Trump: Cohen is 'weak person' trying to get reduced sentence

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

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham and this is "The Ingraham Angle" from Washington tonight.

And we have a Fox News Alert. The president is speaking out about his former lawyer, Michael Cohen.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: He was convicted with a fairly long term sentence on things totally unrelated to the Trump organization, having to do with mortgages and having to do with cheating the IRS perhaps, a lot of different things.

He was given a fairly long jail sentence and he's a weak person and by being weak, unlike other people that you watch -- he's a weak person and what he's trying to do is get a reduced sentence, so he's lying about a project that everybody knew about.


INGRAHAM: I hate the fact that he has to shout over that Marine One, the big boy (ph) up there, he's screaming over that. Now, President Trump landed in Buenos Aires just moments ago ahead of the G20 summit. We're going to have a live report on the ground with the latest reaction from the White House on all of the Michael Cohen news.

And also ahead, the liberal media slamming the president over supposed anti-Semitic ties, but what about the real anti-Israel hate coming from the left. You will not want to miss my Angle later on tonight. Plus, an admitted MS-13 gang member caught trying to sneak into the country with the caravan. Oh, what a shock. And new details about the dangerous diseases that migrants are bringing with them. The experts will weigh in.

But first, the top story tonight, a liar caught lying. Today President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, pled guilty to special counsel Bob Mueller's team admitting he lied to congress about his involvement in efforts to build the Trump Tower complex in Moscow.

Now, he claims his original story to the Senate Intel Committee that those efforts ended in January 2016 wasn't true and that they extended into even June of 2016. Now, given Cohen's history of mistruths, let's put it that way, the question is was he lying to Congress then or is he lying to Mueller now. But some have already made up their minds.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But I know that, no, this is not the first guilty plea for Cohen but this is the difference. This is the first plea deal with Mueller's prosecutors.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've been asking a lot of questions about whether or not the special counsel would believe Michael Cohen, whether or not he would have any credibility with the special counsel. Well, clearly now we know he does.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I actually believe that Michael Cohen only lied in the service of Donald Trump. I think that otherwise in his life, he was a fairly up front guy, pretty reputable.


INGRAHAM: Now, putting Cohen's credibility aside, there is the other issue. What transgressions have been proven to be committed by the president at all? What does the White House think of all this? For answers, we go live to Fox News chief White House correspondent John Roberts. John, did you just fly in as well? Did you just land because you look so fresh like as a daisy. Look at you. You look great.

JOHN ROBERTS, FOX NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, we landed about 12 hours ago after an overnight flight, so whatever sleep we got on the plane is whatever sleep we've had but, you know, we are in Buenos Aires. We are in Argentina and everybody is feeling good here. I tell you, one thing that we do know about this whole Michael Cohen plea deal is that it did not catch the president by surprise, Laura.

Unlike the rest of the world that was taken by surprise, because the president was informed of the pending guilty plea last night by one of his outside counsel, Jane Raskin. She was told about it by the Department of Justice last evening. She immediately telephoned the president to talk about it. She also told Rudy Giuliani who talked with the president last night and Giuliani talked with him again this morning.

So by the time that the president came out of the White House to go to that noisy helicopter that you alluded to this morning, he had plenty of time to digest the Cohen guilty plea and prepared to answer questions about the Trump Tower project in Moscow. Listen here.


TRUMP: We decided -- I decided ultimately not to do it. There would've been nothing wrong if I did do it. If I did do it, there would've been nothing wrong. That was my business. So he is lying very simply to get a reduced sentence, OK.


ROBERTS: We also found out today that the president did answer a question that Robert Mueller had about the Trump Tower Moscow project, what the president knew about it, who else he talked to about it. Fox News has told that the president did not put a date on when communications regarding the project ended for the simple reason that Mueller didn't ask him about it.

The president's outside legal team said that there is no evidence of wrongdoing by the president. They also took aim at the special counsel for the timing of the announcement of the Cohen guilty plea. Rudy Giuliani saying, "Documents that the special counsel's office is using to show that Cohen lied to Congress were voluntarily disclosed by the Trump organization. It is hardly coincidental that the special counsel once again files a charge just as the president is leaving for a meeting with world leaders."

You might remember that he indicted 11 Russians on conspiracy to try to throw the election just before the president went to meet with Putin, who you see there, in Helsinki. "BuzzFeed" tonight also has an interesting story that the plan with Trump Tower was for Putin to be given a $50 million penthouse in Trump Tower Moscow as an enticement to sell the other apartments to Russian oligarchs. Kind of his idea of come live where Vladimir Putin lives.

I've contacted a source close to the president who have spoken with him about that article. The president thinks that the story is nuts, that it would be a stupid idea to sell or to give rather a $50 million penthouse apartment to Vladimir Putin and that the president never heard about that idea.

