Roseanne Barr apologizes but can't save her show

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 29, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Good evening from Washington, I'm Laura Ingraham and this is "The Ingraham Angle." We have our work cut out for us tonight as Sean said. We are trying to squeeze so much great stuff for you into just one hour. ABC moves really quickly, cancels Roseanne's hit show after her racially charged Tweet and MLK's niece Alvida King and Howie Kurtz weigh in on whether ABC's reaction was the right call. Also Andy McCarthy tells us why he has no doubt that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign and he explains why. Plus Starbucks has every one of its workers spend the afternoon pondering whether they are unconsciously biased or racist. We have an exclusive look at the workbook. They reflected over today. This is it, it says My Notebook, lots of interesting notes in here. We are going to dig into this. I don't think people have seen this, it's pretty wild. And we're going to tell you why legalized pot laws have totally backfired and turned out to be a bonanza for, believe it or not, the drug cartels. But first separating parents from children and fact from fiction. That's the focus of tonight's "Angle." The media have been hammering President Trump making scurrilous charges that his draconian immigration policies are separating families and losing track of illegal immigrant children.


CNN NEWS HOST: The trump administration is threatening to separate and more parents and kids at the border screaming and crying, "Please don't let me be taken away." They are traumatized.

CNN NEWS ANCHOR: He called about 7,600 of those children and they couldn't find 1,500 of them.

MSNBC HOST: Donald Trump really is obsessed with perhaps the sickest part of the policy, separating families from each other.


INGRAHAM: Predictably the New York Times also weighed in with a piece titled, "Did the Trump administration separate immigrant children from parents and lose them?" Well as you will see this is not reporting. It's called trying to create a narrative regardless of the actual facts to manipulate readers' emotions and ultimately force a change in policy. Now never one to forgo a ride on the bandwagon, CNN's Hadas Gold Tweeted this, a picture of immigrant children in what appeared to be cages with the caption, "First photos of separated migrant children at holding facility". Well the inference of course being that Trump was consigning innocent children ripped from their mother's arms into wired cages. Well the same picture was shared by former Obama officials like John Favreau and the usual Trump hating activists such as Women's March board member Linda Sarsour. But there's only one problem with this photo, it's from2014 you know when the saintly Barack Obama and the compassionate ones were all in charge. At the time left wing media did not consider detaining illegals worth covering. But now that Trump is trying to enforce our immigration laws, he's suddenly just a heartless thug. Gold had to retract her tweet but she didn't apologize writing, "Deleted previous tweet because gave impression of recent photos". They're from 2014, well Hadas they gave the impression because you wrote that they were "first phots" of migrant kids in detention. Usually one doesn't label something first photos when they are four years old. Well we are still waiting for the New York Times to apologise for its outrageous headline. It turns out that the Times could have answered their own question by reading further down in their own piece. Did the Trump administration separate immigrant children from parents and lose them? Well, no, they clearly didn't because the Times writes that, "those children had arrived alone at the southwest border without their parents". So I have a question, how can you separate illegal alien children from their parents when the parents sent them here alone? Well there is a glaring loophole in the immigration law that forbids border control from immediately deporting unaccompanied minors from Central America, non-contiguous countries. The illegals know this so they abuse the system and I would argue if they endanger their children in the process. So what happens when an unaccompanied illegal minor, remember he or she could be 16, 17 or one day from his or her 18th birthday by the way, crosses the border illegally. Well the United States then throws them into what is essentially a foster care program. According to Steve Wagner, an HHS official, the 10,000 children and teens in custody cost the tax payers over $1-billion annually. Others are sent to sponsors, so what happens is the government finds the kids' sponsors or family members in the United States whom they can go to live with as their case proceeds, or better pit, as it drags on for years. Well of course few show up for their deportation or immigration hearing. So as they as they charge that the Trump administration lost 1,475 immigrant kids, they didn't lose anybody. When HHS tried to check up on these kids with their sponsors, at times remember illegal immigrant families themselves caring for the children, 1,475 failed to take the calls or even respond to the government at all. So the immigrant kids aren't lost, their sponsors just haven't connected with the HHS or made themselves available. But if the media wants to misconstrue that as losing a kid well, okay let's do that for a moment. Hypothetically let's just say that that's correct. Well Obama lost nearly three times the number kids. The New York Times reporting a 2016 Inspector General report shows that the federal government was able to reach only 84% of children it had placed, leaving 4,159 unaccounted for. Well correct me if I a wrong but I don't remember any media lashing out at Obama for losing kids or separating them form their families. In fact, Obama and his homeland security secretary a few times tried to adopt a hard line on the unaccompanied minors when there was huge rush at the border as you recall back I 2014.


BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PREIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Our message to Central America, do not send our children to the borders. If they do make it, they'll get sent back.

