tv The Ingraham Angle FOX News December 16, 2019 7:00pm-8:00pm PST
we will seek the truth. set your dvr and never miss an episode 9:00 eastern, hannity, laura ingraham starts right here, have a great night. ♪ >> laura: i am laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle" from washington tonight, more games from democrats in the middle of the night andy biggs, bob barr, byron york are all here but they will explain jerry nadler's desperate 11th hour move. also josh hawley, he will join us and how chuck schumer has positioned himself front and center on impeachment. he will also preview another senate hearing from doj inspector general michael horowitz. plus, rudy giuliani has drawn on the left and on the right. and so he could be asked a question is he helping or hurting the president? what new stuff has he found out in his latest travel. the former new york city
mayor rudy giuliani returns exclusively to make his case. the democrats impeachment ship is taking on water. my "angle" later tonight with democrat in congress and also on the streets of middle america. dan bongino, victor davis hanson and moore react to all of it, but first, house judiciary dams are up to their usual hijinks. this time dropping a nearly 700 page impeachment report in the middle of the night the week before christmas. democrats are now accusing trump of committing bribery. and wire fraud. throw something else in. two crimes curiously leapt out of the articles of impeachment heading to the floor vote this week. joining me as bob barr impeachment manager as well as federal prosecutor and georgia congressman and also here is byron york chief political correspondent for the "washington examiner" and fox news contributor and congressman andy biggs. house judiciary committee member
who had to endure last week. so we are just going to say congressman, i'm glad you are okay after a nightmarish week long series of proceedings. but before we began come i want you all to listen to what senator pelosi said, can we call her senator? speaker pelosi said when asked why charges are entertaining against trump were not in their articles. >> we have accused him of bribery but why bribery? >> i, myself, am not a lawyer. sometimes, i act like one. not as often as i act as a doctor. i practice medicine on the side without the benefit of a pull diploma or two. this decision was recommended with our committee chair and our attorney. >> laura: sorry, water.
congressman commit it seems like they are making this up as they go along. i am a lawyer so i followed this closely. it is in a long report for what purpose? what purpose are they throwing wire fraud, bribery into the report? >> they don't have anything in the articles of impeachment worth pursuing. >> laura: right. speak with their articles and incoherent as nancy pelosi's explanation. they don't know what they are doing and that is why we've gone everywhere from the term quid pro quo right into something like bribery and this wire fraud issue. who knows what is next. it is an embarrassment, quite frankly. >> laura: byron they have done everything to get people to pay attention to this. >> at the hearing with the legal scholars, one of the legal scholars pamela carlin, the professor from stanford. >> laura: are favorite. >> tried to explain that bribery
actually meant something else. she called it constitutional bribery saying the founders at the time, they drafted the constitution and had a different view. so what the president did fits that definition, even if it doesn't fit today's criminal code definition of bribery. and then looking in this report and it's got the criminal code saying bribery. > laura: she gave them the idea to phrase at the way she did? >> she gave an alternative which is in the report, but i think they were responding to critics like congressman andy biggs who said there is no accusation of the president. >> laura: but it's not in the articles of impeachment. so you can talk to make these points and right a long report, but if you don't take it seriously, it's not in the articles of impeachment. and congressman barr, flip-flopping calling for impeachment witnesses. watch. >> 1999 was a different case.
there were all the obvious reasons why they did not want it witness like monica lewinsky testifying in public. i was there. it related to what the questions might be about. that the whole nation, including children, would be watching. this is a totally different situation. there is no analogy. >> laura: bob, is that the way you remember it? and the point for the previous question. >> it is an alternative universe and alternative memory that we have here. chuck schumer back in 1999 was among those who wanted nothing, whatsoever, to do with impeachment. no witnesses, nothing. they wanted to just brush it through but fortunately we had a republican majority, trent locke that caved in to pressure from schumer and others. but this notion you were talking about a few moments ago and other guests, laura, throwing in town arms like bribery, extortion and so forth.