Also, Laura, a little secret here. You alluded to the helicopter. That is the sound of the auxiliary power unit which the White House could ask the military to turn off but it also serves as a convenient foil for the president who says I can't hear the question. There is a noisy helicopter behind me.

INGRAHAM: I remember when President Reagan, we were on the lawn watching him leave ans he would just go -- and he would wave. It was always the wave, wave off. And it was that twinkle in his eye.

ROBERTS: That was usually when Sam Donaldson asked a question and then Reagan would go "What?"

INGRAHAM: Oh, yes, I can't hear you. Waters running. Blades moving. John, do you think at this point, much of what we are hearing from the Mueller team is all that surprising to the Trump legal team? I mean, people forget they have been dealing with these issues for months and months and months. They have been going around and round with Mueller on all these questions.

ROBERTS: And don't forget that the president's legal team had a joint defense agreement with Michael Cohen's team before he entered the first guilty plea deal and that was canceled. They also have a joint defense agreement with Paul Manafort, still is in existence to this day.

So, they are getting information about what Mueller has been asking Michael Cohen and what they've been asking Manafort. They're also getting some information about what Mueller has been asking Jerome Corsi. So, I don't think any of this is surprising to them.

But I think that perhaps the second guilty plea might have been a little bit of a surprise yesterday when it was relayed to Jane Raskin by the Department of Justice, but the president was fully prepared for it this morning when it came out. A lot of people thought that he was blindsided. He was not in fact.

INGRAHAM: He doesn't seemed fazed at all about it this morning. John, thanks so much. Great reporting tonight. Get some sleep.

Now, what shouldn't be lost on you, in any of the viewers, is that the special counsel's original mandate was to find out what Russia did to influence the 2016 election. Now today, there still been no evidence presented by the Mueller team that any criminal collusion occurred between Trump folks and the Russian government.

So perhaps the (inaudible) in class can breathe a little bit before we make any grand declarations about where this investigation is actually going. But for more insight, we put together a super panel of experts who are going to provide you with all the answers you need to know.

Sol Wisenberg, former deputy independent counsel during Whitewater investigation, James Trusty, former DOJ attorney in the criminal division, and here with me in studio, House intel member Michael Turner and John Solomon, investigative reporter and opinion contributor of "The Hill."

Let's start with you congressman. Where we are right now is seems like leaps and bounds beyond what we were led to believe when this entire thing kicked off, when Jeff Sessions recuses, Rosenstein steps in. It seems to have a real meltdown, decides got to appoint a special counsel.

And here we all this time later with like a 72-year-old guy, you know, looks like he might, you know, get charged with something or Roger Stone kicking around and now we have this deal with Michael Cohen.

REP. MICHAEL TURNER, R-OHIO: Well, you have an excellent point about what the original mandate was of the special counsel. And when the news first broke, it looked like it was, you know, an exciting story about Michael Cohen and being, you know, coming forward with a guilty plea about lying.

But upon further investigation, what is so notable here is that in the written statement that he actually gave to the Senate, he made a statement that he was not involved in collusion with Russia, the Russian federation, or involved in any way in any hacking. That is not a statement that he pled guilty today or that the Mueller team or special counsel alleged was false.

So, here you have a statement that actually relates to the mandate of the investigation and that's not the subject matter of an alleged lie at this point. And you have that the investigation and the marching in of the guilty plea over a failed real estate deal. Not the same thing. Not what we're looking for. If the special counsel had information that this was a false statement from Michael Cohen, you would've expected that would've been part of the guilty plea today.

INGRAHAM: Sol, the false statement, 187 USC 1001. It's a classic go to charge in these types of cases. You don't lie. You don't tell lies to a prosecutor. You get in big trouble when you do. But it's also a tool, the cynics would say. People don't want to be in jail for the next 60 years and you get your sentence reduced if you, well, may be, I guess I wasn't completely forthcoming on that. How do you see this Michael Cohen announcement today fitting into this overall narrative?

SOL WISENBERG, FORMER DEPUTY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: If you actually look, Laura, at the plea agreement and at the criminal information, there is absolutely nothing that implicates President Trump in a crime. There's absolutely nothing in there that says where Michael Cohen says President Trump talked with me about the lie I was going to tell to Congress. We conspired. We talked about it. There is nothing whatsoever.

So, if we really confine ourselves to the actual law and not a bunch of babble that you here all day on television, let's just look at the actual documents. It doesn't implicate President Trump in any way, which brings up the question of why he was so angry if he had been told about this and why he came out and said Cohen is nothing but a liar. He's lying.

All Cohen said is that I lied to Congress. He didn't say that President Trump helped me lie. So, there could be all kinds of things that Mueller is keeping quiet from us that we don't know about that Cohen has told him. That's possible. But that's the realm of speculation. Let's talk about reality, and reality is this is a nothing burger.

