow more rabid over impeachment. So, what will the queen of San Francisco do now. Bongino and Hahn next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You told us enough to interpret what he said as a referral for impeachment proceedings.

PETE BUTTIGIEG, D-IND., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The message really is over to you Congress. This is as close to an impeachment referral as you could get under the circumstances.

BETO O'ROURKE, D-TX, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It's time for Congress to act and to begin impeachment proceedings. Act now or lose our democracy forever.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Isn't that a little overstated there, no. Robert Mueller's statement today added fuel to the fire of course for the 2020 Democrat fanatics who are calling for President Trump's impeachment. What else are they going to do? Tell us how they're going to raise the GDP faster than Trump. Even Nancy Pelosi by the way who has warned her party against the rush to impeachment seems to be inching a little closer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: Nothing is off the table, but we do want to make such a compelling case, such an ironclad case that even the Republican Senate will be convinced of the fact that we have to take as a country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Here to debate, Dan Bongino, author of the upcoming book Exonerated, and also Fox News Contributor, Chris Horn, Former Aide to Senator Chuck Schumer and a radio talk show host. All right Chris as a Democrat are you thinking this is a good moment for your party, because it seems like pretty much all the 2020 candidates. I mean all 23 of them seem to be saying the same thing that this is tantamount to a referral of impeachment. Do you agree?

CHRIS HAHN, FORMER AIDE TO SENATOR CHUCK SCHUMER: Well, I don't ever celebrate anyone's misfortune, but it does appear to me that what Bob Mueller said today was, I am not the one who gets to decide this. It is up to you, Congress. Here is the evidence I laid out for you. Now it's your call. He felt that he couldn't indict based on the DOJ policy and he did not want to make a recommendation because that would be unfair because the President would not be able to then defend himself because there would be no trial.

INGRAHAM: Well, Bongino he certainly was very clear on no conspiracy with Russia. He made a definitive conclusion on no conspiracy or collusion is not a crime, but they weren't working together to try to thwart the election, they found no evidence of that. So, on that they were clear. But on the obstruction which is what everyone is hanging their hat on. Mueller was well no, we couldn't come to a conclusion on this. But that doesn't mean no crime was committed. That was what got under my craw today because it was an elbow out the door with no ability to question Mueller and no ability for a follow-up.

DAN BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Yes. Laura, you don't need to be an attorney like you and Chris to figure out that not, not guilty is not a standard. I don't understand what Bob Mueller did today, ethically or morally, it was really awful. And let's be clear on something, what Chris said about the OLC guidelines, guidelines, it's not the law limiting Mueller's ability to charge Trump. That's not true. There were witnesses and multiple people at the DOJ saying that Bob Mueller said not once, not twice, but three times that the OLC guidelines did not prevent him from making a decision, which means he punted to Barr for an obvious reason to sell Barr, because Barr had written that--

HAHN: No.

BONGINO: Memo would advance and make it look political.

HAHN: He did not punt to Barr, he punted to Congress, that is very different than punting to Barr.

BONGINO: Chris, you don't know--

HAHN: And what other people might have heard was not what he said. He said today and he had to say it because Barr was misrepresenting what he said.

INGRAHAM: Yes, well that's a separate point.

BONGINO: Then why he didn't say that.

INGRAHAM: Hold on.

BONGINO: Then why did Mueller, no stop.

INGRAHAM: Chris, hold on.

BONGINO: Why did Mueller praised Barr today if he misrepresented him? Answer to that please. INGRAHAM: Yes. I think that here is the deal. I mean he works for the Attorney General, the U.S. government. He doesn't work at the behest of Congress. That's what the Democrats are interpreting here and inferring, and I get why they're doing that. But that's not how the special counsel statute is set up. He reports to the Attorney General.

HAHN: Right.

INGRAHAM: That's who he reports to. It's Bill Barr's decision to have made the ultimate determination as he punted it to Barr. Now Congress wants to go and try to impeach Trump on that. Chris, let's just say as a matter of politics. Do you think that's smart politics aside from whether do you think it's the right thing to do? HAHN: I think that the president thinking that him being impeached is a benefit to his reelection is a gross miscalculation. I think impeachment would be bad for this president. It was bad for Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party. It led to the election of George W. Bush. The Republicans did not lose to the House of Representatives or the Senate during that time.

So there's a lot of talk that this is something that he wants. I tell you, Mr. President, you don't want it. And the way to avoid it is to start cooperating with Congress on their subpoenas, give them the documents they want, and let it play out that way, and it won't be an impeachment.

INGRAHAM: Dan, it's like holding a gun to his head. If you give us this, this, and this, and the 50 investigations, we'll leave you alone. That's like mob tactics. I don't think that's --

HAHN: No. it's the right of Congress.