it makes clear at this lump of coal that deposited itself and the house last evening, late last night is simply a document to allow every democrat out there that wants to find something on which to run against trump or say bad about him can do so. the ultimate though, it is absolutely outrageous for this document, an official document of the u.s. house of representatives to say that this president is a threat to national security and is a danger to the contrary. that is just over the top and ought to have no place in any public document with the house of representatives. >> laura: this is a political document. and it was dropped, byron york for political purposes. that is why it was dropped. they don't care about these issues. they know they are going down.
they know they are losing support by the day. the longer this goes on, the more support they lose. >> it is hard to capture the imagination of the american people. remember with the mueller report, if we can have hearings turn it into compelling tv, that will capture the nation's imagination. that didn't happen. then you had ukraine come up. they didn't have a neutral fact finder like mueller no report to do so they created these hearings and the hopes of making a good tv show. and it just didn't happen. >> laura: congressman bigs, it is embarrassing. this whole thing, this entire process, i've tried to treat it seriously when i can buy at the time i want to burst out laughing because they are taking a baseball bat and knowing it will hurt when they get themselves in the face, and they smash, smash, smash. maybe it won't hurt this time. and then maybe it will be on the floor of conscious soon. i can't believe they keep doing
this. >> i'm with you on that. i find myself saying if i wasn't here come i would not believe this. this is so self indignation to the highest degree. you know. it is comical in one sense. because you see them rushing around. let's face it. nadler had to write longley -- laundry list to schiff because he was left out. who knows what will happen next. >> laura: bob, we will talk to the senator in a moment but this most of the senate. given what you have seen and the abuse and fisa and the politicization of all of this from the beginning with surveilling the trump administration and they were spied on my what do you think should happen next in the senate? just a quick motion to dismiss and try to get this done quickly? or should witnesses be called and really put a stake through the heart of this type of bias? >> the senate majority and the republicans that they should go to senate to president trump and
do what he wants. it's his reputation and his legacy on the mind -- on the line, not mitch mcconnell. but this is the old -- this is the senate trial for the president to clear the air and present a full and complete cont in which his policy decisions were made. none of that came out in the house. they didn't allow it. so i think that there needs to be a full robust trial in the senate, and the president needs to be very, very adept at picking a good team. he ought to follow, for example, to be honest with you, the team clinton chose back in 1999. which did a very good job of presenting his case, his defense and the senate. >> laura: all right, gentlemen thank you very much. the republican senator talking about what's happening in the senate, josh hawley and member of judiciary committee. senator, you are the conversations. schumer claims the evidence is already overwhelming from the
house, yet, he's asking for more witnesses. so which is it? >> he knows they have nothing. listen to the house impeachment articles are a joke, laura as you pointed out. they don't charge a crime. let's remember what impeachment is, like an indictment and it comes to the senate for a trial. if you have the evidence for a crime, they would have charged the crime and put it in the articles of impeachment. they didn't because i don't have anything. this whole thing is a joke and it's time to get the president exonerated. >> laura: they are already claiming, senator holly from the house judiciary committee that the senate has already cooked the books on this meant that this is rigged, zoe lofgren, quach. >> some of the things i'm hearing from the senators look like they plan to rig the trial. the senators announce they made up their minds. they don't need to look at the facts. that does not clear the president if he's not convicted in the senate. that is just a political
endeavor to protect a man who is guilty of abusing his power. >> laura: so senator, the democrats are saying the republicans are politicizing, i guess, the defense for the president? >> the facts are the house has no evidence of any impeachable offense. they put the evidence out there. they have issued reports. we have seen the hearings, look, there is nothing there and they didn't charge a crime, laura. they had their chance. they had their kangaroo courts. they have their circus for weeks and weeks and months and months. there just isn't anything there. listen to him it will come over to the senate and we will execute our constitutional responsibility. but i can tell you i'm not voting for impeachment for someone who has not committed impeachable offenses. >> laura: senator, the debate rages on what should happen in the senate. the process is governed by the rules of impeachment that were developed some time ago. but what about this idea of putting witnesses on?