INGRAHAM: But John Solomon, to listen to congressman on the other side of the aisle today, Eric Swalwell, one of our favorites. I want you to listen to what he said about where this is all going.



REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF.: I believe they are obstructing the collusion and again this is where Donald Trump will say, oh, they are just trying, you know, to bring him up on lies. Well, only guilty people lie and what they are trying to protect is that the president, his family, his businesses and his campaign sought dirt on Hillary Clinton from the Russians and sought to do a big deal in Moscow at the time of the campaign. And when they were confronted about it, they lied. Where I come from, that's collusion.



SOLOMON: I don't know where he comes from but it isn't collusion. Let's take a look at what happened today. The president's attorney admitted to lying about a business deal that would've been perfectly legal, may be stupid, but perfectly legal if it went through. He doesn't implicate the president at all.

And I think more importantly, people are missing the significance of why this happened today. Bob Mueller waited in wait to see what the president would say in his answers to see if he could catch him in a perjury trap. He didn't. The president answered in a way that was consistent with the evidence, so he's cleaning up now and finishing up this Cohen investigation. That's what went on today.

INGRAHAM: Now, James, how would you as a prosecutor in the criminal division treat a witness like Cohen who's obviously -- he was trading on the president's name. He strikes me as somebody who loved being close to power and he knew Trump, obviously. Helped him, as the president said, a big favor years ago. How do you treat him given his admitted slipperiness with the truth and facts?

JAMES TRUSTY, FORMER DOJ ATTORNEY: Right. Well, look, you have to go into it knowing that you're kind of engaging in snake wrestling. And as much as a private attorney as the defense attorney, I would relish the idea of cross-examining this guy. I mean, he's a lawyer who betrayed his client, who said he would take a bullet, didn't mean that, has now admitted criminal culpability that is his own culpability and now he's trying to get a break from the judge.

So, there are a million very stock great things you can cross-examine on but I have to say some of the prosecutors on that team know their way around the courthouse. You know, Greg Andres would put mobsters on the stand who had a lot of baggage too.

So they are not blind to the fact that this guy is kind of a horrible character are not instantly likable by many outside his family. So they're going to be looking to corroborate. They're going to be saying you have to corroborate.

INGRAHAM: And James they have -- he has tapes, right? We have forgotten that he has tape recordings. He has tape recordings apparently.

TRUSTY: Well, that's the thing. If he has either documents -- but if he has e-mails, documents, some powerful corroboration, you might actually be able to overcome all of the initial dislike and more importantly disbelief of Michael Cohen that you are going to have as a juror.

INGRAHAM: it won't play. But even they have Jake Tapper saying -- where's the collusion with the president? And this is all interesting, But again, we don't know completely what they have. We don't know yet. Congressman, I want to talk for a moment about what happened today with Comey because he doesn't like this idea of coming in and talking to you guys in closed session.

He sent a tweet, "Today my legal team filed court papers to try to get transparency from House Republicans. Let the American people watch." So then he can get that -- what did he say, nauseated. He was nauseous, it makes me nauseous. So that made me nauseous to see, but of course, you guys are the ones who have a problem with transparency, that's rich coming from Comey.

TURNER: Right. This is not about transparency. It's about stall tactics and stall tactics only. During that lure of the incoming Democratic chairman of the committee said, according to Bloomberg today, that this is about trying to pump (ph) this over so that perhaps the subpoena can be averted.

The reality is that Comey is free in the public to say whatever statement that he wants to make and he doesn't get to choose under which forum congress calls him forward.

INGRAHAM: So, what's going to happen next? I mean they are --

TURNER: Hopefully the court process will work quickly and --

INGRAHAM: Fast? You guys got what, five minutes left in the majority.

TURNER: -- that there will not be, you know, an impediment to this (inaudible) subpoena, from Congress should be a subpoena that stands and he should come forward and testify.

INGRAHAM: Sol, incoming House Judiciary chair Nadler said the following today, "Anyone who still believes that this is a witch hunt must now face the reality that the investigation appears to be closing in on the president." Sol, given what we know now, what about that statement?

WEISENBERG: Well, number one, I never thought it was a witch hunt, but there is certainly nothing again in the official papers that have been released that we look at which is how Mueller explains things to people, that would indicate that they are closing in on the president. I would like to make another point about Cohen.

Cohen's case has already been -- his Mueller case has already been reassigned to the New York judge who handled his original case. Now, the sentencing range in this case in New York was with the southern district, was 46 to 57 months. It could be as high as 63 months. By consolidating these for sentencing, he has the potential to actually get probation because Mueller is giving him a 5K1 for cooperation which is a very significant thing.

