tv The Ingraham Angle FOX News October 8, 2019 7:00pm-8:00pm PDT
people in the world. we need to keep them behind bars. that's all the time we have left this evening, we always thank you for joining us and we will never be the hate trumped media mob, let not your heart be troubled. straight from the sewer, the swamp, laura ingraham. >> laura: if there's just one night where it wasn't sewer, swamp, laura ingraham, that would be great. i >> sean: i'm not saying you are the sewer, the swamp. >> laura: i think -- >> sean: i can get fined for saying "illegal alien" the wrong way. >> laura: fantastic show. i'm laura ingraham, this is "the ingraham angle," in a blistering letter to democratic leaders, the white house counsel is making it clear this means war and fox news has also
learned exclusively attorney general john durham's review of the origins of the investigation is expanding because of what he has already recovered. you will not see a better lineup of guests to break all of this down, people who are practicing attorneys, understanding the constitution. no hyperbole, these are the facts. the president's attorney rudy giuliani, joseph digenova, gregg jarrett, sara carter all here. also tonight, the liberal mayor of minneapolis is trying to shut down president trump's rally there thursday night. we have exclusive campaign reaction from mercedes schlapp, that will be fun. tonight's big breaking news, the white house counsel sends a lacerating letter to speaker nancy pelosi and committee chairs adam schiff, eliot engel, and elijah cummings. making it clear the white house is not going to be complying with the faux impeachment
inquiry. i want to take you through two important passages from this letter. i believe it's necessary to lay out what this fight is really all about. the current proceedings are nothing more than an unconstitutional exercise in political theater, an unauthorized impeachment inquiry that conflicts with all historical precedent and rides roughshod over due process and the separation of powers. it continues "your inquiry is constitutionally invalid in a violation of due process. in the history of our nation, the house of representatives has never attempted to launch an impeachment inquiry against the president without a majority of the house taking political accountability for that decision by voting to authorize such a dramatic constitutional step." as we told you last night one of the most fateful decisions of the entire charade was when nancy pelosi put adam schiff in charge of it all. he's a prevaricating, priggish
partisan. he's one of the many reasons why the white house is dismissing this entire episode as a farce. the white house counsel is 100% correct. this nonimpeachment impeachment is not a constitutional undertaking, it's a political hit job. exactly what our founders did not want for our republic. consider this commentary about the dangers of impeachment. the effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters, we must not overturn and remove the president from office except to defend our system of government or constitutional liberties against a dire threat and we must not do so without an overwhelming consensus of the american people. there must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or impeachment supported by one of our major political parties and opposed by another. such an impeachment will produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come
and will call into question the very legitimacy. sounds like the views of our next guest rudy giuliani and joseph digenova -- wrong. those were the 1998 anti-impeachment views of none other than current house judiciary chair, jerry nadler. so what has changed? a donald trump in the white house, that has changed. here now the forementioned rudy giuliani personal attorney to the president and former and frequent guest. what does this forceful letter mean? what does it signal less about the road ahead? >> i think it was brilliant he quoted nadler for another reaso reason. what he wrote was a traditional american liberalism, when i was a young person, liberals believed you have to defend the civil rights for the communists
and the nazis -- all of a sudden this congress has run roughshod over the right to call witnesses, the right to confront witnesses against you. if the right of counsel. if they are threatening to imprison attorney general barr and impeach me, that is his government lawyer. i've never seen a subpoena like this. >> laura: are going to get to the attorney-client privilege issue in a moment. the house's failure to provide coequal subpoena power in this case assured that any inquiry will be nothing more than a one-sided effort by house democrats to gather information favorable to their views and selectively release it -- you warned about this, the drip drip drip of the leaks coming out of the democrat offices they are conspiring with. what about this?