the president, obviously, where is biden and where is the whistle-blower, where is hunter? adam schiff's role in all of this? is it important those individuals be heard from so all of this kind of thing doesn't happen again? it's almost punitive towards the people who started this whole thing if the witnesses are called. >> i said i would like to hear from the whistle-blower. i said some time ago, whoever that person's is absolutely relative, material and hunter biden the same thing. hunter biden is absolutely material. we will call witnesses and they absolutely should be cold. i think the president is entitled to due process. i think he is entitled to full fair offense and denied that every turn. the house democrats denied him the ability to participate in their ridiculous show trial over on their side. and the party, by the way from the procedures and presidents in the past. the president deserves a full offense and i am confident you will get it. >> laura: finally, horowitz is on his way back to capitol hill
for more testimony. and i think he testified for nine hours or something last week. what more can you possibly learn from him? >> i think it is important we drill down on what happen before the court in particular, the fisa court. as you know, to see the democratic national committee by itself, fbi investigation feed this fake report to the fbi, and then the fbi to go and deliberately mislead a court not once, not twice, but at least three times. i want to know exactly how that happened. i want to know exactly who signed off on it. by the way, are you telling me the attorney general of the united states and the president of the united states at the time barack obama didn't know that the fbi was asking for a court court for warrants for president's campaign? really, we are to believe that? i find that very hard to fathom. i would like to get some answers to that. >> laura: boy, what i'd like to get answers to that. great to see on the show.
♪ >> it is easy to get lost with all the twists and the turns and the ukraine saga and a lot . but no matter what road you go down, they all lead back to one person. trumps personal attorney, rudy giuliani. his investigations into corruption of what the bidens were up to in ukraine are what sparked much of this in the first place. moreover, rudy giuliani in ukraine earlier this month continuing his investigation. that drove the left crazy.
he is touting new evidence to vindicate the president, some critics allege rudy giuliani is actually hurting the president more than he is helping. can that be true? joining us now the man in the moment, rudy giuliani. we thought we would ask you personally, rudy, what is your reaction to those critics who say, oh, my gosh, rudy has to stop while he's behind. they don't even say a head. rudy, they are so critic of the old. >> i don't know. maybe they don't believe there was, in fact, substantial corruption in ukraine that went on for years. and that the president of the united states when he asked for an investigation was doing his duty as the president of the united states. maybe they buy into some form of the democratic criticism. but what i uncovered there are two major schemes, $147.5 billion, the other for $5 billion in money laundering that went on through the obama administration. part of it involves joe biden,
the bravery part which is a disgrace not only to the investigation for the america that may be because the law enforcement is too afraid to. but the reality is it is a complete defense for the president. the president of the united states was asking the president of ukraine to investigate, he was asking to investigate crimes at the highest levels from both governments appear that the president of ukraine deferred ts we, meaning a joint problem. so he is being impeached for doing the right thing as president of the united states. nothing. >> laura: your work in ukraine hinges on the word of former prosecutor general of ukraine. but here is how he was described in the new yorker. no conservative publication but you gave an interview. he referred to simply as the corrupt prosecutor general of ukraine has been portrayed without reason unscrupulous pup politician telling lies with
personal ambitions, and giuliani, trump, and allies funded to smear the reputation of the bidens. and maria bonaventure fired in april, the star witnesses told , i don't think we would be here if not for him. now this hit piece and it is a hit piece has you on the record admitting that you forced out maria and said you needed her out of the way but you're a personal attorney for the president so why do you need her out of the way? >> i forced her out because she was corrupt. i came back with a document that will show unequivocally that she committed perjury when she said she turned down the visa for mr. chopin because of corruption. the fact is on the record in the state department's own record, the reason given is because he had an operation and have not recovered yet. the operation was of course two
years before but documentary evidence she committed perjury. i have four witnesses who will testify that she personally turned down their visas because they were going to come here and give evidence either against biden were against the democratic party. there is no question that she was acting corruptly in that position and had to be removed. she should have been fired at the state department were not part of the deep state. >> laura: but i have a question, pompeo and i know you have an enormous amount of respect for secretary of state. you know, i certainly do. why doesn't the president go to pompeo, we have concerns. i want my own person. the president puts their own people and all the time, big deal. so why does it go to the president to pompeo and why does it go from you -- >> it didn't go from me to the president. the first one to go to the president was pete sessions, and a number member of congress who said he would be impeached.