And so, they are consolidated for sentencing. That judge in the New York case in the southern district case will sentence together. There's a whole grouping concept in the guidelines, and at the end of the day can say, wow, your cooperation with Mueller was so great, you are going all the way down to probation. Now, his attorneys could argue for that anyway but when you have a 5K1 from the government, it's a huge thing. So, keep your eye on that.

INGRAHAM: Well, we are working on booking him so thank you. We prefer to interview him in studio and not in jail, so thank you so much. All right guys, thanks so much. The left is quick to tag the president as being now anti-Semitic. It's the most ridiculous thing ever, of course no evidence at all.

But they have blinders on when it comes to some of the most vile elements of anti-Israel hate in their own party. My ANGLE and reaction from Michelle Malkin, next.


INGRAHAM: Anti-Semitism hiding in plain sight. That's the focus of tonight's Angle.

During the next several months, we at "The Ingraham Angle" are going to devote a significant amount of time unpacking the most important political and cultural stories of the day. Our aim is that these investigations help you better understand the people and facts behind critical challenges facing you, your family, and our country.

Tonight we examine the pernicious influence in American politics of this woman, Linda Sarsour. A woman described by The New York Times very affectionately as a home girl in a hijab.


LINDA SARSOUR, ACTIVIST: I am a Palestinian Muslim-American activist born and raised in Brooklyn and every Islamophobe's worst nightmare.


INGRAHAM: Sponsored by Mercedes. Well, she is a nightmare, period. A relentless self-promoter, she represents so much that is hideous. Now, check out this attack on the Trump administration where Sarsour actually invokes jihad.


SARSOUR: I hope that we, when we stand up to those who oppress our communities that Allah accepts from us, that is a form of jihad that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or in the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America were you have fascist and white supremacists and islamaphobes reigning in the White House.


INGRAHAM: Reigning in the White House. She is also extremely subtle. Now, as a co-founder of the anti-Trump Woman's March in January 2017, Sarsour became a near constant fixture in the media, spewing her hate and her lies everywhere. Now, wherever there is a camera, you will find her trying to hog it as she did in the Kavanaugh confirmation fight even.


SARSOUR: We are!


SARSOUR: About to!




SARSOUR: We need!


SARSOUR: Everyone!


SARSOUR: To pay!


SARSOUR: Attention!



INGRAHAM: And a bad chanter. She was arrested during the hearings themselves but so were a lot of other leftist agitators. She wore it as a badge of honor. Yet Sarsour who claims to stand for all these oppressed people all over the world and has even done some fund-raising for victims of anti-Jewish violence is really an anti-Semite herself hiding in plain sight.

Sarsour and two other founders of the Women's March, Tamika Malory and Carmen Perez, have all appeared at events sponsored by the (inaudible) anti-Semitic organization the Nation of Islam, including by the way, one where Farrakhan himself said the Jews are my enemies. Now, any association whatsoever with Farrakhan is the ultimate tell regarding someone's true motives.


LOUIS FARRAKHAN, LEADER, NATION OF ISLAM: When they talk about Farrakhan, call me a hater, you know what they do, call me an anti-Semite. Stop it. I am anti-termite.

The Jews don't like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a great name. Hitler was a very great man.

And Farrakhan, by God's grace, has pulled the cover off of that satanic Jew.


INGRAHAM: Of course, a perfunctory condemnation of anti-Semitism or other forms of bigotry was issued by Sarsour and her cohorts, but they have yet to condemn Farrakhan himself. Last spring, the Women's March Organization cited the difficult and often painful work of intersectional movement building, hence why they had to work with him.

And instead of a strong unequivocal condemnation of the Nation of Islam founder, they wrote "Minister Farrakhan's statements about the Jewish, queer, and trans people are not aligned with the Women's March Unity Principles." Oh, that's tough. But now, to quote another well-known anti- Semite, the chickens are coming home to roost.

The main founder of a Woman's March, Teresa Shook, wants the Sarsour, Mallory, Perez trio to step aside. Even that nasty Trump hater, Alyssa Milano, was less than charmed. She is threatening to boycott the next Women's March coming up in just a couple months unless Sarsour and company leave the organization.

My question is, what took them so long? Sarsour of course feigned an apology but she is not backing down from her harsh attacks on Jews. Just a few weeks ago on Facebook, she slammed folks who masquerade as progressives but always choose their allegiance to Israel over their commitment to democracy and free speech.

Now the phrase "allegiance to Israel" is a favorite among the anti-Semitic set. To his credit, CNN's Jake Tapper was all over Sarsour last spring after the Women's March wished a cop killer fugitive who fled to Cuba, a happy birthday. The venomous Sarsour responded with this. "Jake Tapper joins the ranks of the alt-right to target me online."