JEH JOHNSON, FORMER HOMELAND SECURITY SECCRETARY: Our message to those who are coming here illegally, to those who are contemplating coming here illegally into South Texas, is we will send you back.


INGRAHAM: Oh one problem, they couldn't be sent home, they couldn't be deported because of the insane immigration laws we currently have in place. By the way which is why Trump is right. The law has to change, Congress must act. Not only this unaccompanied minor loophole, but the Catch and Release Program as well as chain migration, asylum fraud, all of it. So if you want to know why this anti-Trump media narrative is being advanced at this time, why? It's because Trump is close to making good on his promise to transform our immigration laws for the better. Even the left realizes this issue is a winner for Republicans. Tom Friedman who is a favorite of the Global, you know obviously New York Time bestselling author, even he this morning was recognizing this issue as a vulnerability for Democrats.


TOM FRIEDMAN, JOUNALIST: There are several things that are true that Democrats have to wrestle with. We cannot take every immigrant in a world that is splitting between a world of order and disorder-


INGRAHAM: Wow well now is not the time to go wobbling on immigration or embrace some type of blanket amnesty. There is one point that the left and the right should be able to agree on especially given the recent media indignation. We all want children to be together, unified with their parents so let's make that happen in the country of their origin. It is immoral to allow laws on the books that incentivize people to send their children alone into a foreign country or to frankly make a dangerous trek with their parents. And until those laws change, immigrant children will continue to be separated from their parents, no matter what the President does now. And that's the Angle. President Trump was on a roll at a rally that just wrapped up in Nashville hitting on some of these issues and taking some shots at the Dems over MS13.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And of course the MS13 lover Nancy Pelosi. She loves MS13 can you imagine. Remember I said they're animals and she said "How dare you say that". (Because Ryan Chuck) wanted to have a lottery system. So these countries that are sending people in, do you think they are sending us their finest? So they put names and we pick the names and they come in and then we wonder why we have problems. We're not going to be a stupid country anymore.


INGRAHAM: I'm sorry, I love that montage. Let' discuss this further in tonight's Angle with the Chairman of the American Union Matt Schlapp. Matt sorry I am not laughing through your name, I love the last part, we are not going to be stupid anymore. Radio host, Former Aide to Senator Chuck Schumer, Chris Hahn a favorite of mine, great to see both of you. All right let's take it away Chris, obviously the President taking a strong stand on the immigration issue tonight. The Democrats I think know they have some vulnerability here on the MS13 issue, the unaccompanied migrant issues as I pointed out on the Angle. Obama was sending back people. We even have this great headline from the Huffington Post, this is from March of last year, "The hard truth about Obama's deportation priorities. From 2009 to 2013, 50% of all immigrants removed from the country had no criminal convictions. Preliminary data from
2016 when Obama was still in office suggested this trend of deporting non- criminals continued". It goes on and on and obviously had to deal with the unaccompanied minors that he claimed were going to be sent back and only 3.4% of them were ever deported.

CHUCK HAN, FORMER AID TO SENATOR CHRIS SCHUMER: I don't think he was great on immigration and I have said that before and I'll say it again. I think that he probably could have worked with Congress to have comprehensive immigration reform in his first term and he didn't and that's a failure of President Obama but that doesn't excuse what going on right now. I understand that the story about children being lost is a bit overblown, they can't get in touch, I get that part. But there is still this bit where Jeff Sessions is separating families. When those families are coming here through regular ports of entry seeking asylum and that I have a problem with. And I think most Americans who have any compassion would have a problem with that.

INGRAHAM: So do you think that criminals should be separated from their families? Because they are every minute of every day, you obviously know that.

HAN: Yeah but to criminalize people seeking asylum is where I draw the line here. This is what we have to make a distinction of.

INGRAHAM: Okay so they are all legitimate asylum seekers? I mean we have a duty, hold on I want Matt to chime in, we have duty to take care of children in a different way than we take care of adults. I mean that's from Flora's decision, the judges and so forth putting that burden on the American government, that's fine, that's what we do. But part of that is separating children from people who are trying to gain the system. Sessions was very clear on this otherwise we are going to have a massive flood of family units. We don't even know if they are actually families, half the time, family units crossing the border Matt.

MATT SCHLAPP, CHAIRMAN OF THE AMERICAN UNION: Yeah this is what happened. Obama did not follow the law. When an adult crosses our border illegally, he or she is breaking the law. The Attorney General has no choice but to follow the law. What Chris and the other Democrats are saying is that as we take the adult and put them into custody which means that they go to jail, that somehow the kids should go to jail too. That would insane and inhumane and as a country we simply so not do that. And when Kamala Harris and these other folks who have also had the job of Attorney General in their states, it would be the same thing as saying she has been separating parents from their children in California when parents commit crimes. Anybody who's had this law enforcing position, it would be the same thing. It's absurd Chris.

HAHN: You're complaining.