when i interviewed witnesses, not just let sanko, she was specifically holding up visas ie investigation of pollution into ukraine and specifically the biden investigation. i have that testimony under oath. i gave it to the state department. they never investigated a single witness. when they say that she is innocent, it is innocent without investigation. >> laura: what they say, rudy -- >> it is a cover-up. it is a cover-up. >> laura: so the entire hearing she was saying and everyone else who knew her, she was there fighting corruption. she was a corruption fighter. >> i also have tapes according to ukrainian officials, including career prosecutors who say that during the obama era, the corruption in ukraine became substantially worse and she was a contributor to the corruption.
for example, remember when she was asked at the end by jim jordan about how many things ukrainians had done, the statements that were made that he should be destroyed that he was insane and the ambassador from the u.s., she was asked, did you ever go complain about that to ukrainian government? this is foreign interference into the election, right? the answer was no. also when she talks about being corrupt, how come she doesn't talk about the candidate she has been supporting that stole everything that didn't move? he is right now under investigation for taking $100 million in bribes. >> laura: my question is -- >> biden was close to him. if they were worried about corruption, why weren't they worried -- >> laura: ukraine wanted hillary to win. that is beyond obvious.
>> ukraine wanted her to win. >> laura: rudy, hold on. people in the white house today, according to these reporters who are talking on camera are worried about your continuing role, fairly or unfairly, jonathan karl. watch. >> you talk to senior officials in the white house to a person privately, they will tell you that they wish rudy giuliani would just go away and never be seen in public again related to any of the spirit there is great frustration. >> laura: is that, in any way, in your view, accurate? >> are there people in the white house saying that? that could be. is it accurate that in some way it will hurt to show substantial amount of corruption that took place and that the president was doing what he should do when he asked for an investigation? i would say that they are buying into the democratic spin. the fact is, there is nothing to be defensive about. joe biden was involved in multimillion dollar corrupt
scheme along with a number of other democrats. it's never been resolved. they have never been held to account. as long as those issues remain between the united states and ukraine, you really can't fight corruption in the ukraine. and the fact is, there are numerous ukrainian witnesses who want to come to the united states and explain how much during the obama administration ukraine was corrupted by americans. >> laura: okay, rudy why are we giving them any money? why did the president okay the money? >> i can't answer that question. >> laura: i would not give them a cent. >> my job is to defend him. what i will tell you i have a report from ukrainian accounting office in 2017 showing $5.3 billion in aid seems to have been wasted. our state department. >> laura: let me finish so i get the whole thought out. our state department went to the
police and told them not to do the investigation, and they demand they not do the investigation. you know why? our embassy was involved in wasting a great deal of that money by giving it to ngos and when i was asked, do the ngos have a political bent? do you know the answer i was given? they were left of left. >> laura: well, i hope you have the president and the congress and the senate -- we are out of time, lindsey graham and all these times do an actual investigation that is not coming from you, but coming from a lot. i hope that happens. >> i want to show anybody that wants to pay attention to it but so far law enforcement has been afraid to look at it. >> laura: someone has got to actually do this. if this is going to make sense to people and it has to be followed through by the appropriate channels. you are one person and a lawyer. rudy, thank you. democrat defections in both the halls of congress and swing districts across the land.