>> what you are seeing is regicide by another name, fake impeachment. the democrats in the house want to destroy the president, they don't want to preserve the republic. there's nothing honorable about what is happening. this is a despicable abusive constitutional power. if they had on the floor a vote to establish an impeachment inquiry, that would give the republicans subpoena power. the democrats aren't doing that, they want to deny them subpoena power. what do we get? we get first one anonymous informant, then a second anonymous informant, i refuse to call them whistle-blowers. these two nonentities are suicide bombers that the democrats have unleashed on the democratic process. they actually think the american people are going to accept having people testify secretly
without anyone knowing who they are, where they worked, what their party affiliation was -- it's pretty obvious that this first suicide bomber who sent that complaint to the inspector general was a paid democratic operative of the democratic party. >> laura: human political suicide bomber. before we start getting people -- get a sense of humor. if you think that, you should watch another show where we have to spell it all out for you. this is critical. if you are being set up as the president in this situation, you have no right to know who was making these accusations. they say in response this isn't a judicial process -- impeachment is a political process, they say it's a political letter, what they're doing is is a political letter. >> pat cited a constitutional
scholar, jerry nadler. of course due process is necessary, let's call it basic fairness. the american people when they think about this are going to be totally outraged, they want to impeach him on the testimony of hidden witnesses who are behind a curtain. i went back to read two books about the salem witch trials. >> laura: you do that in your spare time rudy? >> i just drove through salem. they required witnesses to face the witch and some witches were acquitted -- it's ridiculous. you have to go back through the magna carta, the only place i think where we had trials like this is the soviet union. remember how the president used to call this a witch hunt? this worse than a witch hunt. >> laura: the witches had it
better. >> they had more rights. >> laura: we are going through this letter painstakingly, it's eight pages long and it's getting dismissed because they are being called out for what they are doing. they like having a one-sided show. it's an important part our viewers have to understand. the committees have ominously threatened before they even issued a subpoena that any failure to appear in response to a mere letter request for a deposition shall constitute evidence of obstruction. the suggestion that it would be problematic for anyone to raise long establish executive branch confidentiality and response for a request for a deposition legally unfounded. these points are amounts to nothing more than strong arm tactics designed to rush proceedings without any regard for due process and the rights of individuals in the executive branch. people who are practicing u.s. attorneys on television tonight
and all day today saying this letter where he is raising these issues is at self of obstruction. now this is the new thing, pelosi is saying the same thing tonight we will put it up on the screen for everyone who wants to read nancy pelosi's legal wisdo wisdom. >> because of their continuing effort to ignore due process and the presumption of innocence, to redo the electoral college, they want to destroy all the substantial pillars that make our country have the rule of law. they lie about every fact, about every rule and what they are doing now is this letter is so spectacular and so on the money that they only have one option, it's to just ignore it and say it doesn't mean anything. >> laura: you can't be on the defensive here, you have to stay forward leaning in responding to this. they have to be defined, framed and put up on the wall, everyone has to know what's happening to
this country. they don't like this president, they don't like draining the swamp, they didn't like him coming down the escalator, whatever it is, they didn't like him. they wanted amounts day one and they are being thwarted in their efforts and they aren't going to stop until they destroy every major pillar of this government. >> that is the great danger of the rule of law when you treat somebody you don't like -- it's very easy to give someone who writes who you like, it's a question too if dedicated to the law when you get someone you dislike. american liberals used to be very proud of that. >> laura: they didn't like the fisa court, now it's the greatest thing ever. >> these people should be embarrassed of themselves. >> laura: one thing i was thinking about, if this can happen with the president you don't like, you have no real basis for any impeachable offense -- it's absurd. this means every time we have a house in the hands of one
political party and a president from another political party, you get some detail from the deep state to go to the white house, this disturbed me -- can you imagine the unmasking conversations they had in the white house? what if there was a whistle-blower then? >> this is like the hatfields and the mccoys. >> laura: it's back and forth. >> it is so ignorant, so stupid, it's neanderthal. to say that he doesn't have a right to call witnesses, to say that -- let's say i assert attorney-client privilege. i'm obstructing justice? by asserting attorney-client privilege? of everything i have in my file is a document i created in defense of the president. let's say the president was a terrorist, they want to be allowed to subpoena that from me and they wouldn't be allowed to say i'm obstructing justice. if they are trying to intimidate me in my role as a lawyer. it doesn't work, these creeps