BONGINO: No, Chris is right and wrong here. He's right, impeachment is obviously never a good thing. It's tautological to even say it. Having said that, the difference between the Clinton impeachment and the Trump impeachment is that Clinton actually committed crimes. He lost his law license. This is a fake collusion hoax from the start that will blow up in the Democrats faces.

HAHN: Oh, Dan.

INGRAHAM: We can't relitigate the Clinton -- all right, guys, we got to go. Fascinating conversation. This is going to be going on for God knows how long. Thanks so much tonight.

And ahead, will Dems use Mueller's comments to undermine the ongoing DOJ investigations into the corrupt grounds for this investigation into Trump's campaign, why it was launched in the beginning, the origins of the Russia investigation?

But up next, Raymond Arroyo is here with Joe Biden's getting a little handy. And which royal plans to snub Trump in the U.K. next week? We will be there. "Seen and Unseen," next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's time for our "Seen and Unseen" segment where we expose the big cultural stories of the day. Biden, the space invader, and apparently President Trump gets the cold shoulder from a royal. Joining us with all the details Raymond Arroyo, FOX News contributor. Raymond, OK, tell me that Joe Biden did not get too close to a young lady again?

RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: I'm afraid he did. If you are Joe Biden, the one image you want to avoid is grabbing women and children in a weird way, right? The other day at a Texas town hall in front of the media, Biden took a question from a little girl. He said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT: I bet you're as bright as you're good- looking, I tell you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: Why is he telling a little child that she is good-looking? She's 10.

INGRAHAM: It's the hands.

ARROYO: Oh, yes, but he wasn't finished. She then told him she wanted to be a journalist, so he processed her over to the press corps and introduced her to the media. You see him clasping her by the shoulders. Biden finally deposited the poor girl into the press pen. And my first thought was, why is Joe Biden separating children from their parents and confining them to press pens? This is what we need to investigate.

INGRAHAM: He's separating children, that was an odd --

ARROYO: It was very weird. Remember, he's promised that he would respect personal space. He's already violating that promise. I think he should just has a presser where he lines kids and women up and touches them and kisses them, and says, you know what, I'm inappropriate, I'm overly affectionate.

INGRAHAM: If this is my worst sin, I don't mean anything by it, I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

ARROYO: Laura, speaking of public missteps, on June 3rd Queen Elizabeth will welcome President Trump and his family to Buckingham Palace for a state visit which you and I will be covering in London. Members of the Royal Family will attend lunch with the Trumps, including Prince Harry. But his wife Meghan Markle will not be attending. The Duchess of Sussex may not be snubbing the Trumps at all since Windsor claims she is still on maternity leave and has not done no public events since her son's birth last month. What do you make of that?

INGRAHAM: I don't know. If Michelle and Barack Obama were in town, I think the maternity leave might have been cut short. That's just a guess.

ARROYO: She is going to the queen's birthday just five days later. That's going to be her big --

INGRAHAM: Here's the problem. The only problem I see for Meghan Markle here is if she's seen at some type of hot yoga class later in the day, she could get out to that.

ARROYO: Out shopping, at in Paris.

INGRAHAM: Politics may also have been informing Markle's no-show. Here she is in 2016 discussing then candidate Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEGHAN MARKLE: I think it was in 2012 the Republican Party lost the female vote by 12 points. That's a huge number, and with as misogynistic as Trump is and so vocal about it, that's a huge chunk of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: This is some political bias here at play.

INGRAHAM: I didn't even know that was she. She looks totally different.

ARROYO: Very different, yes. She looks totally different.

INGRAHAM: Oh, my goodness. The baby is adorable.

ARROYO: Look, neither she nor Harry really have to be here because they're not in line for the throne. So they really don't have to be at these state events.

INGRAHAM: I like Kate.

ARROYO: I like Kate, too.

INGRAHAM: I like Kate Middleton.

Now, I know people are worried about the World Series and other big sporting events, but there is one, Laura, that I had to bring you because you might have missed it. It's a world championship now in it's 43rd gear, toe wrestling.

(LAUGHTER)

ARROYO: Don't laugh. Do you know the skill it takes to train a toe, Laura, and subject it to this kind of grueling challenge? Look at that. They wrap the toes and try to move the person on the other side.

INGRAHAM: I hate feet.

ARROYO: This year's world champion was none other than Alan "Nasty" Nash. That's him.

INGRAHAM: That's some nasty feet.

ARROYO: Who took home another title with his tootsies.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I've been doing two wrestling for 25 years. Over the 25 years, I've had 15 world titles. After today it will be 16. I've got no intention of losing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: Ingraham, stop reaching for your wedges. No, no, we're not going to do a toe-off here.