♪ >> laura>> i'm marianne raffertd house democrats laying out impeachment case against president trump preparing to set the rules for wednesday's landmark vote. today's report by democrats on house committee accuses the president of abusing his high office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting the u.s. election.
and then trying to cover-up the misconduct by blocking the investigation. meanwhile come over and the senate, republic and democratic leaders getting ready to negotiate the rules for next month's likely trial in that chamber. and new research suggests that aping is safer than smoking regular cigarettes according tof preventative medicine finds people who smoke cigarettes more likely to develop lung diseases than people who only vape. the study concludes that many people end up doing both. i marianne rafferty. now, back to laura ingraham. ♪ >> laura: iceberg meat democratic party. that is the focus of tonight's "angle." for a wild, democrats thought it was smooth sailing. everything was going along just fine. they had a whistle-blower, alleging wrongdoing on the part of the president more than a
year out before an election. potential abuse of office. schiff and pelosi thought it would help them nex to a win net year. >> look at this. look at that, would you? >> if that is what it takes for us. >> laura: everything is fine, but in september, the president called the democrats bluff. he released the zelinski telephone transcript and that is when it started becoming unpredictable. >> watch out you [bleep]! >> is there anyone there? >> iceberg, one ahead head! >> laura: that guy answering the phone kind of looks like schiff. and madame speaker tried to
assure us that she didn't care about public opinion. she was not hearing the alarms going off. it was all about the principle of the thing. >> we take an oath to protect and defend. if we do not do that, we would be delinquent in our duties. so it's not about election. it is about the constitution. >> laura: she was making herself fall asleep in that club. but of course, it is now and always been about politics. and now reports are circulating that it could be a dozen or more democrats lining up to vote against impeachment. ♪ >> laura: but nancy says not to worry because she's not whipping out the votes. >> we are not with legislation nor do we ever whip something like this. people have to come to their own conclusion.
>> laura: wait a second, such a momentous abuse of power but nancy pelosi is not going to encourage members to stand on principle for the sake of the constitution? and now one of her members had such seasickness, a wicked case that he is switching parties over this. democrat jeff van drew won't just be voting against impeachment. he's voting against the entire democrat party because he's becoming republican. some of his top staffers immediately resigned and impeachment enforcers, congressman cohen said it is like rats jumping off of a ship. i love that, schiff. just like the titanic though, the impeachment cheerleaders were clueless until it was too late. [screaming] >> laura: precious few seem to understand what is at stake. they think telling everyone, we
care, we really care is going to save their seat and their party? >> in my district commits not impeachment. it's not what's on the front page of the newspapers in washington, d.c. what are you going to do to bring down the cost of prescription drugs? if you cannot afford your medications, you want a representative in congress to go to bat for you. >> dumb xp went okay but she still voting for impeachment. you can't make this up. this is what they are going to do. they may argue impeachment is necessary to protect our democracy, but actually voters disagree. as of today, they averaged show support for impeachment is underwater now nationwide. things are even more dire for democrats in swing states as msnbc found in michigan this weekend. >> i don't even care about it. it is just noise. have you ever recorded a football game the final score before you watch it? they usually don't care. it's not interesting. looking back on the nixon
impeachment which was really, really great at the time and was by the boat, very bipartisan. this just seems like it really is political theater. >> laura: that is msnbc. they are not buying the nixon argument. they are saying the opposite and a second focus group of michigan had a similar take away. they are sick and tired of impeachment too. >> they were wasting a lot of money on taxpayer money. speak with the focus is in the wrong direction, very similar to what you are saying except now g on policies. >> give it up, give it up nancy. >> why have you wasted this much time? >> they were trying to get rid of trump. what are you doing for us? >> laura: i like that guy on the left, give it up, give it up nancy. trump won michigan 2016 by 10,000 votes. so it is still very much in play. that is not good news for the
democrats. >> so you would think there would be democrats joining jeff van drew and the impeachment wreckage but not congresswoman alisa's walk in. she is supporting impeachment despite being in a district that trump won with 51% of the vote in 2016. she explained her position in op ed sank the past few months i've been told more times than i can count the boat i will be casting this week will mark the end of my short political career. that may be. there are some decisions in life that have to be based on what you know is right in your bones. and this is one of those times. so voters, the facts be, she's riding this impeachment bow all the way down. here is how her constituents took the news. >> i think it is wrong. i think the congress is wasting a lot of their time and our time. i will not vote for her. >> laura: you can't say we didn't warn them.