aren't going to intimidate me. spoon i have to play devil's advocate. attorney-client privilege doesn't necessarily to apply to everything you do. >> of course not. it's. >> laura: you have to be representing him in a legal capacity. >> i have to be careful i don't make a mistake. i have to interpreted expansively. >> and i remember, this is a law for her can't rely on attorney-client congressional testimony, made for the purposes of obtaining legal advice. it does not protect for instance communications or attorney might have with foreign government officials or with u.s. government. >> that's in order to obtain evidence, it does apply. they said they were looking for bad information about joe biden, i was looking for it two years before he was and even a
candidate. this was obtain information to exonerate him, everything i have in my file exonerates him. >> laura: what you looking into corruption in general? >> joe biden got the case dismissed that would have revealed the rest of the collusion. that's why i ran into joe biden, they gave me joe biden and the corrupt vice president interfered. >> laura: this is throwing everything out against the wall, they would never do it if it weren't you. it would all be privileged if it weren't you. i mentioned this earlier. here's how the media reacted to the white house's letter tonight, watch. >> this is a letter of political posturing, it's all about partisanship and politics. >> it seems to be a political letter, i wouldn't be surprised if some parts of it are in all caps. >> the white house is putting impeachment inquiry in scare quotes. >> they don't have any legal precedent to .2 that indicates
anything that supports a single thing they've uttered. >> laura: lots of constitutional scholars in that crowd. >> this is what television has become with political commentary, this is an embarrassment for these networks to put people like that on who don't know what they are talking about, who are embarrassing themselves. they are saying ridiculous things. the letter is brilliant, the people from l'affaire, guess who's working there now -- james baker, the disgraced former fbi chief counsel. give me a break, they have a lot of money, they work out of working institution and they are a bunch of hacks. >> laura: let's talk about what this means for next steps. let's say pelosi -- i said i would show it earlier. the letter is manifestly wrong, i'm not going to do my impersonation now. is it another unlawful attempt to hide the fact of the trump administration's brazen efforts to pressure foreign powers to
intervene in the 2020 election. the white house should be warned that continued effort to hide the truth of the president's abuse of power -- it's all concluded already there is no investigation -- will be regarded as further evidence of obstruction. in other words, an aggressive letter from the white house counsel. heads they win, tales we lose. >> people should read the letter for themselves, it's supported by precedent. chuck todd said there is no support for it, he doesn't even read the footnotes, those are cases, i can't imagine you can read them but it says due process applies to a congressional hearing. it is a very strong brief, strong letter. it is supported by footnotes and not political propaganda, it's hardly political, it's legal and it's beyond their competence
because they are so mesmerized with going after trump they've lost all common sense. >> laura: they are heading to across the with a two by four. >> i would ask people to read it and see if it's the hysterical thing they were talking about it. >> and nancy pelosi doesn't get what they want, they've already made their conclusion, minority gets no rights in this land. schiff -- >> even "the washington post" -- >> laura: she doesn't get documents and eyewitness testimony, they are all freaked out about the state department, now what? are they going to go to court? and try to argue this? >> or vote, get subpoena power. >> if they go to court they are going to lose because the president and the secretary of state and others are invoking
immunity privilege and they are doing that because they have a right to when there is not an a formal impeachment proceeding underway. democrats have chosen this route. >> laura: here is how some of the msnbc's legal analyst interpreted the white house's letter like this. >> i think trump wants to be impeached in a way. he doesn't have a domestic agenda, his foreign policy is in shambles as the whole kurdish example shows, at least on impeachment or something to talk about and something for him to run against. it's explained as please impeach meek because i've got nothing else going on. speak a did they find these people? >> laura: former solicitor general . >> no wonder the justice department is in shambles. >> laura: under obama?
i think it was. 13 months. >> the reality is all americans should be concerned about this because it really is a principle we have to always honor. we have to protect everyone's rights. if you don't like donald trump, how can you possibly tolerate -- he's going to be tried by anonymous witnesses. >> laura: call the vote. you want to put more money, then you get subpoena power. >> it was collusion in ukraine that misses necessitated trumpg it. >> laura: they dream about impeachment all night long, why don't they take the vote? >> aoc, the incandescent ignoramus is manifesting the same stupidity that the entire democratic caucus reflects. they don't like the rule of law because they want to decide everything like a kangaroo cour court. queen of hearts, man.