SCHLAPP: No I'm not. It's a crime Chris. When you commit a crime, you go to a holding facility. It's the way it is.

HAHN: Yes you are. Matt the difference here is that the Trump administration has decided to treat asylum applicants as criminals and that is what I have a problem with.

INGRAHAM: It's not just asylum applicants, no, no, no it's--

SCHLAPP: No, no, what you want to do is have people come in through regular ports of entry when Jefferson Beauregard Sessions has said he will treat as criminals.

INGRAHAM: Correct, correct, hold on Matt it's not just people seeking asylum. We are just thinking of asylum as the great caravan that showed up in San Diego. It's all people. Remember Obama and J Johnson said in those clips that I think nobody remembers, I play them all the time on my radio show. They both said, don't bring your children here. We can't process this and you are going to have to go home. Both of them said that, neither of them followed through. And all but 3.4% of the people who crossed our border illegally, not applying for asylum, crossed our border illegally for all those years, 3.4% were deported. Now that is a screwed up system Chris and the Democrats are--

HAHN: Laura what President Obama was doing by those statements was trying to discourage mass immigration of unaccompanied children to this country.

INGRAHAM: Great which is what Sessions is doing. Let's hear from, there is an illegal immigrant--

HAHN: He's ripping a baby out if his mother's arms and that is disgusting.

INGRAHAM: Finally the Democrats are worried about ripping babies away from mothers. All right let's talk about the illegal immigrant wife who interviewed on CNN today about whether she was upset about her husband being deported. Let's watch.


CINDY GARCIA, WIFE OF A DEPORTED IMMIGRANT: I am not upset at our government due to the fact that I am US citizen and that our laws come first. Our laws are just broken and need to be fixed. But I can't be mad at Trump for doing his job.



HAHN: How many immigrant women did you have to interview to get that clip? I have got to know. I have never heard it before. It's the first time I am hearing it. I'm blown away.

INGRAHAM: Usually they float along the truth at CNN, no one's watching but occasionally they actually find some that's common sense to put on there. Her point is that is that Donald Trump is actually following the law. If you're here illegally as J Johnson said, you don't have permission. We are not going to give you permission, you're not going to get it because you're violating our laws.

HAHN: I get that you know, look. Again, I believe in law and order. I believe in proper immigration. We have all failed in creating a system where we an immigration that addresses the markets that are driving people this country every day and we should work collectively to come to a solution.

INGRAHAM: All right I agree with you on that. Thank you both, fantastic segment. Let's get the perspective of Senator Mike Lee of Utah whose new book out in paperback just today is already a huge New York Times bestseller. It's on my Facebook and website, "Written out of History, the Forgotten Founders who fought big Government". Welcome Senator, as always it's great to see you. I think our founders would be shocked to see what's happened to this country. Obviously a whole different situation than our country's founding. But you heard this debate we just had, you heard the statistics. President Obama said these people are going to have to go home, then they all get to stay. They get relocated to sponsors senator and we're trying to check on them, the sponsors Senator are going off the grid because they do not want to be deported, they don't want the kids to be deported. So it's all a perverse system that we've set up.

U.S. SENATOR MIKE LEE, R—UTAH: That's exactly what's bringing these people here. That's exactly why children are being separated from their parents. Because we had a government that refused to enforce the law and a government that said we will deport you and then didn't. When that happens, you end up being a magnet for illegal immigration. That subjects all kind to children to exploitation, to abuse, to sexual assault in many cases. But make no mistake, that is the cause.

INGRAHAM: Approximately 90% of all removal orders, that's deportation orders, each year result from a failure from people to show up at their hearings. So they are ordered to be removed because they don't show up for their actual immigration hearings. That's 90% of the unaccompanied minors are not showing up at hearings. So they come here, they know they are going to be able to stay here. What is the senate and the house cooking up? I keep hearing about administration's going to come out and agree on an amnesty with an end of chain migration. Kind of sounds like the Bob Goodlatte bill but it's not quite the Goodlatte bill, what going on there?

SEN. LEE: I would love to see it be the Bob Goodlatte bill. I think Bob Goodlatte has done a remarkable job at balancing competing interests. I hope they are not coming with something like what they cooked up in 2013. Remember how they told us, hey we are coming up with a deal. It was rumored for many months, years in fact that they were working on it, and then they finally released and it was a thousand pages worth of something nobody had read. People voted for it anyway and then they twitched it when it got to a final vote and replace with a different 1,200 page bill. I fear here they might be doing the same thing and I think they should remember the consequence of that mistake.

INGRAHAM: Freedom Caucus says they don't want it. They have already come out and said we don't want an amnesty but can you get something positive. I mean if you could end this chain migration that is a huge amplifier of immigration in the country, non-merit based. That's a bigger driver of the growth in immigration is it not, illegal immigration?