♪ >> laura: yet, do not fear. don't pat her neck schiff and pelosi are in safe districts in california. they made sure there was plenty of room in the lifeboat for them. but those in tighter races -- [screaming] i hope you can all swim in those frigid waters. and that is the "angle." joining me is dan bongino, author of the book "exonerated." dan, you heard the "angle." impeachment gets closer, i guess they will vote to impeach the president, but how bad is it going to get for these democrats, given what we are
seeing in the swing districts? >> you know, i think it is the single worst act of political suicide we have seen in modern history. listen, laura, regardless of the billings of the clinton impeachment, obvious bill clinton did a lot of things wrong. looking back to the clear eye of history, viewing it strictly through the technical, political lens, it was a mistake. he left office with 66% approval and i think they knew clinton did things wrong but wanted to pick and wanted to choose the president himself. did they not learn from this? some of these people were there when it happened, schumer and others. i mean, look at the footage you seen earlier today melissa's slot pen from michigan at a town hall. they are getting wrecked in their districts with this. i mean it is really so incredibly naive that i used to think the democrats were smarter than this, but clearly they are not. >> laura: and the "angle" i referenced op ed with the congressman in michigan, the swing district in which he is ready to do was dip in her view
on impeachment. she got hammered at a town hall, watch. >> how can you overturn the will of 53 million voters in 2016? and voters to position themselves in less than a year? i was not supportive of impeachment for many, many months because i thought the election 2020 should take care of it. then the facts came out that the president was reaching out and speaking to influence that very election so i was counting to have a democratic process. >> laura: dan, that got brutal in there. >> laura, that is what i'm talking about. it's going to get worse. mcadams and utah, virginia, these trump districts swinging type districts, this is going to get really ugly. listen, here's the problem though. the democrats are telling america, oh, we had a tough time explaining it that america is not getting it. no, you explained it right. you said there was a quid pro quo and then you could not point to an actual quid pro quo. none of this is hard.
you said there was an illicit deal. and then when you put your best witnesses forward, nobody can actually point to what this dreadful -- matter of fact, you're only fact witness said it didn't happen. this is really bad. i swear i thought they were smarter than this. pelosi knew from the start that this was a disaster. now, they are walking off of the clip. this will not turn out well for them. >> laura: i love it. i still love how nadler has to put out a longer report, like competing against each other for a long, windy, absolutely indiscernible reports. no, there is some bribery, and it's kind of bad appear there is wire fraud but we are not going to charge that. and by the way, we are just learning this, dan, collin peterson of minnesota is now being pressured to switch parties and the reports are, he's on the line. he the congresswoman, to talk about jeff, congressman, jeff
van drew, mi getting that name right? who also switched parties. could this be -- maybe this could be a domino effect here. >> yeah, couple of points. you are right. we need another white paper on impeachment. they didn't explain it well enough. think about this. the result of the impeachment, the president approval rating up. swing district poles going against, down against impeachment despite the hearing. minority of voters historic levels for republican candidate for reelection at this point. how do you not look at this, put a spreadsheet together and say this is an abomination, piled on to what you said to come of andrew leaving the democrat party to become a republican anf another congressman exiting the? how are you looking at this with a straight face, yeah, we pat ourselves on the back. this was a great move. come on, this was an abomination. the smart democrats know it. >> laura: dan, great to see you tonight, thank you so much.