it's over, you're dead, you're guilty, no evidence necessary. the democrats used to love process and procedure and the rule of law. they are literally subverting the rule of law and what really amounts to a seditious attack on the government. it really is sedition. >> do you know why they get away with this? it's the fault of the press. they can say anything they want. >> laura: "the washington post" isn't really a newspaper anymore. it used to be a real paper. >> they can be as corrupt as they want and they don't get investigated, nobody cares, nobody worries. for years, obama had a pay for play operation in his administration and it was disgusting. one of the reasons they are fighting so hard, if biden comes out, so does clinton come out, this goes right to the top of the obama administration and the administration -- i didn't have scandals, it will be the most scandal ridden administration are history. he didn't care about ethics
otherwise it wouldn't happen. the vice president should have been stopped from doing this by a president who had the slightest bit of integrity, a chicago paul like obama, pay for play, millions of dollars to the vice president and hundred of millions of dollars to the secretary of state. >> laura: this is a special "the ingraham angle," i got you guys for a half-hour, this is awesome. rudy and joe, stay right there. if we are now learning more about the ukraine whistle-blowers deep ties to -- they're still talking, i can't keep them quiet. if sara carter, gregg jarrett here as well on the john durham probe and more. we have a lot more breaking new breaking news, we'll stay on it for you. stay right there.
the water louis giuliani he will not testify until there has been a formal impeachment vote and its chairman adam schiff is removed. end of the boyd swooped senator lindsey graham, he has invited giuliani to testify about possible corruption in ukraine. will he accept this offer? rudy giuliani, joseph digenova, are you going to testify with the senate? at >> i have to weigh that with my client, it's not a unitary decision but it may affect the other decisions. i would love to testify and give me a half-hour to point out biden inc., four decades of crime. it will be easier than pointing out six decades of mafia crime. >> laura: what was going on with perry? >> he's done nothing wrong.
>> laura: he was at the inauguration of zelensky. >> senator chris murphy told zelensky he better not cooperate with me and other senators told him not to cooperate with william barr. >> laura: did you debrief him? >> i'm not going to tell you my internal conversations, i talked to a lot of people. >> laura: cory booker is someone who is chomping at the bit to question you. >> i would savor the opportunit opportunity, especially if it's done publicly. i know rudy giuliani is from new york, very close to broadway, he loves the theatrics, his behavior has been despicable and the lies and half-truths and the deception that he has been doing at the direction of this president and beyond is unbecoming. >> laura: unbecoming, despicable, garden-variety
insults. >> i have to go into the arena with spartacus? i don't know if i could handle it, he's a tough guy. i don't know. he scares me. he was a terrible mayor, when i was a mayor of the city i turned it around, when he was mayor they had more crime. newark is doing fabulous. >> laura: everyone's a tough guy. biden has been off the trail since friday, you never see biden. >> did you see biden today, he lost it today. he started yelling at a reporter, first it looked like he was sleeping. i think in las vegas. >> laura: here's what sources told the washington examiner's byron york -- the ig said the whistle-blower had a professional relationship with one of the 2020 candidates.