LEE: Absolutely and that's one of the things that I like about the Goodlatte proposal is that it addresses that and it addresses the Docker situation in a manner that's shuts off the magnet.

INGRAHAM: I want to ask you about this other news over the last few days, when is spying, spying? Your colleague Marco Rubio said something I think interesting on ABCs This Week. I'd like you hear your reaction, let's watch


U.S. SENATOR MARCO RUBIO, R—FLORIDA: It appears that there was an investigation not of the campaign but of certain individuals who have a history that we should be suspicious of that predate the Presidential campaign of 2015/2016. The FBI who was in charge of counter intelligence investigations should look at people like that. But are not investigating the campaign, they are investigating those people who could argue--

MARTHA RADDATZ, ABC ANCHOR: So you are saying President Trump was wrong?

RUBIO: I have seen no evidence that those people were part of an investigation on the campaign.


INGRAHAM: Your reaction.

SEN. RUBIO: His final statement might be true as far as it goes. He may have seen no evidence of any spying on the Trump campaign. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. And I think it's very difficult to prove that a dog didn't bark. I don't think he's saying that the dog didn't bark, he just hasn't seen evidence of it.
INGRAHAM: We're going to play a sound bite later on by Trey Gowdy. There a lot of Republicans who seem to be working overtime, a lot of them didn't support the President, working overtime to build up Bob Mueller. The Bob Mueller team and I think that from the very beginning there have been a lot of people who have been surprised by that. Senator it's great to see you always. Congrats on the book, great, great read as always. And Andy McCarthy is here next to tell us why there is now no doubt that team Obama spied on the Trump campaign and more from the FBI agents who want to testify about how politics is destroying the Bureau. That's next.

In today's National Review Andy McCarthy says that there is absolutely no question that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign. But the New York Times is trying to deflect from that news tonight with new information leaked from the DOJ suggesting that the President wanted just sessions to un-recuse himself from the Russia probe and take control of it. Joining us now for a reaction. Former Prosecutor Andy McCarthy and along with Attorney Democratic Strategist Scott Bolen. All right Andy a lot to get to here. There are lots or people coming out, Rubio and others, and Trey Gowdy is saying this whole thing about spying is kind of ridiculous, let's watch.


REP. TREY GOWDY—R, SOUTH CAROLINA: I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to when they got the information they got and that it has nothing to do with Donald Trump. I think when the President finds out what happened he going to be not just fine he's going to be glad that we have an FBI that took seriously what they heard. He was never the target, Russian is the target.


INGRAHAM: I got a lot of texts on my phone tonight saying what's wrong with Trey Gowdy. By the way we want you to come on the show. He's never been on this show, we want him to come. Maybe now we know why he's not coming on. What's your sense there?

ANDY MCCARTHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Nothing, he's perfect. Well there's no question that they spied on the campaign.

INGRAHAM: I mean Rubio, a lot of people just say that never happened, Andy Napolitano, Judge Napolitano on Fox tonight.

MCCARHTY: No what they were saying was that they think what the FBI did was appropriate so what they are saying they had these guys who they had concerns about who had some Russia baggage and it was appropriate for the FBI to check that out. I don't think anyone in his right mind would disagree with that. The question is how you go about doing that.

INGRAHAM: Well he saying they're saying that they were looking at Russia. Russia was trying to mess with our system it didn't matter, if they were a Democrat they would have done the same thing. It happened to be Trump and he had this Carter Page on his list and that's what set them going.

MCCARTHY: If you were working with a corporation and you thought the corporation was being corrupted by three people, you would go to the CEO and say, "I think we have got a problem here, we need your cooperation". What they did instead was send covert operatives to pry information out.
Now it may well be that President Trump himself, or then Donald Trump was not personally the target.

INGRAHAM: So why didn't they do defensive briefing Scott Bolden. Why didn't the Obama administration, having this deep concern that they had about Russia. Why didn't they go to the head of the campaign? Then it was Paul Manafort so they're not going to go to him, but why didn't they go to President Trump or Candidate Trump?

SCOTT BOLDEN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: If I am doing an internal investigations for a company, I'll use your example, I'm not starting at the top. I'm starting at the source. And what they did with this informant is went and talked and then outreached to two or three leaders on the campaign to test not whether Trump was colluding with Russia, but whether Russia was doing outreach to the Trump campaign, how deep they may have gotten in there. And what would you expect the FBI to do, unless you put a political overlay on it, they're doing their job. The target was Russia, they were trying to protect Americans and how the GOP would criticize this institution as if it's in some type of deep state. Even in 2017 and '16--

MCCARTHY: So you would have been cool with this if it was the Obama campaign?

BOLDEN: I would have been cool with it if the FBI was protecting electives of democracy and doing their job. How dare us think otherwise.

MCCARHTY: The Bush 2008 justice department and FBI send informants into the Obama 2008 campaign without letting Obama know.