Aside from Tapper's twitter takedown, media outlets including CNN were responsible for elevating Sarsour to cult like status. So desperate to smash all things Trump, the left was only too happy to offer this incendiary figure a platform to organize.


SARSOUR: We're coming back out and we're announcing today to the American people to join us around the country and in Washington, D.C., on January 19, 2019. We are outraged that we are talking about and putting victims on trial and talking about Dr. Ford in the way in which she was treated at that hearing.


INGRAHAM: Unreal. But today, some good news. CNN dumped contributor Marc Lamont Hill after he delivered a speech at the U.N. that seem to call for wiping the state of Israel off the map. Lamont Hill's association with the network was especially ironic given the network's new series at CNN about the rise of anti-Semitism here and abroad.

Sarsour owes her public profile to a press that has gone out of its way to cover for her rather than actually cover her true motives and allegiances. They made excuses for Sarsour because she's a woman, she's Muslim, and she's a harsh critic of the president. Now they are paying the price with further erosion in their own credibility. And that's The ANGLE.

Joining me now with reaction, conservative commentator Michelle Malkin and Code Pink's national co-director Ariel Gold. All right, Ariel, now you say that Linda Sarsour is an ally of the Jewish people. Then why would Jewish- Americans like Jonathan Greenblatt, he's the head of the Anti-Defamation League, have a real problem with their statements?

ARIEL GOLD, COD-DIRECTOR, CODE PINK: It is so disgraceful that Jonathan Greenblatt is spending his time going after people who are our real allies come. After the attack on Jewish cemeteries, Linda Sarsour raised over $100,000. After the Pittsburgh massacre, she raised over $200,000. Why are people trying to drive wedges between Muslim and Jewish partnership?  We have no greater ally in the Jewish community in this time where anti- Semitism is dangerously on the rise than Linda Sarsour.

INGRAHAM: So the Anti-Defamation League doesn't know what anti-Semitism is?

GOLD: The Anti-Defamation League is completely out of line in this case.  And they are on the wrong track. They are on a witch hunt against Linda Sarsour for being a strong Palestinian Muslim woman rather than dealing with the fact that we have white nationalism in the Senate, in the House, and in the White House.

INGRAHAM: Wait a second. We have white nationalism in the Senate? Name three white nationalist senators.

GOLD: What about Sean (ph) King?

INGRAHAM: Why is he a white nationalist? In the U.S. Senate? Sean (ph)  King?

GOLD: In the House.

INGRAHAM: He is an activist for Black Lives Matter.

GOLD: Sorry, I might be referring to --

INGRAHAM: That's all right. I don't know what you're getting at.


INGRAHAM: Let's talk about this, Michelle. I think that sadly when we have these very emotional appeals by people like Linda Sarsour, she's an interesting figure. She's very captivating in many ways, the way she talks. She's a leftist. She hates Trump. Woman, Muslim. And so I think a lot of people will give her a lot of slack for that reason. And yet if conservatives say one thing out of line, you have "Media Matters," little people in their underwear in the basement writing about it, you've got all these -- boycott, boycott. But someone like Linda Sarsour gets Mercedes sponsoring her interviews. Shocking.

MALKIN: Yes. Right. Well, she has bamboozled a lot of people, and she is a master at using the Islamic technique of taqiyya, which is lying to promote the Islamic caliphate and Sharia law. And I just want to give credit to all of the outspoken critics of Sharia out there who have been squelched by social media and who have been marginalized by the elites in the mainstream media, people like Laura Loomer who is responsible for confronting those Women's March organizers who marched into one of these Politicon conferences in L.A. and was the one who disrupted it to call Alyssa Milano to the carpet. And it wasn't until that happened that these Women's March leaders finally acknowledged the toxic anti-Semitism that lies at the intersection of the extreme left and radical Islam.

There is a type of Sharia, an American Sharia, a Silicon Valley Sharia that seeks to silence those voices. And I think that Ariel Gold in particular has a lot of gall talking about repairing relationships with people when Ariel Gold and Code Pink itself has been so much responsible for the kind of toxic anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel that we are seeing. In fact, Ariel Gold has uttered the same phrase that Marc Lamont Hill got fired for, from the river to the sea, which is not just a dog whistle. It is a blatant call. It is the most famous call for the extermination of the state of Israel.

INGRAHAM: Let's let Ariel respond.

GOLD: First of all, I meant to say Steve king in the House who is supporting -- supports white nationalists. But from the river to the sea, Marc Lamont Hill was clear that what he was discussing is the Palestinians deserve freedom, equality, and justice, just as Israels do.

INGRAHAM: He didn't say that.

GOLD: He did. He said that Palestinians inside Israel face over 60 laws of discrimination --

INGRAHAM: Ariel, why is he hanging out with Farrakhan? Would you hang out with Farrakhan?