if this turns out to be true, as in the democrats keeping his or her identity a secret a total joke? >> this is why the notion that you are going to keep these witnesses secret, why you are trying to nullify an election, commit regicide and remove a president of the united states is ludicrous. everybody knows in all likelihood, fusion gps was involved with this person, this anonymous informant, i refuse to call him a whistle-blower because he is not a whistle-blower under the law. everybody knows that there is a former fbi agent who worked with this whistle-blower as he is now called. we are going to learn an awful lot about the fact that this person never wrote this document, he was drafted by a committee of political consultants and researchers and people affiliated with the democratic national committee. >> laura: adam schiff should
not be running this. he lied about contact with the whistle-blower on national television, he just lied. >> adam schiff is a witness, you can preside over a hearing where you are a witness. how could it be possible if we can't test the credibility of these witnesses? you can't come to a conclusion unless you get a chance to test credibility. for example, this law firm was offering money, they were offering help with your mortgage, expenses, they were prodding witnesses to come forward. you don't think i would want to cross-examine the witness? did you read it? did they offer you any money, did you see schiff? >> laura: this can't happen again. >> here is the deal. this inspector general is a. when he wrote that analysis, he
was wrong about the law. this is not a matter of great concern, urgent concern, he got slapped down when they analyzed the fact this guy michael atkinson is a. there's no way around how bad a job he did. he is an embarrassment to the inspector general. >> laura: now we know there is a 2020 connection, 2020 democrat connection to this whistle-blower and someone tried to criticize her question byron york's reporting tonight, was it axios? it was just fine, he's right on, byron york is spot on in his reporting about this. >> laura: it's going to get worse. the state department ordered gordon somnolent not to appear for his deposition with house investigators, it would make sense which of course is drawing the ire of schiff, watch.
>> the failure to produce this witness, the failure to produce the documents, we consider additional strong evidence of construction, a coequal branch of government. >> laura: if you assert a privilege, executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, deliberative process privilege, you are guilty of obstruction -- there's no winning in this scenario. >> i would like to explain to little schiff that propounding and presenting a false, completely false narrative, someone's guilt is called obstructing justice. he did it, he did it right in front of the american people, he did it for about 20 minutes. he did a total, fictitious claim and he did it again earlier when
he claimed he had evidence of russian collusion. schiff, where is your evidence? you're a liar, i'm calling you out as a lawyer, where's your evidence? >> laura: they are hitting gordon sondland because he was a big donor for trump. does anyone remember who obama's donors were? there was headline after headline complaining about -- that's just what it is. unless you're a career diplomat, stop going after trump because obama -- >> just watching that tape of schiff, watching him bug eyed performing like a loon and mouthing these -- it's just dumb
and stupid and unsupportable legally. this is the chairman of a major committee and pelosi trying to keep the dentures and while she's talking to them is just there abiding by this, it's outrageous. >> it would be funny if it wasn't horrible trashing of our constitution. that has repercussions. it keeps our country better, divided. if they think thinks like them. >> laura: there are a lot of people living their lives. i want to end with what pat wrote at the end of his letter. if the president has a country to lead, the american people elected him to do his job and he remains focused on fulfilling his promise to the american people. if he has important work that must continue on their behalf at home and around the world. i get that people are upset -- infrastructure, all these things are important, the safety and
security of our country. they have to keep doing the peoples business. >> rooting out high-level corruption is enormous. >> laura: how confident are you in the next couple of weeks? you're going to know a lot more from horowitz, durham, and the rest. you will never be an incandescent ignoramus to me. everyone is tweeting -- rudy and joe, thank you so much. the breaking news doesn't stop there, we learned that john durham is expanding his investigation into the origins of the russia probe. could this have something to do with robert mueller? gregg jarrett and sara carter here and moments to explain it all.