BOLDEN: It's the least intrusive means that they could pursue if they were going to go into a political campaign. But you all put a political overlay on it. You say this is politics but that's conjection. You just choose that.

INGRAHAM: Well the reason I find-- Okay Andy you wrote tis in your piece today and you talked about it's an odd thing, it was great point that you made, it was an odd thing Obama wanted to have more flexibility with Dmity Medvedev, that Clinton got the 500k speech, in Moscow that the Podesta Group, housed the Clintons, represented the Spiers bank which is Putin's favorite bank. All this stuff happened, got Uranuim 1, all this stuff happened but they are worried that Trump is going to be too close to Russia? That's just an odd thing, I hadn't thought of it in that way before I read your piece.

MCCARTHY: Laura up until 11 o'clock on November eighth, Carter Page was a Conventional Democrat. I personally find his reliefs about Russia to be ridiculous to offensive. But his belief is appeasing Putin is the best way to better relations.

INGRAHAM: I think I'm not sure, I don't know what he really believes. I think he thinks that just like we have a relationship with Communist China that has 17 times the economy of Russia, we should have a relationship with Russia. That's what I think he means. I don't know. It's not about Carter Page at this point.

BOLDEN: Carter can be whatever you say want to say him to be and the Clintons can be whatever you want them to say them to be, but what does that have to do with putting an informant in place to investigate Russia. This isn't about the Clintons, this is about by October of 2016 we knew that there was substantial contacts between people in the Trump campaign and Russia. Way too much for a political campaign. We know that the former CIA Director said as much right?

INGRAHAM: There's just as many contacts with the Clinton campaign with Hillary Clinton and all of her friends are you kidding me? Barack Obama's, the committee on foreign investment given that have Uranium 1 all over Russia come on.

BOLDEN: We're not talking about Barack Obama. You're running out of time--

MCCARTHY: If you keep talking we're going to be out of time.

INGRAHAM: What's the deal tonight with this, we got to get to the bottom of the FBI informant issue but what's the deal tonight Andy with the New York Times come out saying this Russia thing is collapsing, the informant thing. People just don't like the feel of that. But on the issue of Trump wanting sessions to un-recuse himself. That doesn't surprise me at all. I don't find that surprising that if he told his White House Council is ridiculous. He talked to Kislyak for five minutes in his office. Why the heck is he recusing him? He didn't have anything to do with Russia. Maybe he told McGahn, if the story is true, McGahn talked to Sessions' people and it didn't go anywhere. But this was leaked it tonight, another leak out of the DOJ. Your reaction?

ANDREW MCCARTHY, NATIONAL REVIEW: Turning the page. But at the time this happened I thought that Sessions' recusal was too broad and an overreaction because it didn't comply with the regulations of the Justice Department, which are the same ones that sort of apply to Mueller as well.
And I know everybody wants to look at this as an investigation. President Trump has to look at this as this affects my ability to govern. That's why the special counsel is such a terrible institution and it's been a terrible institution to every president of either party that it's ever been --

INGRAHAM: I think there's a lot to do -- everyone says Russia is the bogeyman. I think every time someone says Russia, I say China. China is a much bigger threat to the United States. I think there are times where we could triangulate China with Russia, and now we are not doing that. I think we are not doing a lot of things that we could do to put pressure on China to be more helpful to us. I want to ask about the FBI thing. We've got to get to this issue. FBI agents, "Daily Caller" report today that they are afraid that they are not going to get whistleblower protection inside the DOJ, inside the FBI itself. Are you concerned about that? Apparently many of them are worried about the politicization of the FBI.

SCOTT BOLDEN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Don't know. But Donald Trump and his people are driving that narrative like conservative --

INGRAHAM: They're witnessing it. They're on the inside. They are not about Trump. They are experiencing it.

BOLDEN: They certainly will have whistleblower protection, and if they don't they ought to hire up and get lawyered up like everybody else in Washington to do that. They should not be concerned about that. And listen, if the Congress wants to hear from them, they can simply invite them or issue a subpoena for them, and they will be heard.

INGRAHAM: Guys, fantastic as always, both of you. And by the way, ABC is showing zero tolerance after Roseanne crosses the line. Alveda King, Howie Kurtz join us to discuss whether this is the best way to deal with racially-tinged remarks by a celebrity.


INGRAHAM: ABC canceled the hit sitcom "Roseanne" today after a series of bizarre tweets from the show's star early this morning. They included a racist remark about Valerie Jarrett, top advisor to former president Obama. Roseanne Barr apologized profusely after she was severely criticized, but that wasn't enough to save her show. Jarrett responded on MSNBC tonight.


VALERIE JARRETT, FORMER OBAMA SENIOR ADVISER: I think we have to turn it into a teaching moment. I'm fine. I'm worried about all the people out there who don't have a circle of friends and followers will come right to their defense. The person who was walking down the street minding their own business and they see somebody cling to their purse or want to cross the street.