INGRAHAM: No, no, I'm not the toe --

ARROYO: There is a separate lady's division, anyway. Lisa "Twinkle Toes" Shenton was this year's ladies champion. I wish I were making this up. Not a joking matter to these contestants, Laura. They train all year, they exercise those bunions. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN WOODROFFE, TOE WRESTLING COMPETITOR: There's a lot of things that a lot of people do. I've had my toenails removed on my feet removed for toe wrestling purposes. So yes, there's a lot of things you can do, a lot of preparation, and if you are dedicated to it, you will do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: And very limited concessions there. They only sell toe jam and hang nail brittle. That's all they sell.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: I was going to say, they nailed it. All right, Raymond, that takes the cake.

ARROYO: See you in London.

INGRAHAM: Now back to the other news.

ARROYO: Yes, the important news.

INGRAHAM: Big news of the day, Robert Mueller was toe wrestling with Comey? No, mixed messaging. Democrats now try to undermine the three separate investigations into the mishandling of the Russia probe. Robert Ray and George Papadopoulos, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For the first and possibly the last time, Special Counsel Robert Mueller spoke.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was so much of that was extraordinary about hearing from Mueller. The content of it was extraordinary as well.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hearing Mueller say that was a moment in history.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: A moment in history. What you won't hear from those anchors is the fact that, of course, that doesn't stop the fact that there are three separate investigations still going on into the origins of this Russia hoax, how it all started.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is looking at a potential surveillance abuses by the FBI. Utah Federal Prosecutor John Huber is also investigating potential FISA abuses by the FBI and the DOJ. He's also reviewing the handling of the Hillary Clinton email scandal. And finally, of course, U.S. Attorney John Durham in Connecticut was tapped to examine the origins of the Russia probe and specifically tasked with determining if former intel leaders abused their powers.

Here now is Robert Ray, former Independent Counsel, and George Papadopoulos, a former Trump 2016 campaign adviser who himself, of course, got caught up in this Russia witch hunt. He's also the author of the new book, "Deep State Target." Robert, which of these investigations is the most important at this moment post Mueller statement?

ROBERT RAY, FORMER WHITEWATER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: The most important would be the latter two because they will have prosecutorial power to bring charges, criminal charges against those that those individual prosecutors find warranted. We don't know, it's too early to say what we will see from that, but obviously that's the most potentially significant.

I don't want to minimize the fact that we are also preparing to hear from the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz. That will provide I think a bit of a roadmap for the public to understand where we're going. But I think the bottom line is the Attorney General intends to get to the bottom of this, and I would take him at his word that he's serious.

INGRAHAM: George, when you were watching this today, what went through your mind, given everything that you've gone through, the attempted set-up, using you to make inroads in the Trump campaign. What were you thinking?

GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ADVISER: I saw a feeble man, meaning Bob Mueller, basically propagating conspiracy theories and trying to galvanize the Democrats to initiate some sort of obstruction hearings or impeachment hearings, which I think of course would boomerang and hurt the Democrats in 2020. So I don't think they are dumb enough to actually initiate those considering the president of course could not obstruct a witch hunt, and Bob Mueller himself should have stated that very clearly and eloquently, which he did not.

But I think the president was on to something a couple days ago before he went to Japan when he stated that he is going to looking into foreign government interference in the 2016 election. And at the beginning of this segment you showed the three agencies, the CIA and the FBI, and possibly the NSA, were colluding, I believe, with foreign governments including the U.K. and Australia to basically set traps for the Trump campaign to make it look like we were conspiring or coordinating with the Russian government, which of course was absurd.

INGRAHAM: And you're saying, George, just so people understand. George, you are saying, you're alleging that they were the ones conspiring to stop this upstate Donald Trump. Perhaps the State Department had a hand in this as well later on in the process. I believe that's what you're saying, correct?

PAPADOPOULOS: Absolutely. And I was face-to-face with these spies, with these agents, these foreign agents, Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper, Joseph Mifsud, State Department officials, CIA officials, all of these individuals were running into me in capitals around the world, in London, Athens, and even in the U.S. So clearly, they were targeting the campaign. And I even went, in my opinion, it goes back even to other campaigns, too. I think Donald Trump's campaign wasn't the only one targeted. I was working for the Ben Carson campaign, and there were very strange forays into that campaign of State Department officials.

So I think the president is right to declassify the materials. It's the only way to get to the bottom of it, and he did the right thing for the American people.

INGRAHAM: I've got to get to what John Brennan, former CIA director, the man, one of the spokes of this wheel, the hub of the wheel, John Brenna, his interpretation today of Mueller's statement. Robert Ray, let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: The public statement today is going to give momentum to those who want to move forward to impeachment hearings. I think there can be no doubt about Mr. Mueller's message that the obstruction of justice issue is not resolved and that there needs to be follow-up action on it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: A former CIA director giving his own marching orders to Congress there, Robert. Your reaction?