♪ >> i have total confidence the fisa process was followed and the entire case was handled in a thoughtful, responsible way by the doj and fbi. i think the notion fisa is abused is nonsense. >> laura: don't you love those old sound bites? they were so much fun. almost a year ago, actually over a year ago. that was comey dismissing concerns fbi was abusing power to spy on the trump campaign. now, he persisted with this lie
even after the ig report came out last week. writing in "the washington post," the allocation of criminal conspiracy was nonsense. there was no spying on the trump campaign. the truth is finally out. six days later, comey changing his tune. >> i was wrong. i was overconfident in the procedures that the fbi and justice built over 20 years. i thought they were robust enough. it is incredibly hard to get a fisa. i was overconfident in those because he is right from a real sloppiness. 17 things that should have been at the applications or discussed and characterized differently. >> laura: 20 may now victor davis hanson at the senior institution and chris swecker, former fbi assistant director. chris, zeus backtracked a little too late? >> yeah, listen what he's doing is a clever deflection. i placed too much confidence in the agent, the fbi and the process. he is the process.
as the last person that signs off on the comey stomach fisa, certification of compliance with laws and regulation, and it is accurate, it is complete. so he is the final and that process. he's really trying to dodge it and reflect it to the agents and fbi. that is a total cop-out. >> laura: i mean, he is the guy, he signed it. that is the way it worked. he can't get away with that. no, no, it's my show. if something goes wrong, it's on me. victor, comey tried to distance himself from the fbi, they are handling the totally discredited steele dossier. watch. >> i don't believe the fbi concluded that steele reporting was bunk after a source. as the director, you are not kept informed on the details of the investigation. i didn't know the particulars of the investigation. >> laura: victor, he was going 50,000 feet. all of the little people handle that, but he gave multiple
interviews where he described the detail and lured parts of the dossier. i mean, who was going to buy this excuse? >> i think there is a larger problem with comey and for that matter andrew mccabe and brennan and clapper. those are the four most important people in the obama administration and intelligence and investigatory capacities. there is no problem coming on after they left office but always commenting on their role within the russian hoax narrative. so there was often, not just explaining that they were analyzing and exonerating and apologizing for their behavior. were contextualizing. when you add in the mixture, lower laura, all four have problems and on two occasions, lied under oath and mccabe up for a criminal referral for misleading federal investigators. comey was out for referral for
leaking classified documents. you add the idea that three were paid analysts, being paid to analyze a scandal in which they were the principal players. it was so unethical and the conflict of interest and you add a final element, all on record with not just a slight but intense hatred of donald trump. comey referred to them as the mafia boss, mafioso. klapper with a russian asset. >> laura: the russian asset line which i heard again today and watched it, it is shocking. but i want to read this for you, chris. this is devin nunes letter to schiff today. he says ig is finding pervasive major abuses by the fbi, dramatically contradict the assertion of a memo released in february in which you claim the fbi and doj did not abuse fisa after publishing false conclusions of such enormity it is clear you are in need of
rehabilitation, chris, to schiff. pretty tough language. >> yeah, it sure is. he is a true challenge most of the time anyway. and i think a super official standing of what the fbi does. but the one that really needs the rehab is jim comey. he doesn't seem to have any sense of leadership and accountability. he talks about the higher, the higher loyalty and all of that. and then he throws his own agents under the bus. he tries to throw the fbi under the bus. that is what infuriates myself and other agents and former agents and the fbi. hundreds of whom i have heard from him. he seems to be throwing them very subtly and very cleverly under the bus when he made momentous decisions in these cases, including not doing defensive briefing of the president. and instead, giving them very superficial briefing of the most salacious parts of that now infamous dossier. >> laura: that was it.
they are still swimming in the frigid waters. the ship long gone since went down but it's almost like they haven't noticed. it will get numb in there real quick. that is all the time we have. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night," take it from here. ♪ >> shannon: hello, welcome to "fox news @ night" shannon bream in washington. we began with a fox news alert. a dramatic showdown in town hall as voters go head-to-head with democratic lawmakers over impeachment, senate minority leader chuck schumer throws down impeachment trial gauntlet. will it backfire? critics signing schumer's own words call him a hypocrite tonight. any minute we go back to the origins of it all. fired fbi director james comey finally admits sloppiness and some wrongdoing in