INGRAHAM: For reaction we are joined by Alveda King, former member of the Georgia House of Representatives and the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, and Howie Kurtz, the host of "Media Buzz" here on FOX News. I went to start with you, Alveda, here because this was a breakneck speed cancellation of the most popular network television show of the season. A huge smash hit. She apologized, but the comments in the eyes of a lot of people were pretty inexcusable to say the least.

ALVEDA KING, NIECE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.: This actually, Laura, is a teachable moment. I'm 67 years old and I do use social media, but I try to stop and may be pray or think or consider what I'm about to tweet or put on Facebook or Instagram or LinkedIn or any of those, because people will hear that or see that or read that. And as you say, Roseanne's remarks move like lightning. They just move everywhere, and then ABC responded and I believe appropriately saying, hey, we just have to stop the show. We have to stop this. There has to be a message that this is not what we are about. So I believe that it is a teachable moment, unfortunately for Roseanne herself.

INGRAHAM: But I have a question about this, though. Howard, there seems to be no possibility of redemption in certain cases. You have redemption for Joy Behar. Let's remind everyone what she said not so long ago.


JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, "THE VIEW": It's one thing to talk to Jesus. It's another thing when Jesus talks to you.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's different!

BEHAR: That's called mental illness if I'm not correct.


INGRAHAM: And then Andrea Mitchell posed this very odd question today to Joy Reid. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What you have to do on social media to get fired from a top-rated show on an American broadcast network?


INGRAHAM: Given Joy Reid's past comments about homosexuals and so forth, it was kind of ironic.

HOWARD KURTZ, FOX NEWS MEDIA ANALYST: Right. A lot of commentators and comedians have survived these offensive comments when they have apologized. Difference here I think is that Roseanne Barr touched the third rail of race and it's very hard to come back. This was a spectacular self- immolation by Roseanne who woke up this morning with the most popular show, within nanoseconds it seemed ABC pulling the plug, which is going to cost ABC a lot of money, by the way. Roseanne should have been on top of the world. Instead she continued to spew anger on Twitter.

INGRAHAM: Alveda, you see the double standard, however. Christians are mocked and ridiculed, entire classes of people ridiculed. Yet someone issues an apology, maybe makes a phone call, and career preserved.

KING: In America right now the issue of race has reached fever pitch boiling point. We've not gotten the message yet from my uncle, for example, Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., we must learn to live together as brothers, and I'll add as sisters, or perish together as fools. We are not understanding that we are one race, one human race. And so we are still in these race wars and battling. And so it's just an absolute terrible thing to take a racial slur and kind of throw it out there like that, and I understand that. However, I believe that we all as human beings, red-blooded human beings, our skin color really doesn't define us. It's a character that does. We are not color-blind. We can see ethnicity and we should, because if we ignore or say we can't see skin color then we can't see the oppression and the wrongdoing that happens even down to the little babies in the womb all the way to old people. And so fighting over skin color really is the problem, but that's where we are right now and that's why I say it's a teachable moment. The racism really does have to go, and we really have to begin to regard and respect each other as human beings.

INGRAHAM: Hear, hear. Howie, did ABC not know, though, what they were getting with Roseanne? Ben Sherwood's comments in "The New York Times" is that you can't control Roseanne. Let's get Howie in on this. Many who have tried have failed. She's the one and only.

KURTZ: ABC knew exactly what it was getting with Roseanne. She has been spreading conspiracy theories from 9/11 to Nazis for many years. It was a gamble here that maybe she would zip her left, and she did create a funny show, a pro-Trump show that touched a lot of people in the country. But ABC cannot claim to be blindsided. And there's one more point here, and that is I was just waiting, I was counting down CNN's Don Lemon. Roseanne at President Trump.

INGRAHAM: They are putting it altogether.

KURTZ: MSNBC bringing it in, even Valerie Jarrett was taking the high road and she was sort of blindsided here, but she took a swipe at the president. Although he liked Roseanne and he called Roseanne after the success, this has nothing to do with Donald Trump. The mainstream media has to turn every negative controversy into a Trump story.

INGRAHAM: Alveda, what do you think? Hold on, Alveda, what do you think about tying this to Donald Trump, which is what people are doing in tweets. The guy from "Scandal," actor Joshua Malina, said ABC is greater than GOP, others tweeting similar things, Donald Trump created this atmosphere for someone like a Roseanne to tweet that thinking she probably could get away with it.

KING: I believe Roseanne perhaps, as I say, teachable moment, just thought she could say or do whatever she thought.

INGRAHAM: But did Donald Trump create the atmosphere?

KING: No, no, no. No, he did not. No, he did not. I voted for Donald Trump. I'm not a racist.