GOLD: Palestinians in the West Bank face military occupation.

INGRAHAM: He called Jews termites.

MALKIN: You're a liar. She's a liar.

GOLD: Palestinians in Gaza are faced with --

INGRAHAM: Ariel, Ariel, Ariel.

MALKIN: This is taqiyya.

GOLD: -- has become unlivable.

INGRAHAM: Emoting in the way of talking doesn't make you any more credible.

GOLD: Palestinians deserve the same quality and rights that Israelis do.

INGRAHAM: Ariel, here is your problem. You have got an avowed, I'm sorry, an avowed anti-Semite in Farrakhan. Do you disagree with that?

GOLD: I have no love for Farrakhan.

INGRAHAM: So why is the head of the Women's March posing with him, and why are the trio of fools at the Women's March showing up at his Nation of Islam conferences? Why?

GOLD: Linda Sarsour shows up for Jews. Nobody showed up after the Pittsburgh massacre --

INGRAHAM: Why is she going to Farrakhan's conference? You have no answer for this, Ariel. And I'm telling you, the FOX viewers are watching. You look like a wonderful person.

GOLD: And Linda Sarsour has been very, very clear that she does not support Farrakhan's anti-women hatred --

INGRAHAM: But if Donald Trump showed up at his -- then don't go to his conference.

GOLD: -- anti-LGBTQ hatred, and anti-Semitism.

INGRAHAM: He wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map, and you've got these people standing side-by-side with him. That is shameful. The man is an old guy now, but he is a shameful anti-Semite. He's been that his whole life, and he ridicules all of these groups that you are in favor of. He goes after the LGBT community. He ridicules women. Farrakhan does that.

I want to go back to Michelle because I'm very -- the rise of anti- Semitism. Alan Dershowitz talked about this today, Michelle, on my radio show, specifically CNN -- what's that? We don't have time to go that, unfortunately. But guys, I'm sorry. We could do this for an hour, and both of you are great guests. I didn't mean to get too hot on this, but you are both great guests to come on. It's a very important topic.

Coming up, what is lurking inside the caravan at our southern border? You are going to want to hear what Homeland Security and our own reporters just found out, next.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If we let the trash accumulate, we will become infected more than we already are. Many of us are already infected with cough, flu and all that. If we let the trash accumulate later, it will become a risk for the children and for all of us here.


INGRAHAM: A Honduran migrant raising red flags about the very caravan that he's part of. This is the Tijuana health department, and they are telling FOX News exclusively that more than a third, that's nearly 2,300 of the migrants who have set up camp in the border town, are being treated for health issues ranging from respiratory infections to TB, and a few even with HIV.

Joining me is now Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Orient, now, you say that despite claims to the contrary, the medical screening are not even close to being sufficient here. Explain.

DR. JANE ORIENT, DIRECTOR, AMERICAN PHYSICIANS ASSOCIATION: Oh, I think that they are not. And I think that one of the most serious problems is tuberculosis. Almost all of the tuberculosis that we have in the U.S. now occurs in foreign-born citizens, and the threat of this multiple drug resistance to TB or even extremely drug-resistant TB is very great. And there's not really a simple way of ruling this out. We really need to do chest x-rays. And even if a person has latent TB now, it can break down and become active at any point. This could be transmitted on the bus. It can be transmitted very easily. And it can be extremely difficult to control.

INGRAHAM: And who ends up picking up the bill here? The American taxpayers. And I got an email today from a very dear friend of mine who said that one of his relatives is a public school teacher in the Washington, D.C., area, and she says kids are showing up every day in class with no proof of birth, no proof of shots, immunization, or anything. And they are coming in with all sorts of maladies. And each time one of them sneezes, half the class goes sick for a week. That might be a slight exaggeration. But I've heard this time and again, Dr. Orient, from teachers who are reporting that the kids -- and again, it's not the kids' fault. Your heart breaks for them. But the kids are coming in with either diseases or serious respiratory infections that are horrifically contagious.

And this has just got to change. It's not fair to the American people. It is not fair to the Tijuana folks either. What's your one suggestion that has to be implemented for this all to stop?

ORIENT: I think that we need to go back to the policies we had when we had immigration, great waves of immigration from Europe where people went to Ellis Island. They were quarantined for a time to make sure they weren't incubating a serious disease, and they had medical examinations, and they had a good medical history and testing for things that could be a threat.  Otherwise we could have diseases spread throughout the country that could be killing our children, as possibly that outbreak of respiratory diseases did in 2014, perhaps not coincidentally when we are resettling Central American children all over the U.S.