RAY: My reaction, Laura, is I held press conferences only when I had something to say. I don't really know what the point of nine minutes and 40 seconds worth of a, I'm returning my paper clips and I'm going to head back into retirement, really what the purpose of all that was. I assume the purpose was to show Congress, lest they be tempted into subpoenaing his testimony, that Director Mueller is serious that he has no intention of saying anything other than what he's already said in his report. And if that is the result of this, I think that's a good thing.

I think, and I've thought all along, that it is in the country's interest to allow the report to speak for itself. If the Congress in its infinite wisdom wants to jump on the impeachment bandwagon, then go to it. But they don't need an assist from Bob Mueller to do so. I don't understand really what the point of that press conference was. He said nothing new and he made it clear that if you subpoena him he doesn't intend to say anything other than what's already --

INGRAHAM: Back to my “Angle,” Robert. And part of this is the old Washington sin, the universal sin of pride. You don't want this guy Donald Trump and the forces supporting Trump look like they defeated you. You can't discount that factor here. But I'm glad that Robert Ray agrees with me --

RAY: I do agree with you.

INGRAHAM: -- that it wasn't necessary. I wish we had more time. Fantastic conversation.

Coming up, Republicans aren't taking these impeachment threats lightly, though. Steve Scalise is here to fire back, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

REP. RASHIDA TLAIB, D-MICH.: I think it's very clear that from many American people that I've spoken to, they don't want a lawless, king-like president. I tell the president bring it, because 10 million people signed a petition to impeach this president. What precedent do we set when we don't do anything?

REP. JOE NEGUSE, D-COLO.: I think it's hard to not see the Special Counsel's comments this morning as anything but an impeachment referral to the Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: From radicals to moderates, the Mueller statement has brought Democrats of all stripes in Congress together. So how does the GOP plan to respond to this newly unified front to impeach?

Here now is House Minority Whip Steve Scalise in New Orleans. Congressman, what is the leadership's response to the Democrat drumbeat that built up over the last few weeks, but you really felt it today?

REP. STEVE SCALISE, R-LA, HOUSE MINORITY WHIP: Laura, this has been their plan all along. They've been pushing for impeachment since the day they won the majority. Many of them couldn't hide it. Nadler was bragging about it. You saw others in their own leadership on the Democrat side saying this was what they were going to make their two year majority about.

Frankly, this isn't what the American people elected them to do, so I think there is going to be a heavy price for Democrats who go down this path. But they've been planning this witch hunt. They spent two years and over $30 million of taxpayer money lying, saying that there was proof of obstruction, that there was proof of collusion. There was none of it. In fact, the only collusion that happened were there were people, officials at the Department of Justice, at the FBI, even in the Obama administration who were spying on the Trump campaign. And ultimately when you look at some of the things that happened, they had a partisan agenda within the FBI to take down this president before he was elected. People aren't going to stand for this. If they want to pursue this road, it's going to be, again, at the peril of their majority.

INGRAHAM: Do you think, Congressman, think that the Senate Intel Committee, as others have said, should subpoena Mueller to testify before them? He said he's pronounced he's not talking, I don't know how he can say that, but he did pronounce that today definitively. But should Republicans in the Senate not take that as gospel and subpoena him to testify?

SCALISE: Republicans in the Senate have been focused on doing their job, the job they were elected to do to keep this country moving forward, to get this country, the economy back on track. The Democrats in the House have made it clear they don't care about the economy, they don't care about the crisis at the border. Keep this in mind, Laura. The very committee that has jurisdiction over the crisis at the border that is real today, more than 4,000 people a day crossing our border illegally, that's the committee that is chaired by Jerry Nadler that is focused on this witch hunt, on focusing down ratholes to try to impeach the president even when there is no proof and there was no collusion.

INGRAHAM: I want a five second answer, OK? Do the Democrats think impeachment is their only chance of beating Trump now?

SCALISE: No, but it's the only way that they can appease their radical left base.

INGRAHAM: OK, because Allan Lichtman is out there saying that that might be the only way they can win because he might be projecting Trump wins in 2020. This is a Hail Mary. Congressman, thank you for joining us tonight.

And coming up, a remarkable last bite that will leave you with chills.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Last night the country was captivated by "America's Got Talent" contestant Kodi Lee who says music that saved his life.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TINA LEE, MOTHER OF KODI LEE: -- is blind and autistic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wow.

T. LEE: We found out that he loved music really early on.

KODI LEE, MUSICIAN: I've been so many places in my life in time --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Every life has talent and dignity, and if that doesn't make you cry, the judge is jumping your feet, I don't know what will. Gabrielle Union hitting the Golden Buzzer sending him straight to Hollywood. Oh, my God. I can't watch that again. I'm going to fall. I have to get off the set.

That's all the time we have tonight. Don't forget my podcast, podcastone.com.

Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team take it from here. Shannon, have a great show.

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.