INGRAHAM: I think that's obvious.

KING: We are not racist. So to tie this one particular act from one particular person and say that it's Donald Trump's, President Donald Trump's fault, that's just not true. And I think that we should not do that.

INGRAHAM: Howie, will someone else pick up the show?

KURTZ: I think it's very hard to come back from this kind of radioactive controversy.

INGRAHAM: So no one will pick up the show, the most popular show of the year, no one will pick it up? Any of the cast and characters? They are all out of jobs.

KURTZ: Some of the people were saying they were leaving. But yes, that's the sad thing here, that with this self-destructive act, all the writers and tape editors and people who would not be so easy for them to find jobs, they all get --

INGRAHAM: It's a shame. It's a shame, because I saw one minute of it.
But people really liked the show. But it's a television show. Life will go on. Thank you so much, both of you. In another issue that raises questions about race relations up next, Starbucks just made their employees spend the afternoon trying to figure out if they secretly harbor racist sentiments. No word whether Roseanne was actually at one of these sessions. I have the briefing book, I kid you
not, when we come back.


INGRAHAM: All 8,000 company-owned Starbucks closed for three hours today so that 175,000 employees could receive unconscious bias training. The company recently announced that it stores would be open to all, even those who do not make a purchase. The new policy was in response to all the bad publicity after a Philadelphia store manager called police last month to arrest two African-American men who did not make a purchase. Instead of unconscious bias training, would Starbucks employees have been better served, as some critics claim, by learning how to maybe run homeless shelters? Let's discuss this with FOX News contributor Gianno Caldwell and Democratic strategist Michael Starr Hopkins.

OK, guys, I actually have the booklet. Do you see it? And its tabbed because it's actually fun. It's tabbed. One of my sources is a Starbucks employee, and he actually said that people at his Starbucks were -- African-Americans, Hispanics, and himself, and they were laughing through this book. Look, I think people make a lot of money and racial bias training in all these diversity training, make a lot of money, but some of it has gone too far. I want to share some of it with you. Gianno, you can react to this. Here we go. Ground rules. What makes me me and you you? That's the first part of the book. It says similarities bond us together, yet being able to perceive what makes us unique and different from each other gives us the gift of seeing each other as full human beings. So you have to listen respectfully, speak your truth, honor other people's truths. We are kind of behind the times on the full screens, but you get the point. There are all sorts of questions about noticing your racial identity. Gianno?

GIANNO CALDWELL, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: What's interesting, TMZ has reported that some employees from this session felt that it didn't bridge the gap. They felt that some of the questions didn't make a lot of sense and some people were uncomfortable, that's black, white employees alike. To me, and to be clear, there is a need for trainings. We have to have diversity inclusion training, so that's good. But this antibias training by Starbucks is meant to prevent bias from one group, and that Starbucks. They want to make sure that they can continue to protect that bottom line and have people come in and patronize their stores. We saw the very beginning after the arrests that there were protests, there were people saying I will never go into a Starbucks again. Starbucks heard this and decided to put on what some employees have called a show, because if they were really serious about this particular training they would have done it way before this incident occurred as a number of companies have already done. I believe United Airlines was one of them, and a number of other companies have put on trainings similar to this.

INGRAHAM: It seems like, Michael, that people should just be respectful to one another. No matter who you are, where you come from, don't call the cops on people if you can diffuse the situation, have clear policies. The poor employees, I feel sorry for them now. If other employees, customers complaining because you can't get into the bathroom. And then you've got people sitting there all day with their bags. It seems like no one is happy, even some of the employees who were taking part of this training, even if it was well-intentioned. Your reaction?

MICHAEL STARR HOPKINS, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Everyone should respect each other. Unfortunately that's not the world we live in. And the issues with race that we're dealing with now, it's not a situation that was created overnight. So Starbucks isn't going to solve that with a three-hour training. However, I do have to say I appreciate that Howard Schultz was willing to shut the store for a couple of hours and take a swipe at at least addressing the issues. I think far too often in this country we are afraid to talk about race and afraid to deal with race. And this was his attempt at what everybody else has been saying on this show is a teachable moment.

INGRAHAM: Let's go through some of the recollections and reflections in the training manual that I have tabbed like I'm back in law school. Recall when you first experienced to your racial identity, you noticed your racial identity, you felt your accent impacted people's perception of your intelligence or competence. My friends in the Bronx don't like that one. You altered your communication style, dialed it up or dialed it down -- we have full screen on this to put up -- to avoid playing into -- had a senior role model in your organization with a similar racial identity as your own, or when you went to work with your natural hair without comments or questions from others. A friend said that particular last one seemed like it was kind of almost unfairly directed toward one minority group, and then that started a conversation apparently at that particular Starbucks. Gianno.

CALDWELL: I was talking about this on my Instagram, and I encourage everybody to join me there.