INGRAHAM: Yes, well, and I think again we have hepatitis outbreaks that are being feared now, and all the people who want to keep bringing people into the country who are camped out in places like Tijuana, maybe they should all just come and live in their houses for a while. But that would never happen. Doctor, thanks so much.

There's more alarming news about just who is inside the caravan. The president has warned that members of the violent MS-13 gang are illegally crossing our borders. And now we have proof. Border Patrol just arrested this man, Jose Villalobos-Jobel, he's a self-proclaimed member of MS-13, and he told agents he was traveling with a large group from Central America and he planned to claim asylum. Strength in numbers.

And here now Jay Lanham, executive director of the Northern Virginia Regional Gang Task Force. Jay, you are part of a taskforce here in northern Virginia that deals with this issue, gang activity. Does any of this surprise you?

JAY LANHAM, NORTHERN VIRGINIA GANG TASK FORCE: Not a bit. Gang members are continuously trying to cross the border. What better way to get across the border than to covertly intermingle yourself with a large group like this caravan and just try to come across the border unnoticed.

INGRAHAM: A lot of them have been already deported, and then they make their way back into a large group of people. And again, the emotion of all of it is being played on the left in the United States. It's a very emotional -- you have the teargas and the women and children and the Hello Kitty backpacks. In a way, that's a perfect place for someone who wants to elude the Border Patrol just walking across the border illegally. Then being part of this large group, it's just a much better deal for them.

LANHAM: Absolutely. We encounter many people who have come here and been deported. So I find it very shortsighted and naive by individuals to think that there are not gang members intermingled in with this caravan. The gangs need numbers to become the alpha dog in the area, and that's how they get their numbers. They bring them from Central America.

INGRAHAM: This is a DHS statement to FOX News. "As President Trump and Secretary Nielsen warned, over the last few weeks we have identified over 600 known criminals and gang members in the caravan and we are now predictably seeing members of the caravan including criminals show up at the border claiming asylum. These threats are not only going to increase in light of illegitimate judicial injunctions and loopholes created by Congress." In the end Congress has got to do something about this.

LANHAM: Absolutely. Anyone who comes across the border has to be vetted.  They have to be thoroughly vetted for their background to see if they are criminal or they're in gangs. And a lot of them are going to come across the border undiscovered because records don't exist. You can't vet someone when you have no records or background on them.

So if Congress doesn't come up with a way to stop these individuals from coming across the border, then we're going to continue to have gang members in our community. And to me, one gang member who comes here wanting to commit murder and violence is one gang member too many.

INGRAHAM: People think gangs, they are in places like Chicago or maybe Baltimore, maybe some really bad areas in L.A. But that's not the case with MS-13.

LANHAM: No. In fact, if you look at the northern Virginia area, this is the largest El Salvadoran population in the United States. So where does MS-13 come from? El Salvador. So we have a very large population of them here.

INGRAHAM: Apparently some of the MS-13ers are now coming from Honduras as well. They brought the countries together in gang activity.

LANHAM: Absolutely, all of Central America.

INGRAHAM: All right, thank you so much for the insights.

And coming up, Trump touching down in Buenos Aires just a few moments ago ahead of tomorrow's G20 summit. A high stakes meeting with China's President Xi is still on the books, but Trump is canceling his meeting with Putin. A former CIA Moscow station chief and the man who has the president's ear on China are here to tell you how this might play out.


TRUMP: I think we are very close to doing something with China, but I don't know that I want to do it, because what we have right now is billions and billions of dollars coming into the United States in the form of tariffs or taxes. So I don't really know.


INGRAHAM: President Trump arriving in Buenos Aires, Argentina, ahead of tomorrow's high stakes G20 summit. Trump shocking the Kremlin earlier today after abruptly nixing a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Russia's seizure of Ukrainian ships. And tensions running high between the U.S. and China as the trade war rages on. Trump's all- important meeting with President Xi could impact the balance of that relationship for many years to come.


TRUMP: I have been preparing for it all my life. It's not like oh, gee, I'm going to sit down and study. I know every ingredient. I know every stat. I know it better than anybody knows it, and my gut has always been right. And we are doing very well, and I will tell you, China very wants march wants to make a deal.


INGRAHAM: Joining me now is someone who briefed President Trump yesterday on actually how to handle that meeting, Mike Pillsbury. He served in both the Reagan and Bush 41 administrations and is the author of the phenomenal book "The 100 Year Marathon." And joining me is former CIA Moscow station chief Daniel Hoffman.

Let's start with you, Mike. I want to start by taking us inside your meeting with President Trump yesterday. You spent about an hour with the president. If you can share any thoughts about where the dynamic is today.

MICHAEL PILLSBURY, BRIEFED TRUMP ON MEETING WITH XI: I think the president has very strong views on China. He first laid out a very detailed plan 18 years ago in eight pages of a book where he talked about the steps that America should take to stop what he called the fleecing of our country by China. So he doesn't need advice for me or, frankly, anybody else. He laid this out 18 years ago. He's added to it during the transition and since he became president.