>> laura: multiple administration officials telling fox news that u.s. attorney john durham is expanding his investigation into the 2016 trump campaign surveillance. if we knew he would be reviewing the days leading up to the election and the inauguration but now based on his findings, he is looking into a wider timeline of events from the beginning of the russia probe all the way until the spring of 2017 when robert mueller was named a special counsel. joining me now, gregg jarrett fox news legal analyst and author of the brand-new book -- we were talking about the witch hunt earlier --
"witch hunt" which touches on a lot of nights breaking news. he also hosts the new fox nation show of the same name, both out today. so happy he's on, along with sara carter, fox news contributor and investigative reporter. the democrat and deep state conspiracy is unraveling. we feel it, we see it, we are on the precipice of it, what's next? >> i would like to think my book is a road map for john durham who is leading the investigation that bill barr initiated into acts of corruption and lawlessness. various individuals in the fbi and intelligence officials, now that we know the investigation is expanding, that pretty much means she has already found some acts of lawlessness and corruption. asking now for additional
personnel, he's gone overseas to two different countries to gather evidence not of trump-russia collusion but of fbi, department of justice, hillary clinton campaign and democratic national committee collusion. i think now that it is expanding, he's not just looking into how james comey violated fbi regulations by launching an investigation of trump without a shred of evidence, he is also looking into lying in the spine undercover informants that were used, he should also look as i point out in my book that rod rosenstein appointed the special counsel not based on law or evidence or even following the regulations, he defied the regulations and appointed bob mueller in an active vegans, retaliation against donald trum donald trump. not only that, he ought to look at bob mueller's conflicts of interest in this case which are
egregious. >> laura: hold that thought, we are going to get into that in a moment. when you talk about john brenna john brennan, the man ran the cia and now he has smeared the r and now he has smeared durham one of the most respected attorneys alive. >> it makes me think the hand of politics is now being used to massage what this ongoing review is. i am concerned. >> laura: what they were carrying out is not a fraudulent investigation but what does that tell you about how scared they are? >> they are terrified, deny everything, that's where they are at right now. john brennan, even his rhetoric is dangerous, both to the
united states national security and because we know his involvement with investigating part of this entire issue of the investigation into president trump's campaign began with john brennan, why do i say that? because we know it occurred overseas. we were accepting information, from christopher steele who is a foreign former spy for mi6. he was funneling information, that information was well-known to the cia in london. of that information was well known to those fbi agents that went there and spread these malicious lies. what do we know now? we know none of it was verified. this dossier they used to target president trump and his administration and his campaign, that was based on lies and it was handed over to the fisa court and the foreign intelligence surveillance court said this has been verified, the fbi handed it to us, now we know
that isn't the case. john brennan, james comey, james clapper, they are a disgrace. this was a soft coup against president trump. >> laura: another member is very nervous about john durham's expanded investigation. >> what the then commander-in-chief president obama told us to do which was to assemble all the reporting that we could that we had available to us and put it in one report -- it's disconcerting to be investigated for having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the president. >> laura: now obama is involved. i want to learn more about that. you wrote about it. the president wants to keep -- kept informed of all of this. >> we know obama knew because peter strzok and lisa page
exchanged a text message that said the white house wants to know everything we are doing. john brennan was briefing the president on everything. you can't launch a counterintelligence investigation without the president's permission because the information goes to the president. in my book i described john brennan as the instigator of the russia hoax and the witch hunt and james clapper, the dni, he was the leaker. he is the guy who was leaking information to cnn and of course he was rewarded with a job on cnn. >> laura: we mentioned that his investigation timeline is expanding into 2017. i wonder if it's anything to do with another bombshell fox news up tonight? multiple sources telling us that former special counsel robert mueller was pursuing the fbi director position when he met with president trump in may
of 2017. that is something mueller denied on camera, testifying under oath this summer. >> did you interview the fbi director job one day before you were appointed special counsel? >> my understanding, i was not applying for a job. i was asked to give my input on what it would take to do the job which triggered the interview you were talking about. >> so you don't recall on may the 16th 2017 you interviewed with the president regarding the fbi director job? >> it was about the job but not about me applying for the job. >> see your statement is that you didn't interview to apply for the fbi director job. >> laura: do you think these are related? he was talking about getting that job and then rosenstein named tim to special counsel,