HOPKINS: Nice plug.

CALDWELL: These comments, and especially -- look, I'm going to plug. I self-promote all day, certainly.


CALDWELL: But from what you've just read, Laura, I can tell why people were certainly uncomfortable with this conversation. There are some legitimate issues to be discussed, but putting certain things out there, there is the potential for people to be biased against you if you feel a particular way about how you deal with your colleagues, whether they be senior or not. Those are conversations that necessarily should be had in a group setting of three or four people and reviewed by other folks. So when it comes to this training, you've got to make sure that you are not providing more opportunities for people to be biased against each other.

INGRAHAM: Michael, I think the problem is people are probably afraid even in this setting to say anything. I think everyone is afraid to say almost everything these days about -- everything is misconstrued. They are afraid to complement someone, afraid to hug someone goodbye at a going away party. Everyone is afraid. I sense this everywhere. No one wants to have an honest conversation. Maybe this will help, I don't know.

HOPKINS: And I think that's true, but I think that's why we all have to choose our worlds carefully. I think no question in these bias trainings is going to be perfect, but I think what it does acknowledge is that we all, every ethnicity, every group has something that they are insecure about, something that makes them unique. And so when we point that out that we all can at least get to the same starting point and be able to have what is supposed to be an uncomfortable conversation.

INGRAHAM: Or maybe just sometimes have a great cup of coffee.

HOPKINS: I do love some coffee.


INGRAHAM: All right, guys, thanks so much. And we're going to tell you why the drug cartels, believe it or not, just love states where pot has been legalized. You're going to see it for yourself.


INGRAHAM: I thought legalizing marijuana was supposed to take organized crime out of the pot business. News flash, it is not. A startling report from NBC News this morning reveals that foreign cartels embrace homegrown marijuana in pot-legal states. The reason is simple. According to Colorado Sheriff Bill Elder they have found that it is easier to grow and process marijuana in Colorado, then ship it throughout the United States, than it is to bring it in from, let's say Mexico or Cuba. Federal officials say the Chinese, Cuban, and Mexican drug rings have purchased or rented hundreds of homes in California, Colorado, and Washington where lax pot laws provide cover for cartel. So is it time to admit that legalized pot, the whole experiment, has failed? Here to debate the question is Mason Tvert, a spokesman at the Marijuana Policy Project joining us from Denver. Mason, it's great to see you. This is pretty wild. We have Chinese, Cuban, and Mexican mafia/cartel folks renting properties in Colorado and California to get their products out. How is this good for the states were pot was legalized?

MASON TVERT, MARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT: This is actually something that's been going on in every state around the country for decades, and now in states like Colorado and Washington and California, what we are seeing is that the demand amongst the population in those states is being met by a new legal market where the product is being controlled, it's being grown and sold by licensed businesses. And because there is still that demand in these other states that are not controlling marijuana, people are still producing it and then sending it out there.

INGRAHAM: Come on. Come on. Mason, Mason, Mason, they are able to undercut the expense -- I've browsed in some of those stores in Colorado. Infused -- lavender-infused, edibles. This stuff is expensive. The cartels can come in, rent these places, undercut the legal pot, and sometimes it's a lot more potent, believe it or not, and a lot more dangerous. They flood the market with that, undercutting legal pot, not causing it to be a problem.

TVERT: I don't know where you are shopping for marijuana, but if --

INGRAHAM: I'm not, thank you very much. But I was seeing what all the stoners were buying.

TVERT: But you're talking about the prices, and the fact is you can buy marijuana for the same or lower of a rate than you could on the street. No one is going out and calling around to illegal drug dealers or trying to meet on the street corner. Imagine if alcohol was being sold illegally.

INGRAHAM: I get your point. Let's hear what Colorado law enforcement, who are actually on the front lines here, what they are saying about this wonderful legalization experiment.


LT. BILL HUFFOR, EL PASO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: The vast majority of people that we come across on these roads are Cuban nationals. They are organized drug trafficking organizations who come to Colorado to grow their marijuana.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Colombia is to cocaine as Colorado is to marijuana.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think that the state is turning a blind eye to that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think they are absolutely turning a blind eye.

SHERIFF BILL ELDER, EL PASO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE: This experiment has failed, and I urge any state that is thinking about legalizing marijuana to learn by our mistakes. Don't let this happen in other states.


INGRAHAM: Final thought from you very quickly?

TVERT: There's a reason why Mexican cartels and Chinese drug rings are not renting out suburbs houses to distill whiskey and bootleg it around the country. It's because it's a regulated product. That's why Donald Trump supports letting states establish their own policies and is working with Congress to pass a law to do that.

INGRAHAM: We'll have you back. I think it's a disaster, but we'll see. Our kids I think are going to be on the front lines of having to deal with this years from now. We will be right back.


INGRAHAM: That's all the time we have tonight.

<Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>