The problem we face I think really is on the Chinese side. They think they can use the same old tricks that worked against previous presidents against President Trump. And it's not working. And there is a chance they are going to offend him, so I don't expect a big breakthrough Saturday night.

INGRAHAM: Yes, but you've got Steve Mnuchin, Larry Kudlow, who's, in my view, not as bad as Mnuchin on the trade issues. Steve Mnuchin is not with the president on the trade stuff. Who is? Bob Lighthizer, Peter Navarro, people like you, myself, and people who have been dealing with the China stuff in print and on radio and television for many, many years.

But the Chinese have now even turned their boosters against them. Winston Lord and this group yesterday coming out with a report, a phenomenal report. Winston Lord, you can't believe it. And it's a report about how China has influence, and both Mike and you know about this, China has influenced America from the universities, the research, the forced technology transfers across the board. And we are going to go in and we're going to be like, you're going to behave better on opening up your markets and then we're going to take away the tariffs. China is like, let's go party the town.

PILLSBURY: It's a stunning confession from our China --

INGRAHAM: The elites got it wrong for how long?

PILLSBURY: Well, they basically go back 40 years when Dr. Kissinger opened the door.

INGRAHAM: WTO, permanent trade status.

PILLSBURY: These are left-wing China experts. These are not conservatives. So it's all the more refreshing, it's sort of a source of delight to people like me and Laura.

INGRAHAM: But you've got to keep these tariffs, keep the pressure on, because it's working. Mike, the Putin deal is the big one. The president not meeting with Vladimir Putin. Dan, I'm sorry. I'm thinking of Dan.

DANIEL HOFFMAN, FORMER CIA MOSCOW STATION CHIEF: Mike can probably answer that one pretty well, too. I'm good with that.

INGRAHAM: Sorry. Hi, Dan Pillsbury, the brothers Pillsbury. So let's talk about what this means and how significant Russia's actions in Ukraine are.

HOFFMAN: They're pretty significant. It's the height of hypocrisy even by the Kremlin's own lofty standards to fire upon and seize Ukrainian vessels and sailors, and violate international law and a bilateral treaty with Ukraine, and then blame it on Poroshenko's government. So there's no question in my view that we need to respond. We need to draw a line which the Obama administration failed to do on Ukraine when Putin annexed Crimea.

INGRAHAM: Why cancel the meeting, though? Why not confront Putin on it?

HOFFMAN: I will tell you that on this network I said that I thought the president should confront him publicly, deliver a strong rebuke.

INGRAHAM: Why not?

HOFFMAN: It doesn't mean that he can't do it without meeting Putin. I think it would have been pretty good optics if he'd actually been in a meeting with Vladimir Putin and called him out for Russia's aggression against Ukraine, which is under siege, land, air, sea, cyberspace. And we need to stand up for Ukraine's sovereignty, I think.

INGRAHAM: So right now, the Russian psyche, I know you lived there. I lived there. They are a very proud people. This in a way helps Putin, does it not, at home, this nationalist spirit? We're taking on the Americans again. We're protecting the motherland. It's back to the old days.

HOFFMAN: You got it right. Vladimir Putin wants to portray Russia as a besieged fortress which only he can defend. And when he portrays the west as Russia's enemy, it's not anything more than our values and our democracy which is what threatens him the most. And that's frankly why Ukraine is such a threat because it's a country on his border with a sizable Russian population and a commitment to democracy.

INGRAHAM: What's going to happen tomorrow with Xi?

PILLSBURY: There's going to be a private one-on-one session with just the translators where there is some flexibility perhaps for Xi to say something to President Trump. Then there is this canned meeting where, with time for interpretation, there's really less than an hour for each leader to speak.  Probably the other six, including Peter Navarro, have to hold their silence. Then there's going to be the spin on Sunday for what happened.

INGRAHAM: OK, so we are waiting for Sunday. This is like the Super Bowl for us. We are very excited, all these issues. Guys, thanks so much.

Up next, the Last Bite.


INGRAHAM: It's time for the last bite.

Outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan is on his farewell tour, he and Cher.  Today, his portrait was unveiled on the Hill. His reaction was so Ryan.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They say a picture is worth 1,000 words. Here is some pretty good reading, my friends.


REP. PAUL RYAN, R-WIS., HOUSE SPEAKER: I hadn't seen it yet. It looks like me.


INGRAHAM: By the way, it costs $25,000. But don't worry. Private funding paid for it all. Can we have a magic marker and put the beard on?

That's all the time we have tonight. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team, take it from here.

Shannon, I'm so punchy tonight.

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. 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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.