what does that tell you? >> it tells us he should have been recused and never been named to special counsel and that rosenstein who was also secretly talking with other officials about the president and the special counsel should never have appointed him in the first place. he couldn't even remember his own report. that's why durham has to investigate. he has to go further back, i believe he's going to go back to the end of 2015 and he is going to be looking at issues related to michael flynn. he is going to follow those through, he's going to look at stephan halbert and others. >> laura: it sounds like an episode of a telenovela. >> that's why they are so afraid, that's why they are coming after barr, and that's why they are so smart. if they are skirting around them, they are saying we don't
need anybody to talk for us. we are going to go directly to the horse. italy, australia, london. >> laura: brennan and klapper, they are on a smash and a smear campaign. they have to do it as much as possible to get the drum beat going. final thoughts real quick. >> i interviewed the president about his conversation with mueller, the president said he was applying for the job to be fbi director. i interviewed his personal assistant, she said the same thing. then i asked the president did you talk about the reason you fired james comey? the president he paused for 20 seconds and said no comment. it was clear to me the answer was they did talk about it which means mueller was a fact witness they are trying to gather incriminating evidence against the president he should have
disqualified himself, . >> laura: congratulations on your new book. always great to have you on. the trump campaign fires back after a democrat mayor tries to keep the president from actually holding a campaign rally. liberals are all for free speech, except when you're speech disagrees with theirs. mercedes schlapp campaign 2020 advisor for trump up next. ar. i found the experts at safelite autoglass. >> woman: hi! >> vo: with their exclusive technology, they fixed my windshield... then recalibrated the camera attached to my glass so my safety systems still work. who knew that was a thing?! >> woman: safelite has service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪
we value the strength of our diversity. >> laura: is that justin trudeau's brother? that's the mayor of minneapolis, jacob frey. he's afraid of free speech, he says it's about security costs for the trump campaign -- they are just trying to stifle free speech. we've seen this before. joining us now come on mercedes schlapp and tom bevan, founder of real clear politics. the rally is going on as scheduled, correct? >> they dropped their demand, there their ridiculous demand of having a campaign or secret service pay over $520,000. when obama went a couple years ago for a health care speech, it was 20 grand. it goes up if you are in any way associated with president trump. what it does is show that this
mayor was planning on suppressing these trump voters. in their first amendment rights. >> laura: talk about meddling in the election. >> obviously he's trying to be the big guy of the show and at the end of the day he's been trumped. >> laura: i don't even know him. in a land of 10,000 lakes, i have a special affinity for minnesota, i spend a lot of times there in the summers. i think this is a state trump can pick off, tell us what the prospects are. if he only lost minnesota by 44,000 votes, 1.5% of the vote, most of that is in the twin cities. can trump pull off a flip if these antics continue? >> i think so, people forget how close it was in 2016, it gets overlooked. it is in play, he only lost by 44,000 votes out of about 3 million cast. this is the kind of stunt that
does two things. it turns off independence because it's nakedly political. minnesota is in play, if trump manages to steal minnesota, that expands the map for him and its ten electoral votes. that will offset any losses he might have in wisconsin or someplace else. minnesota is going to be a key presidential state in 2020, it's very much in play. >> laura: when the mayor talks about how much they value diversity in minnesota, i'm thinking everything except diversity of thought. no diversity of thought but we are going to hang our hats on every other manner of diversity. the college speech code crowd, they want to have college speech code rules in all of society. >> they want to silence tens of thousands of trump supporter's, thousands of individuals from minnesota have registered to go to the rally. they say it very clearly, as not
only the idea that they want to impeach president trump, they want to impeach the trumped voter. i think that's very unfortunate. you're talking about minnesota, from a structural standpoint the campaign only had one staffer in 2016. that's grown to about 20 staffers that we have right now on the ground. in addition to that, we spent $30,000 in minnesota, we are going to be spending tens of millions of dollars in minnesot minnesota. it is going to be a hot place to be. >> laura: minnesota has a hot economy right now, their economy is doing well. a lot of biotech, big companies, i think it's socialism and more high taxes or prosperity and peace. to me, that is trumps question to pose. >> what is interesting about minnesota is it's one of those states that it mirrors the country but it happen faster --
the rural areas which used to vote democratic flip to republican in the suburbs and the city started voting -- started voting democratic. >> laura: we got to go unfortunately, minnesota up for grabs. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.
maybe there does need to be a rematch. obviously i can beat him again. >> laura: she is really trying her best to cling to relevancy. get the school be mobile ready, i love that car. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team take it all from here, shannon. >> shannon: laura, thank you very much. it would begin tonight a fox news alert. the white house fighting back tonight, sending a scathing letter to house democrats making it clear president trump has no plans to comply with what they are calling an illegitimate and unconstitutional fake impeachment inquiry. telling speaker to take a vote on it. tonight she says she is warning the. if "you will be held accountable moscow. and a fox news exclusive, learning more about u.s. attorney john durham's investigation into the origins of the mueller probe. a new twist on what we may learn and when. and later, a "fox news @ night" exclusive, white house trade advisor peter navarro dobson,